|
 |
Replacing Sino-Korean words... | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
| lichtrausch Triglot Senior Member United States Joined 5960 days ago 525 posts - 1072 votes  Speaks: English*, German, Japanese Studies: Korean, Mandarin | Message 9 of 32 22 April 2010 at 11:29pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
It's foreseeable that within this century, Chinese will become a dominant scientific language. At that point, Korean academics will profit considerably from the large Hanja vocabulary. A bit off topic, but what I find incredible is how reluctant English is to do away with it's awful Greek and Latin scientific words. English-speaking scientists stand to lose almost nothing from replacing those words with more intuitive native English words, since few English-speaking scientists read texts in Ancient Greek or Latin. At least (some) Korean scientists still profit from the Hanja lexicon by reading Japanese and Chinese scientific texts sometimes.
1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| chucknorrisman Triglot Senior Member United States Joined 5448 days ago 321 posts - 435 votes Speaks: Korean*, English, Spanish Studies: Russian, Mandarin, Lithuanian, French | Message 10 of 32 22 April 2010 at 11:46pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Using that logic, I guess English should think now about replacing the DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) to tuoyanhgetanghesuan (脱氧核糖核酸)? And change hydrochloric acid to yansuan (盐酸)? Your answer would probably be no. If your reason is that the Anglophone countries will still continue to produce a large amount of scientific papers, don't forget that South Korea produces a great amount of scientific papers too. Not as much as China or Japan, but it still offers a good amount of competition. Of course if that's not your reason or you have other ones, please tell me.
I don't think Korea would lose much either from replacing them with the native Korean words, which are usually more intuitive to us.
Personally, I think if Koreans want to gain from Chinese and Japanese papers, they might as well learn the Chinese and Japanese languages instead of learning the characters' hanja counterparts. Knowing hanjas might mean they may be able to get a few terms here and there, but that doesn't mean that they have the precise understanding, which is necessary when reading science papers. Edited by chucknorrisman on 22 April 2010 at 11:48pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| vientito Senior Member Canada Joined 6338 days ago 212 posts - 281 votes | Message 11 of 32 23 April 2010 at 12:04am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
Your proposal for that kind of reform will fail because you are ignoring the underlying cultural factors in korean society. Simply knowing the meaning of a few more Hanja words shows your status of being erudite and broadly educated. In pushing that reform you will need the elite class to all agree on its abolition. You are asking those who are in position of power to give that hard-earned privilege up? Not easily, in my opinion. The first wave of cultural reform mainly was to awaken the nationalist sentiment of korean people. That is it. The game is over. The power has gotten its fair share of independence and it won't foolishly embark on further change hereafter.
We have seen an huge influx of English terms into korean society but these words are still primarily used in informal conversation. In serious literature, they still have gained no wide acceptance as opposed to indigenous and traditional way. And guess what? Those who are able to wield their power in academics and politics are the ones who indulge themselves in serious literature. I see very little hope of things starting to move in your proposed direction. Tradition is a contract of power and power usually does not like to yield to changes that erode its basis. 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| lichtrausch Triglot Senior Member United States Joined 5960 days ago 525 posts - 1072 votes Speaks: English*, German, Japanese Studies: Korean, Mandarin | Message 12 of 32 23 April 2010 at 12:13am | IP Logged | ||||||||
For every scientific paper that is published in Korean, there are surely ten that are published in English. There's no comparison.
