Register  Login  Active Topics  Maps  

Why did Korean abandon Hanja?

  Tags: Hanja | Transparency | Korean
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages Post Reply
116 messages over 15 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 6 ... 14 15 Next >>
orion
Senior Member
United States
Joined 7025 days ago
622 posts - 678 votes 
Speaks: English*
Studies: German, Russian

 
 Message 41 of 116
05 September 2008 at 11:46am | IP Logged 
I invite anyone interested to read "Asia's Orthographic Dilemma" by William C. Hannas, University of Hawaii Press, 1997, ISBN 978-0824818920. Hannas is fluent in Mandarin, Japanese and Korean. After you have read the book, please feel free to come back and discuss this topic intelligently.

By the way, this particular topic has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum. Those of us that have been here for years instead of weeks likely remember some of these discussions. Good day.
1 person has voted this message useful



Organik
Diglot
Groupie
United States
Joined 5998 days ago
52 posts - 52 votes 
Speaks: English*, Japanese
Studies: Korean, Mandarin

 
 Message 42 of 116
05 September 2008 at 2:05pm | IP Logged 
orion wrote:
I invite anyone interested to read "Asia's Orthographic Dilemma" by William C. Hannas, University of Hawaii Press, 1997, ISBN 978-0824818920. Hannas is fluent in Mandarin, Japanese and Korean. After you have read the book, please feel free to come back and discuss this topic intelligently.

By the way, this particular topic has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum. Those of us that have been here for years instead of weeks likely remember some of these discussions. Good day.


I appreciate the recommendation, I'll have to check that out.

I do not however see how one book should be a prerequisite for discussing this topic intelligently. Also, I have commented in several threads on this topic so it is not as though I simply stumbled into this thread.

Edited by Organik on 05 September 2008 at 2:07pm
1 person has voted this message useful



Organik
Diglot
Groupie
United States
Joined 5998 days ago
52 posts - 52 votes 
Speaks: English*, Japanese
Studies: Korean, Mandarin

 
 Message 43 of 116
05 September 2008 at 2:26pm | IP Logged 
Erubey wrote:
I invite anyone to read Japanese at an above intermediate level without Chinese Characters.

Quote:
Why Kanji?
Some people feel that the system of using separate, discrete symbols instead of a sensible alphabet is out-dated and overly complicated. In fact, it might not have been a good idea to adopt Chinese into Japanese since both languages are fundamentally different in structure. But the purpose of this guide is not to debate over the decisions made thousands of years ago but to explain why you must learn kanji in order to learn Japanese. And by this, I mean more than just saying, "That's how it's done so get over it!".

Some people feel that Japanese should have just switched from Chinese to romaji to do away with all the complicated characters that was bewildering the foreign white devils. In fact, Korean has adopted their own alphabet to greatly simplify their written language to great success. So why didn't it work for Japanese? And I ask this in the past tense because I believe that the government did attempt to replace kanji with romaji shortly after the second world war with little success. I think anyone who has typed at any length in Japanese can easily see why this did not work. At any one time, when you convert typed hiragana into kanji, you are presented with almost always at least two choices (two homophones) and sometimes even up to ten. (Try typing kikan). The 46 or so character alphabet of set sounds in Japanese makes it hard to avoid homophones. Compare this to the Korean alphabet which has 14 consonants and 10 vowels. Any of the consonants can be matched to any of the vowels giving 140 sounds. In addition, a third and sometimes even fourth consonant can be attached to create a single letter. This gives over 1960 sounds that can be created theoretically. (The sounds that are actually used is actually much less than that, though I don't know the exact number.)

Since you want to read at a much faster rate than you talk, you need some visual cues to instantly tell you what each word is. You can use the shape of words in English to blaze through text because most words have different shapes. Try this little exercise: Hi, enve thgouh all teh wrods aer seplled icorrenctly, can you sltil udsternand me?" Korean does this too because it has enough characters to make words with distinct and different shapes. However, because the visual cues are not distinct as kanji, spaces needed to be added to remove ambiguities. (This presents another problem of when and where to set spaces.)

With kanji, we don't have to worry about spaces and much of the problem of homophones is mostly resolved. Without kanji, even if spaces were to be added, the ambiguities and lack of visual cues would make Japanese text much more difficult to read.


