Korean Job Discussion Forums

[chaz47]

Maybe I'm talking out of my a*s here, but many many years ago when the yangban opposed Sejong's implentation of the Hangeul alphabet they may have been on to something. They called in "banmal" meaning "half language" and these days, in my sincere opinion, it isn't far from the truth.

Some linguists estimate that as much of 70% of Korean vocabulary is based on Hanja, in other words the Chinese characters that form the roots of words.

Chinese characters were the de facto written language of Korean into the 20th century. Although Sejong's Hangeul is the present written form of Korean and has received much praise here and internationally its widespread usage didn't begin until the latter half of the 20th century (following the Korean war).

This reemergence of Hangeul is often touted as providing some impetus for Korean modernization by giving the Korean people a sort of national identity of their own. The alphabet's simple elegance and it's appreciation internationally gave the crippled and demoralized post-war Korea something to be proud of.

Keep in mind though, what the yangban called it centuries before, "half-language". It was meant to be a tool to allow the uneducated majority of Korea a leg up towards literacy. As the learning of Chinese characters is indeed difficult and time-consuming the average peasant farmer in the Korea of yore definitely wouldn't have had the time or money to learn them.

In essence Hangeul was only meant to be a short-hand for Chinese. The meanings of all these homonyms that befuddle learners of Korean are readily distinguishable when written as Chinese characters. I assume that in spoken Chinese they would be of different tones and therefore would have different meanings.

Think about it, how many different meanings are there for "sa" or "dong". It's freaking ridiculous. Now many who write books about learning Korean claim the homonyms here are simply something you get used to as you learn the language. Well, my thinking is if 70% of the vocabulary is contructed of homonymous roots based upon Chinese characters and most Koreans can no longer simply write their names in Chinese characters... hahaha... wow... think about it.

How many of you that are quite savvy in Korean bemoan the inane conversations you have to overhear? Why are they so inane? Because the modern Korean vocabulary is only a half-language, if that.

Here's where the Orwellian comes in. These people work 60 hours a week. As children they are schooled constantly with very little free time. What do Koreans inevitably do during their scarce free time? They drink. They go to norae-bangs. They pay for sex. Recently they have sought refuge from their overworked, overstressed life in PC bangs.

Wasn't it some notorious military dictator (his name eludes me) after the Korean war that put a huge amount of funding into building song rooms (norae-bangs), love motels/room salons, and sports parks. He called it the "3S campaign" or something like that, sex, song and sport. The goal being to keep the population overworked and feed their escapist urges when they eventually have free time, this was his method of discouraging political dissidence.

Flash forward to present day Korea. The situation is the same the population is overworked, overstressed, etc. In schools the kids are taught strictly for the test, blacken the appropriate oval go hagwon, etc. Studying Chinese characters is definitely not a priority these days. Although they are taught, they are taught in the typical Korean fashion of 'here they are memorize, regurgitate, forget'.

As I mentioned earlier, most can't even write their own names in Hanja. How can they function outside of their sphere of occupation? How could they possibly question authority or do anything meaningful about the endemic corruption of their government and numerous social problems. In a way, if the government actually intended this years ago it was a brilliant idea. It is an insidious, effective and invisible social control.

Here's an idea, ask a Korean person to help you with a technical manual for some new cell phone or other technological marvel they are so good at producing but have very little ability to comprehend. Most I have met never go beyond the basic functions of their wonderful devices because they don't understand their own language. The vocabulary is based on Hanja roots that they cannot remember, of course they'll never admit this. They'll just say the Korean people have an odd way of wording things, or that they include 5 ideas in every sentence.

That's lame... it's an excuse. The language is all based on homonym's that they have no idea what they mean. The average Kim, Park and Lee couldn't function outside of their job which they specifically studied for or a simple service industry job.

Average Koreans are probably quite aware of their linguistic shortcomings in their own language but woe to admit it. I recall an adult student of mine once telling me when he saw me studying Hanja, that only "very intelligent Korean people study Hanja because they are so difficult". I looked at him and said, "Oh, so that must mean everyone in China is very intelligent...?". The look on his face was priceless.

Anyway, I've had too much coffee. I hope this doesn't meander too much.

[CasperTheFriendlyGhost]

Interesting, but what is the connection between learning Hanja and questioning authority? Toddlers question their parents authority even before aquiring language.

[chaz47]

[CasperTheFriendlyGhost]

It seems like you're glomming two seperate issues together here.

And I might be wrong, but Hanja and Chinese characters are not really the same thing anymore.

Anyways, as far as gross generalizations go, a thoughtful argument.

[VanIslander]

[happeningthang]

The most interesting thread I've read in a while, but fatally flawed logic with a few characteristics of language not being fully considered. Korean, like any other language in the world, is fully functional and can in no way can be considered "half a language".

Just because a language uses another language as it's source, doesn't mean it's forever trapped in relation to the original language. Language is very dynamic and, some say, an inherent human trait, so even if what the OP is saying is true about the origin of hangul - there's no way it would remain that way.

That's like saying all the Romance languages are forever flawed versions of Latin, or the Germanic languages, English among them, remain nothing more than an incomplete rendition of Proto Germanic.

I've heard that a large portion of Korean is derived from Chinese root words, but you don't need to know these root words in order to speak Korean, in the same sense that you don't need to know the etymology of the many borrowed words of English to use them. The Chinese language and writing has undergone more than a few changes in its history as well.