You keep saying that knowing Hanja will not allow you to understand Japanese and Chinese texts well. I'll say it again: I'm not making that argument. I'm only saying that knowledge of Hanja and Hanja vocabulary make Chinese and Japanese more familiar and accessible to Koreans and therefore easier to learn, should they choose to learn them. That's just how cognates work. Knowing thousands of cognates in a language make it a lot easier to learn. I am sympathetic to your main argument though. If it wasn't for the reasons I've stated, I would be welcome to the idea of getting rid of Hanja vocabulary in favour of native Korean words. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| chucknorrisman Triglot Senior Member United States Joined 5448 days ago 321 posts - 435 votes Speaks: Korean*, English, Spanish Studies: Russian, Mandarin, Lithuanian, French | Message 13 of 32 23 April 2010 at 12:14am | IP Logged | ||||||||
You are right. Even hangul, let alone native Korean words, was not accepted by Koreans until around 1950s after the independence. It was considered too easy and not sophisticated enough like hanjas. And hangul was created in 1443, quite a long time has passed it won acceptance. I presume that an appreciation of the native words over Chinese loanwords would also take a very long time to happen. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
 Jiwon Triglot Moderator Korea, South Joined 6436 days ago 1417 posts - 1500 votes Speaks: EnglishC2, Korean*, GermanC1 Studies: Hindi, Spanish Personal Language Map | Message 14 of 32 23 April 2010 at 4:19pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
I really don't see the point of this argument...
but.. Korean as a language will evolve as it sees fit. There might be more logical, and "better" ways of procession that a language may take. However, you cannot force the native learners to use their language in certain way. Cultural inertia is a very strong force that reforms can overcome only in certain circumstances. Having said that, I'd say Sino-Korean vocabulary is a huge irreplaceable part of Korean language. I don't expect that they will be phased out completely in the forseeable future. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| chucknorrisman Triglot Senior Member United States Joined 5448 days ago 321 posts - 435 votes Speaks: Korean*, English, Spanish Studies: Russian, Mandarin, Lithuanian, French | Message 15 of 32 24 April 2010 at 5:42pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
"I really don't see the point of this argument..."
The point is that we should try to replace the homophones with other words, which are hopefully of native Korean origin, so that the ambiguity would be gone and we wouldn't need hanja to understanding meanings fully. "Korean as a language will evolve as it sees fit. There might be more logical, and "better" ways of procession that a language may take. However, you cannot force the native learners to use their language in certain way. Cultural inertia is a very strong force that reforms can overcome only in certain circumstances." I know that nothing can be forced, but it was just a suggestion to the continuing debate about whether hanjas should be taught in Korean schools. Some say that they shouldn't because hangul is easier, while others say that they should be because hanjas take a large part of the Korean vocabulary. My suggestion was that if we replace the words by coining native Korean words and making their usages more widespread and hopefully as more "prestigious" in Korean culture, then hangul-only Korean can be done and hanjas would not be necessary, while not causing any confusions in meanings. "Having said that, I'd say Sino-Korean vocabulary is a huge irreplaceable part of Korean language. I don't expect that they will be phased out completely in the forseeable future." You are right, and I'm not suggesting that Sino-Korean vocabulary should be completely stamped out. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| andee Tetraglot Senior Member Japan Joined 7077 days ago 681 posts - 724 votes 3 sounds Speaks: English*, German, Korean, French | Message 16 of 32 24 April 2010 at 7:45pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
Firstly, you have said yourself that the Sino-Korean vocabulary is used in textbooks and what-not instead of Native Korean vocabulary. This suggests that register is important. Replacing this system that is in play can be likened to removing the French influences from English, which would just leave us to play with the Germanic words [...not Germanic vocabulary ;)]
Secondly, virtually all languages have an issue with homophones and homographs. Mostly it's dealt with in context. Yes, misunderstandings occur and they will always occur. People have somehow managed to survive with homophones and homographs regardless of these initial misunderstandings. It should also be said that replacing the Sino-Korean homophones/homographs with Native Korean vocabulary isn't a cure all. May I present 치다 with all of it's glorious 13 meanings ranging from hitting to shouting to even adding something like a sauce to something. Perhaps we could switch the Native Korean homophones/homographs for Sino-Korean vocabulary?* As Jiwon hinted at, language planning usually has some flaws and above all else, you can't force the locals to use words in a certain way. Language is a living organism and evolves in any way it likes. *not a serious suggestion by the way Edited by andee on 24 April 2010 at 7:52pm 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