From Tae Kim's Guide. Who knows both Korean and Japanese.


I definitely agree with Tae Kim's assessment. Certainly, the distinctions between the two languages make Japanese far less suited to being written in alphabetic form than is Korean in my opinion.

Edited by Organik on 05 September 2008 at 3:09pm
1 person has voted this message useful



aegi
Diglot
Newbie
Korea, South
Joined 5989 days ago
33 posts - 41 votes
Speaks: English*, Korean

 
 Message 44 of 116
09 September 2008 at 3:44am | IP Logged 
Hello, for the first time and for the last time. I have two points to make before I take my leave:

1. Although few of the commenters possess adequate knowledge to speak about this topic. Most are outsiders looking in. How many live (or have lived) in Korea and have more than a beginner's competency in her tongue? How many can read about this topic in Korean?

2. It seems that most of the aforementioned commenters agree on one point: that hanja are extraordinarily difficult to learn, a veritably insurmountable Mt Everest. This is false. Like all things under the sun, to gain a basic knowledge of hanja requires not a little time and effort; however, they present, in no way, a major obstacle to the average Korean. How hanja are taught is dreary and ineffective, but this can be easily remedied.

Edited by aegi on 09 September 2008 at 3:55am
1 person has voted this message useful



ChrisWebb
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 6267 days ago
181 posts - 190 votes 
Speaks: English*
Studies: Korean

 
 Message 45 of 116
09 September 2008 at 5:40am | IP Logged 
aegi wrote:
Hello, for the first time and for the last time. I have two points to make before I take my leave:

1. Although few of the commenters possess adequate knowledge to speak about this topic. Most are outsiders looking in. How many live (or have lived) in Korea and have more than a beginner's competency in her tongue? How many can read about this topic in Korean?

2. It seems that most of the aforementioned commenters agree on one point: that hanja are extraordinarily difficult to learn, a veritably insurmountable Mt Everest. This is false. Like all things under the sun, to gain a basic knowledge of hanja requires not a little time and effort; however, they present, in no way, a major obstacle to the average Korean. How hanja are taught is dreary and ineffective, but this can be easily remedied.


Ignoring the attempt to reason by ad hominem I will note that in the case of difficulty, I think you misunderstand the point. Hanja is not so much difficult as time consuming. A bright farmer might never have the time to learn Hanja but a stupid noble given the time surely would manage it.

You said that to gain a basic knowledge of hanja requires a little time and effort 'like all things under the sun'. I will simply note that Hangul requires a great deal less time and effort and it's that efficiency that is likely problematic for Hanja's future. Nature and free markets both have a way of rewarding efficiency and punishing inefficiency.
1 person has voted this message useful



aegi
Diglot
Newbie
Korea, South
Joined 5989 days ago
33 posts - 41 votes
Speaks: English*, Korean

 
 Message 46 of 116
09 September 2008 at 8:28am | IP Logged 
'Ad hominem' is defined by Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged as

'1 : directed at or appealing to one's hearer's or reader's personal feelings or prejudices rather than his intellect and reason 2 : marked by attack on an opponent's character rather than by answer to his contentions.'

I question many posters' qualifications to speak about this subject. Peruse my posts. To what are they related? Korean. Why? Because I know the subject at hand. How many of the above posters can say the same? I reckon the answer is 'very few'. However, don't ask me about Turkish, Gallego or Swahili. Don't let your doctor work on your teeth.

Hanja are no more time consuming than mathematics or history. And ... English!

Whence the farmer and the noble? We're discussing Korea circa anno domini 2008. The last I heard, she's got many farmers, no nobles, and universal education.

Nature and free markets haven't a thing to do with it; nationalism and sloth are to blame.

Efficiency is fine and good, but let's not worship it as Ba'al. Using both hangeul and hanja is the most efficient method. Besides, how efficient will Koreans be when they are bereft of hanja in the face of Japan and China, both of which seem to fare just swimmingly whilst bearing the burden of 'time consuming' kanji or hanzi?

And finally, I'll beat the dead horse once more for those late to the show. Disposing of hanja is akin to living with one arm tied behind your back: it's just possible but horribly limiting.

