![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Note: Material on this Talk page added before approximately 16:00 UTC, 4 March 2004 was moved here from the main article.
Hello, Korean wikipedians and non-korean wikipedians interested in Korea (both south and north).
There's also a Korean Wikipedia.
http://ko.wikipedia.org
한국어 위키백과도 있습니다.
http://ko.wikipedia.org
Let's talk about various themes about Korean items in Wikipedia. Here are several themes being discussed at the same time. Please do not write your opinion just at the end of this page, but tail it in each section.
This section shall deal mainly with how we should write the Korean names in the Latin alphabet. I've put a link to the official South Korean romanization, but firstly it's quite new (therefore there exist too many non-standard romanizations in books and the internet), and further it's only the standard of one of two Koreas.
External link: South Korean official romanization
I think we should stick to the principle. Korean names are similar to Chinese names, and Chinese names don't use hyphens, do they? -- Xaos
All the English newspapers I have access to here use the hyphened form for personal names. So does the official English website for the government of Seoul. I can't tell you what the national site uses, as I can never connect. -- Stephen Gilbert 02:44 Oct 22, 2002 (UTC)
Some Koreans use hyphens, some don't. I don't see why we should impose anything, both ways are in use. The main thing is keeping the order of family name and first name right. As for 'official', the passport and birth certificate use two words for the first name, but Koreans don't like it. Also, we should respect the common spellings, so not write "Kim Daejung". -- Kokiri
[1] Caveats. To begin with, I have never been a huge fan of the idea of "Romanizing" Korean, and still am not:
Since Korean has no 'b', the question is unanswerable because "letters", while having sounds associated with them, have no sound. The determination of what a 'b' sounds like would depend on the language being spoken (Italian 'b' is different from English 'b'), in which case, the traditional use of 'b' is to indicate lenis, bilabial, obstruent sounds. The statement is true only if the basis for spelling is English; but shouldn't a Korean "Romanization" system be based on Korean?
[2]Some Rules. I believe most of these were amended to the SKKR, but if they weren't, they are good practices to follow (unless you know the reader will have non-standard pronunciation.) They should be followed in the order given.
[3] Graphing Problems.
No system will find widespread acceptance until these problems are addressed. The new system did little to correct these problems, which then brings to question the necessity of making the change. Perhaps it would be a better investment to teach non-Koreans how to read Hangul, rather than put so much time, money, and effort into a system that will probably never work properly.
Naming conventions for all Koreans should go something like this:
With the popular if ugly and inaccurate rendering first and the (S)outh (K)orean (R)evised (R)omanization for purposes of uniformity and for those who do not know there are many ways of transliterating Korean. This system could be added to all pages without confusion. DMC 05:45, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Syngman Rhee ( Revised Romanization: I Seungman ( Hangeul: 이승만; Hanja: 李承晚)) was the first president of South Korea...
- Syngman Rhee ( *) ( Hangeul: 이승만; Hanja: 李承晚) was the first president of South Korea...
- ...and then, further down, at the bottom of the article, we could have:...
Alternate spellings
- "Syngman Rhee" is written as "Rhee Sygnman" in the Korean name order, and according to the Revised Romanization of Korean would be spelled as "I Seungman."
I think we shouldn't apply S.Korean Romanization System to N.Korea related terms. Currently I use the M-R alternatively. Nanshu 07:37 Feb 12, 2003 (UTC)
Here is what I'm trying to do in my new articles:
I put the Hanja in the Gunsan example in parentheses because otherwise it would read "( 군산; 郡山 in Korean)...", which seems to suggest that the Hanja is Korean but the Hangeul isn't.
What do you think?
-- Sewing 01:30, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)
I think it's wrong to forego M-R. Since this wikipedia is for people who don't speak Korean, most materials they might read outside of here would use M-R, and they would get very confused about which is which... Besides, the official system distorts pronounciation so much. We don't need yet another pinyin...
Well, it's time to standardize these things, as has been done (more or less?) for pages on Chinese history. I am going through the Wikipedia now, looking for Korean topics to add to the List of Korea-related topics page, and of course I'm finding a lot of inconsistency in how rulers are named, not to mention dynasties.
