Korean Job Discussion Forums

[shakuhachi]

[mithridates]

And Wa stretched all the way to where? Not to Hokkaido, nor to Okinawa. Like I said, the borders of old are different from now and Wa was Bakjae's best friend way back when.

[mithridates]

http://ehangul.at.infoseek.co.jp/UmiowoWatattaKotoba.htm

I suppose this is also just more Korean blather? Except that it's not Korean. Shrug.

[shakuhachi]

[shakuhachi]

[mithridates]

Like I said, there was Wa, there was Bakjae, and they were two good friends. Wa had the same royal family as the one now though of course. Kind of like how Russia wasn't Russia for a while. Now it's Russia again. Same place, same people though.

[shakuhachi]

[mithridates]

No, it's no problem. There's really no connection between logic and place names, however. Take Granville 'Island' in Vancouver for example.
My point though was that even though they were by and large the same people way back when that the concept of Japan over there and Korea over here didn't really exist as Goguryo was the enemy and Japan / Wa was their ally.

[shakuhachi]

[mithridates]

Yeah, I was considering "the best board to discuss Japanese-Korean etymology and historical roots" but it just didn't have the same ring to it.

[Guri Guy]

http://www.hendrick-hamel.henny-savenije.pe.kr/koreanstudies4.htm

This is a very good link on Tsushima. Unlike Dokto, there has never been any realistic claim by Korea for ownership of the island they argue.

I once read an article by a Korean writer arguing that Tsushima was Korean because its NAME was Korean. He etymologized Tsushima as coming from "tu shima", which he said was obviously a reflex of Korean "tu sOm" (< syem), meaning "two islands." It is true that today Tsushima is indeed two islands. But in traditional times, Korean maps always depicted it as a single island, and correctly so. Between 1895 and 1904, the Japanese navy blasted a cut through an isthmus, perhaps one or two kilometers wide, on the eastern side of island between the great Aso^ Bay and the Japan Strait, not only dividing the land mass into two islands but also advancing their purpose, which was to be able to rapidly move warships from the straits of Korea (between Korea and Tsushima) into the straits of Japan (between Tsushima and Japan). This capability proved crucial during the Russo-Japanese War, when the Russian Baltic fleet, which had spent the better part of a year sailing around Africa (England would never have let it through the Suez canal) in order to be re-based in Vladivostok, was smashed to pieces and sunk by the Japanese in the "Battle of Tsushima." Tsushima has only been "two islands" for only about a hundred years, and the "two islands means Korean sovereignty" theory turns into a bubble. The name Tsushima has a long textual history, appearing earliest in the Chinese "History of the Three Kingdoms" (Sanguo zhi, compiled before 297 CE and partly based on the earlier Weizhi of ca. 250, though the latter is now known only through quotations from it in other surviving books). It is written there in the same Chinese characters that are used for the name today, namely "Taema" in Korean pronunciation. The first syllable, Chinese <dui>, meaning "opposite," "to face," "oppose," etc., was pronounced in Old Chinese (lasting down to the 2nd and 3rd century) as <tush> or <tuzh> or <tus> or <tuz>, according to Chinese historical linguists. The second syllable, <ma>, comes down relatively unchanged. <tushma> (or variants as above) must have represented <tu shima>, not "two islands" of course, but rather "crossing island", or maybe "bridging island," with the tsu (< tu) being the common morpheme "crossing," as of a body of water. In fact the name of the island often appears in ancient Japanese texts in that orthography. The name seems to have been intended to mean a place for crossing between the Korean peninsula and the main

Japanese islands. (Interestingly enough, the character <dui> also has the value <tush>, <tus>, etc., in a KoguryO title found in the same Chinese book <Sanguo zhi>).

It appears that the Korean story is a bunch of crap. Sorry Mithridates, Shakuhachi is correct.

[mithridates]

Oh no!

I did read it in Japanese first though, by a Japanese author.

