[USFK Forums] Romanization Policy

[C. Y. Lee]

We, the Korean War Abductees' Family Union (www.korwarabductees.org/), will comply with the McCune-Reichauer system as modified in 1985, meaning that we will continue to respect what were referenced in the 10th edition of Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (1993), in particular with respect to geographic names referred therein (pages 1441~1529). We are not in the position to entertain the new system adopted by Kim Dae-jung's administration in 2000; for examples, spelling theoretically:

1) Kim Jong-il as Kim Jeong-il,
2) Pyongyang as Pyeongyang,
3) Inchon as Incheon,
4) Pusan to Busan, etc.

The new system, effectively lobbied by a handful of Hangul-lists, is bibliographically inconsistent with publications worldwide, inclusive of maps, military maps in particular, and Korea-related documents, papers, books, novels, etc.

The new system was supported by a handful of nationalists, and there is, therefore, a great danger in culturally challenging what have been prevailing for decades and decades. We are the organization in search of abductees in North Korea, justifying use of maps of 50s for location purposes if we are ever granted to search for those died in North Korea during the Korean War (1950~1953).

Note: Americans had meanwhile recovered remains of those died in action. There is an acute need for USFK Forums' to review its Korean romanization policy. Writing later.

[mike]

his is very interesting. I have noticed this, but never knew the details behind it.

I think you will find that most people still use the old way. This is especially true on the internet. For instance, if you Googled Inchon you are more likely to get relevant returns vice using Incheon. I even did a spell check of Microsoft Word and it recommended I change Incheon to Inchon.

What are your recommendations?

Mike

[usinkorea]

The trend is against the old system. It seems scholars abroad are adobpting the new system from what little I've seen reading the Korea-related journals. Eventually, that will mean the websites will slowly shift over too.

The big problem with the old system, probably for printers and others, are the pronounciation marks above the "o" sounds. It is probably easier for publishers to do without them, and it is easier for people who want to stick to a system type out the new form.

But, I don't think the average person on the net is going to care and will mix and match.......