First of all, I saw a page entitled
Joseon Dynasty, but it is called the Yi Dynasty (이씨 (李氏; I Ssi) in Korean--Joseon was the name of the country. For naming individual monarchs, however, I suggest the following format, which does not use the dynastic name but the kingdom name:
King/Queen X (the Great) of Y
Where X = the ruler's posthumous name (Taejo, Sejong, etc.) and Y = the Kingdom's name (Silla, Goguryeo, Baekje, Goryeo, Joseon). The few Kings who have made the title "the Great" (Daewang (대왕; 大王)) will get the name inserted. Thus:
Finally, I have used the Revised Romanization of Korean for the names of monarchs. There are 3 reasons for doing so: (1) It is now the official Romanization of South Korea, which has roughly twice the number of Korean speakers as North Korea; (2) It is easier to type than McCune-Reischauer (which is still the official system in North Korea); and (3) it is now the mandatory romanization scheme in South Korean textbooks. As an alternative, we could add the McCune-Reischauer spelling after the Revised spelling, in the body of the article, and/or have entries in the McCune-Reischauer spelling with redirects to the Revised Romanized spelling.
What do people think? -- Sewing 23:46, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC) (Revised 16 Oct 2003)
Lucky I found this page! Firstly: the dynasty is called Joseon dynasty, no idea why you folks think it should be Yi Dynasty. This name was used by the Japanese when they colonized Korea, surely not the right choice. Maybe you should check your facts against some literature. Secondly, why do you refer to the East Sea as Sea of Japan? Can't you folks accept that one place can have two names? Again, the Japanese colony is over... I suggest you use East Sea in a Korean context (and you can still link this to Sea of Japan) if you are serious about becoming a real encyclopedia. Good luck with Wikipedia!
Why has the dynasty often been called "Yi Dynasty" instead of the official name? It is because Chaoxian/Chosen/Joseon usually refers to Korea regardless of dynasty outside South Korea. So the specific dynasty is called by rulers' family name. Such a naming convention is common in East Asia. You would know 劉宋, 曹魏 etc.
Then, why do South Koreans believe that "Yi Dynasty" is a derogative term? Here is my theory: In South Korea, "Joseon" is a historical term. It doesn't refer to modern Korea (they use "Han" instead) but only means the dynasty there. So South Koreans forget why the dynasty is called so. And some of them unwisely associate the name with their anti-Japanism. It is a pity that Koreans do not validate rumors by themselves but accept them without questioning. -- Nanshu 01:23, 2 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I can't find any guidance here on whether (for example) Kim Il-Sung or Kim Il-sung is the preferred form. Both seem to be widely used in English-language media. I have recently written articles on Kim Jong-Nam and Kim Jong-Chul with all three name-elements capitalised. Any comments? Adam 10:25, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Um, thanks for that, but I am no wiser on what the Wikipedia policy is. If there isn't one I will leave my articles as they are. Adam 12:32, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
OK *sigh* I will change the articles. Also Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il (when it is unprotected). Adam 12:47, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
See: Talk:Hangul for discussions. Kokiri (rev. Sewing)
Please do not just change the convention before consulting the community. Changing the spelling of a word is not just about changing links and moving the article. There are many occurrences of Hangeul which are not linked. Also, some sentences need rewriting... The discussion is at Talk:Hangul. Kokiri 12:15, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
These are a lot cleaner than the way we (especially I!) were doing things before. I added a new section to the top of the article page. -- Sewing 20:31, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I don't want to cross-post, but there are quite a few links to Japan in Korean topics that actually should link to Empire of Japan. Just bear the existence of this article in mind when linking... Kokiri 22:37, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I have checked on the web and found that both spellings Barhae and Balhae are used for the Korean 발해. Actually, the government brochure I checked uses Balhae. -- Kokiri 18:27, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
(This is how we commonly use it). -- Kokiri 10:07, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I have created {{msg:korean}}. We can add this to all tak pages of Korea-related articles. I hope this maximizes compliance and involvement with our conventions... -- Kokiri 15:56, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Note: Material on this Talk page added before approximately 16:00 UTC, 4 March 2004 was moved here from the main article.