[mithridates]

I see that there are four theories as to the origin of the name now that I've looked into it a bit further:


�ۣ���
対ة���몦����߾�����������ª���ƪ���Ϊǡ��々�ϡ�対������������ê��ΪǪϪʪ��������몦説������ު�����������۪˪ʪê�����Ϊߪʪ骺��国������学�����몤�󪷪�説�Ǫ���
������対ة��죪Ī�����ܬ��ƪ���誦���視�ު�����実�ϣ��Ī����ǡ�˰戸���۪�٥�����۪���ު˪謹�êơ�����������ʪΪǡ����몦��릪��顢真�����﷪�Ԥ��������ߪ����ʪ�Σ����ªê��ΪǪ����Īުꡢ��������٣�����檷�����۪˪Ϫ��ê���ȣ��Ī������ê��Ϊǡ�����説�Ϫ��ު������Ǫ������ʪêƪ��ު��ު�����
�ۣ���
�Ȫ���êƪ⡢��������������죪Ī��������ު����êĪ���並��Ǫ���Ϊǡ�対�˪ʪêƪ����������몦説��죪Ī������몦��ګ�ǪϪʪ�������������説�Ǫ���
�ۣ���
対ة���몦������������ϪȪʪêƪ��ު���������ܪ��Ū����実�Ϫ�êȪ��Ϊ����Ϫ���˪県���飱�������������ƪ������Ǫ���
�������١�対�ͪ�������������Ϫ��Σ��ªΣ������Σ��������������ƪ��ު���
�����ǡ�����٣�����国߲国���۪����������˪��ê��٣��ة�ۣ��Ъ��󡷪�対�����ƪ��������몦���Ȫǡ�対ة���˪ʪê��ΪǪϪʪ��������몦説�⪢��ު���
����説�������ʪΪϡ�ة����������説٥��来�ƪ���処�Ǫ���
�ۣ���
��������ܬ�������ǡ����������몦��Ϊ⪢��ު��������ê�����来���������Ȫ�������学��������ު���
����説�˪��ȡ������������⪫�����国������Ϫ��ު���������処���ê��Ϊǡ����У��������������몦��ګ�����Ū����몽���Ǫ���

�����êǪϡ�対�˪ʪê��������몦説����êȪ�������説�Ǫ���

[the saint]

Just come back from Ulleungdo. Tried hard to get on the Dokdo ferry but it was way overbooked. In the end, I'm not too bothered about that as Ulleungdo was very impressive in itself.

But everywhere there were signs proclaiming "Dokdo is our land!" and it made me wonder who the heck they were written for. Simply preaching to the converted as no Japanese are going to end up as happy tourists on Ulleungdo for sure. The same propaganda in the Dokdo Museum on the island too. The English translation of the Korean guide leaflet for the museum is laughable. Again, who the heck is this written for... the Koreans themselves of course.

Which made me wonder again, what would happen say, if France claimed the Isle of Wight (not occupied, just claimed). The British would just laugh at them. You wouldn't get mass hysteria outside the French embassy in London. You'd just get apathy. Why such a different reaction? I really think it has to do with insecurity.

The Koreans seem so insecure about their national identity that unless they remind themselves of how dynamic they are and exactly what land they possess they will somehow cease to exist. The way they have reacted to Japan's claims this time is evidence of this. It's as if the Japanese have actually invaded the island an act which, despite their worst fears, is really incredibly unlikely.

So, I returned from Ulleungdo and its hordes of Dokdo-fanatics with more insight into the Korean psyche. I'm not sure that this was the impression that they intended me to take with me though.

[Godzilla]

Saint,way I see it is, Korea's a young country that hasn't come to grips with democracy and all that it entails. It may be the 8th largest economy blah blah blah. Whatever. There was no Korea, North or South, in the sense of the modern definition, prior to 1945 (Chosun mismanagement and Japanese Occupation). Then they had the war, then they both went through authoritarian regimes and then the South eventually got democracy. people just can't handle it properly yet and the government exploits this for its own purposes.

Compare this to the UK's handling of disputed colonial property. Hong Kong Island and Kowloon didn't have to go back to China if you look at the Treaty of Nanking and the Treaty of Tientsin. However, a combination of Thatcher's over-confidence and a developed, cultured foreign policy led to the return of Honkers. No mass hysteria though. Just a few moistened eyes (mine included) seeing the Britsh leave HK on a wet, tropical evening in 1997.

Same deal with Gibraltar. Spain is questioning sovereignty.. UK is prepared for joint sovereignty and the only thing holding it up is the inhabitants of the Rock.

So, OK, Korea might not be as dynamic as Koreans are led to believe. In world terms they are but a toddler who has just begun to walk to the tune of democracy. It's pretty understandable for a nation that has finally got a bit of clout both financial and militarily, has recently democratised and has only developed in the last 30 years or so.