That and the very few conversations I've had with Koreans about this, they're all very aware of the role of Chinese in the Korean language, and most seemed knowledgeable about it, and could write their names and discuss the meanings. It made for some interesting discussion groups.

Regarding the historicity of the widespread use of Hangul, you need to consider that, perhaps, I don't know, widespread literacy wasn't exactly a priority before the advent of the Japanese colonial period. It's only after that, and the Korean war, that Korea needed a widely educated and literate society to modernise - hence the latter day infatuation with hangul.

[Tiberious aka Sparkles]

[chaz47]

[viipuri]

While I agree with some of what you say, you must be much more careful with your terminology. You demonstrate that you've at least heard of the term 'banmal' (can't write readable Korean on my Mac for you guys) but you've gotten the word's meaning confused.

The modern usage of the term doesn't apply directly to the usage of the Korean writing system per se, but to the level of formality applied in its communicative aspect. While literally it might mean 'half/language', it is in reference only to the use of the language on a strictly informal basis, such as between friends or close family members - it is not a reference to the hangeul itself. In the past it was sometimes referred to as 'women's writing' or 'kids' writing', but not 'banmal'.

I do agree somewhat that Korean has lost a source of cultural understanding between countries that fell under the sphere of China. As a person who has studied Korean formally and lived here for a good while, I think it would have be insightful to at least keep Chinese characters in the written Korean language as they do in Japanese, but this is merely my personal preference as someone with a keen interest in linguistics. Korea has also gained much for employing hangeul - a (constructed) cultural identity (its true origins have been glorified a little too much, as has its 'being scientific'_ and higher literacy, for instance. I do not believe in the more 'shiny' aspects of the system - it certainly does have it problems, and as a side-note I do wonder about the number of dyslexics in this country (for those with dyslexia, surely a lot of the letters would look all too alike?)! Admittedly, the homonyms can be problematic - particularly for the learner of Korean - but it is also a useful tool to remember and identify (and even create) vocabulary based upon these sounds you recognise as having potentially multiple meanings...at times, it can even be fun.

The problems you mention are legitimate though - Koreans may occasionally not be able to comprehend a word's meaning, but you must also be aware that it may be the material itself that could be the problem. English speakers too have problems understanding guides, technical manuals and abstract written instructions without some simplification or pictures to help. Until the last few years, all Korean laws were written in hanja to prevent misinterpretation of those laws (they are still used to a lesser extent, I have heard, to stop any ambiguity).

I think the issues you discuss are important for us - as residents in Korea - are important to recognise and appreciate, but I don't know if social issues like singing and drinking necessarily tie in with the writing system, let alone 'banmal' as the term is correctly defined.

[Ilsanman]

I read the first 2-3 paragraphs, and stopped reading. The OP clearly doesn't know what 반말 is.

Banmal is not about what alphabet you use to write the language in, it's the level of respect you show another person when you speak or write. If the sentence ends in 습니다 or 요 (and a few more endings) it's not banmal. Even if written in Hangeul or Chinese characters.

[superdave]

if korean is only half a language, wouldn't that make english half a language??

i mean, most english words are rooted in latin, greek or french. without which, english would make no sense whatsoever.

[The_Eyeball_Kid]

[Tiberious aka Sparkles]

[chaz47]

Thanks for your input. I'd like to ask those of you that disagree to reread my original post at least once though. For example I intended to use the original meaning of banmal as used by the yangban back in the old days, not the modern usage.

I'm not suggesting that a limited vocabulary would lead to lesser intelligence per se, just less lateral thinking and creativity as well as a lesser capacity to ask meaningful questions. When you look at the percentage of college graduates that lack life skills it shows a bit more. I believe intelligence is the ability to learn and I think that everyone has the capacity to learn, it's just in Korea with overwork and sleep deprivation being facts of life, the option to put forth genuine curiosity and learn in a meaningful self-directed manner is not very appealing.

I guess the same could be said for many developing economies though.

Our languages hardwire our brains and create our realities, with a limited number of options (vocabulary), the brain goes numb in certain areas. Consider that the English vocabulary is VERY NOUN heavy. The Korean language by contrast is very adjective heavy, most of these adjectives deal with hardship, deprivation and nostalgia. If you can't understand how this would shape a person's life then... I don't know what else to say.

Some psycholinguists have indeed put forth the idea that speakers of English are natively more pioneering and creative than those of other languages. They often do attribute this to the bottomless vocabulary of English. I don't mean to say that native speakers of Korean (or other languages) couldn't excel in some aspect, I've read that despite their self-admitted somewhat illogical language Koreans often excel at Math due to the regularity of their number system.

[ernie]

the OP is confused about two key terms here: 'newspeak' and 'ban mal'... the correct meaning of 'ban mal' has been clarified above, so i will talk about 'newspeak'...

in 1984, 'newspeak' was intended to purge the language of unnecessary synonyms in order to restrict the range of language and therefore, of thought... have you looked at a korean dictionary lately? no purging done there - korean has so many frickin synonyms it makes me crazy! what does spelling have to do with anything?

have you read 'politics and the english language'?
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm

6 simple rules to live by:

(i) Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.

(ii) Never use a long word where a short one will do.

(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

(iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.

(v) Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

(vi) Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.