Hello, Korean wikipedians and non-korean wikipedians interested in Korea (both south and north).
There's also a Korean Wikipedia.
http://ko.wikipedia.org
한국어 위키백과도 있습니다.
http://ko.wikipedia.org
Let's talk about various themes about Korean items in Wikipedia. Here are several themes being discussed at the same time. Please do not write your opinion just at the end of this page, but tail it in each section.
This section shall deal mainly with how we should write the Korean names in the Latin alphabet. I've put a link to the official South Korean romanization, but firstly it's quite new (therefore there exist too many non-standard romanizations in books and the internet), and further it's only the standard of one of two Koreas.
External link: South Korean official romanization
I think we should stick to the principle. Korean names are similar to Chinese names, and Chinese names don't use hyphens, do they? -- Xaos
All the English newspapers I have access to here use the hyphened form for personal names. So does the official English website for the government of Seoul. I can't tell you what the national site uses, as I can never connect. -- Stephen Gilbert 02:44 Oct 22, 2002 (UTC)
Some Koreans use hyphens, some don't. I don't see why we should impose anything, both ways are in use. The main thing is keeping the order of family name and first name right. As for 'official', the passport and birth certificate use two words for the first name, but Koreans don't like it. Also, we should respect the common spellings, so not write "Kim Daejung". -- Kokiri
[1] Caveats. To begin with, I have never been a huge fan of the idea of "Romanizing" Korean, and still am not:
Since Korean has no 'b', the question is unanswerable because "letters", while having sounds associated with them, have no sound. The determination of what a 'b' sounds like would depend on the language being spoken (Italian 'b' is different from English 'b'), in which case, the traditional use of 'b' is to indicate lenis, bilabial, obstruent sounds. The statement is true only if the basis for spelling is English; but shouldn't a Korean "Romanization" system be based on Korean?
[2]Some Rules. I believe most of these were amended to the SKKR, but if they weren't, they are good practices to follow (unless you know the reader will have non-standard pronunciation.) They should be followed in the order given.
[3] Graphing Problems.
No system will find widespread acceptance until these problems are addressed. The new system did little to correct these problems, which then brings to question the necessity of making the change. Perhaps it would be a better investment to teach non-Koreans how to read Hangul, rather than put so much time, money, and effort into a system that will probably never work properly.
Naming conventions for all Koreans should go something like this:
With the popular if ugly and inaccurate rendering first and the (S)outh (K)orean (R)evised (R)omanization for purposes of uniformity and for those who do not know there are many ways of transliterating Korean. This system could be added to all pages without confusion. DMC 05:45, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Syngman Rhee ( Revised Romanization: I Seungman ( Hangeul: 이승만; Hanja: 李承晚)) was the first president of South Korea...
- Syngman Rhee ( *) ( Hangeul: 이승만; Hanja: 李承晚) was the first president of South Korea...
- ...and then, further down, at the bottom of the article, we could have:...
Alternate spellings
- "Syngman Rhee" is written as "Rhee Sygnman" in the Korean name order, and according to the Revised Romanization of Korean would be spelled as "I Seungman."
I think we shouldn't apply S.Korean Romanization System to N.Korea related terms. Currently I use the M-R alternatively. Nanshu 07:37 Feb 12, 2003 (UTC)
Here is what I'm trying to do in my new articles:
I put the Hanja in the Gunsan example in parentheses because otherwise it would read "( 군산; 郡山 in Korean)...", which seems to suggest that the Hanja is Korean but the Hangeul isn't.
What do you think?
-- Sewing 01:30, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)
I think it's wrong to forego M-R. Since this wikipedia is for people who don't speak Korean, most materials they might read outside of here would use M-R, and they would get very confused about which is which... Besides, the official system distorts pronounciation so much. We don't need yet another pinyin...
Well, it's time to standardize these things, as has been done (more or less?) for pages on Chinese history. I am going through the Wikipedia now, looking for Korean topics to add to the List of Korea-related topics page, and of course I'm finding a lot of inconsistency in how rulers are named, not to mention dynasties.
First of all, I saw a page entitled
Joseon Dynasty, but it is called the Yi Dynasty (이씨 (李氏; I Ssi) in Korean--Joseon was the name of the country. For naming individual monarchs, however, I suggest the following format, which does not use the dynastic name but the kingdom name:
King/Queen X (the Great) of Y
Where X = the ruler's posthumous name (Taejo, Sejong, etc.) and Y = the Kingdom's name (Silla, Goguryeo, Baekje, Goryeo, Joseon). The few Kings who have made the title "the Great" (Daewang (대왕; 大王)) will get the name inserted. Thus:
Finally, I have used the Revised Romanization of Korean for the names of monarchs. There are 3 reasons for doing so: (1) It is now the official Romanization of South Korea, which has roughly twice the number of Korean speakers as North Korea; (2) It is easier to type than McCune-Reischauer (which is still the official system in North Korea); and (3) it is now the mandatory romanization scheme in South Korean textbooks. As an alternative, we could add the McCune-Reischauer spelling after the Revised spelling, in the body of the article, and/or have entries in the McCune-Reischauer spelling with redirects to the Revised Romanized spelling.
What do people think? -- Sewing 23:46, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC) (Revised 16 Oct 2003)
Lucky I found this page! Firstly: the dynasty is called Joseon dynasty, no idea why you folks think it should be Yi Dynasty. This name was used by the Japanese when they colonized Korea, surely not the right choice. Maybe you should check your facts against some literature. Secondly, why do you refer to the East Sea as Sea of Japan? Can't you folks accept that one place can have two names? Again, the Japanese colony is over... I suggest you use East Sea in a Korean context (and you can still link this to Sea of Japan) if you are serious about becoming a real encyclopedia. Good luck with Wikipedia!
Why has the dynasty often been called "Yi Dynasty" instead of the official name? It is because Chaoxian/Chosen/Joseon usually refers to Korea regardless of dynasty outside South Korea. So the specific dynasty is called by rulers' family name. Such a naming convention is common in East Asia. You would know 劉宋, 曹魏 etc.
Then, why do South Koreans believe that "Yi Dynasty" is a derogative term? Here is my theory: In South Korea, "Joseon" is a historical term. It doesn't refer to modern Korea (they use "Han" instead) but only means the dynasty there. So South Koreans forget why the dynasty is called so. And some of them unwisely associate the name with their anti-Japanism. It is a pity that Koreans do not validate rumors by themselves but accept them without questioning. -- Nanshu 01:23, 2 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I can't find any guidance here on whether (for example) Kim Il-Sung or Kim Il-sung is the preferred form. Both seem to be widely used in English-language media. I have recently written articles on Kim Jong-Nam and Kim Jong-Chul with all three name-elements capitalised. Any comments? Adam 10:25, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Um, thanks for that, but I am no wiser on what the Wikipedia policy is. If there isn't one I will leave my articles as they are. Adam 12:32, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
OK *sigh* I will change the articles. Also Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il (when it is unprotected). Adam 12:47, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
See: Talk:Hangul for discussions. Kokiri (rev. Sewing)
Please do not just change the convention before consulting the community. Changing the spelling of a word is not just about changing links and moving the article. There are many occurrences of Hangeul which are not linked. Also, some sentences need rewriting... The discussion is at Talk:Hangul. Kokiri 12:15, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
These are a lot cleaner than the way we (especially I!) were doing things before. I added a new section to the top of the article page. -- Sewing 20:31, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I don't want to cross-post, but there are quite a few links to Japan in Korean topics that actually should link to Empire of Japan. Just bear the existence of this article in mind when linking... Kokiri 22:37, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I have checked on the web and found that both spellings Barhae and Balhae are used for the Korean 발해. Actually, the government brochure I checked uses Balhae. -- Kokiri 18:27, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
(This is how we commonly use it). -- Kokiri 10:07, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I have created {{msg:korean}}. We can add this to all tak pages of Korea-related articles. I hope this maximizes compliance and involvement with our conventions... -- Kokiri 15:56, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)