Edited by aegi on 09 September 2008 at 9:23am
1 person has voted this message useful



ChrisWebb
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 6267 days ago
181 posts - 190 votes 
Speaks: English*
Studies: Korean

 
 Message 47 of 116
09 September 2008 at 10:49am | IP Logged 
aegi wrote:
'Ad hominem' is defined by Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged as

'1 : directed at or appealing to one's hearer's or reader's personal feelings or prejudices rather than his intellect and reason 2 : marked by attack on an opponent's character rather than by answer to his contentions.'

I question many posters' qualifications to speak about this subject. Peruse my posts. To what are they related? Korean. Why? Because I know the subject at hand. How many of the above posters can say the same? I reckon the answer is 'very few'. However, don't ask me about Turkish, Gallego or Swahili. Don't let your doctor work on your teeth.

Hanja are no more time consuming than mathematics or history. And ... English!

Whence the farmer and the noble? We're discussing Korea circa anno domini 2008. The last I heard, she's got many farmers, no nobles, and universal education.

Nature and free markets haven't a thing to do with it; nationalism and sloth are to blame.

Efficiency is fine and good, but let's not worship it as Ba'al. Using both hangeul and hanja is the most efficient method. Besides, how efficient will Koreans be when they are bereft of hanja in the face of Japan and China, both of which seem to fare just swimmingly whilst bearing the burden of 'time consuming' kanji or hanzi?

And finally, I'll beat the dead horse once more for those late to the show. Disposing of hanja is akin to living with one arm tied behind your back: it's just possible but horribly limiting.


Addressing the person rather than the points made is pretty much the definition of ad hominem, which is of course precisely what you are up to as soon as you start questioning peoples 'qualifications' ( an absurd practice on a messageboard where you do not actually know much about the people posting anyway ) rather than dealing with their points. You'll note the etymology which reads 'to the person'. You could equally have been accused of 'poisoning the well' ( ie a specific type of ad hominem ) I guess but the essential point remains the same either way, instead of arguing a case you simply look to rubbish your opponents.

As for the rest of the post I think you give the game away as soon as you try and characterise those Koreans who are not hanja-philes as 'slothful and nationalistic'. Your appeal is actually to emotion and not reason hence the use of pejoritives against the opposing view, again no reason, just rubbishing anyone who takes a different view.

On the subject of reason your comparison of hanja to mathematics and English which you intend as a justification really serves only to illustrate the absurdity of your position. Are you really afterall trying to say that a Korean missing Hanja skills is in anyway as hampered as a Korean missing Mathematics skills? Think about it, Hangul will serve for just about every need this person has yet without mathematics they will be in trouble with even everyday activities.

On efficiency you clearly have not actually thought about the issue at all, Korean speakers are not unconcerned with efficiency which explains all the contractions and of course the regular omission of subjects and objects in speech, all of this is simply efficiency at work.

For why farmers and nobles got a mention, that was simply an illustration to make a specific point.

You claim that using hanja and hangul is actually the most efficient method, all I have to say on that is that if it's true you have no need to fear for Hanja's future, if not evolution will cull it just as surely as it does lame animals. I must admit the idea that Koreans need to keep Hanja in use to defend against Japan and China did make me chuckle though. Are you sure it's those 'slothful' Koreans who dont love hanja enough that are the real nationalists?

Edited by ChrisWebb on 09 September 2008 at 10:55am
1 person has voted this message useful



Deecab
Diglot
Senior Member
United States
Joined 5965 days ago
106 posts - 108 votes 
Speaks: English, Korean*
Studies: Mandarin

 
 Message 48 of 116
09 September 2008 at 2:44pm | IP Logged 
aegi, I don't exactly see the point of mentioning Japan and China here as it is irrelevant to the topic with the way you brought it up.

But I do agree that Hanja + Hangeul is the most efficient way. I find the context clarification extremely helpful and IF I know the characters that I read, I don't read them much slower than I read Hangeul(and I can read Hangeul at fast speed).

It's not essential to know a whole lot, just good enough to be able to read any character that comes up in store, signs, newspaper etc.


1 person has voted this message useful



This discussion contains 116 messages over 15 pages: << Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  Next >>


Post ReplyPost New Topic Printable version Printable version

You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page was generated in 0.3906 seconds.


DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved
No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization.