Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!ellis!deb5
From: deb5@ellis.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff)
Subject: Re: Korean: Odd man out?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: midway.uchicago.edu
Message-ID: <DpLyFn.4qL@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Reply-To: deb5@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: The University of Chicago
References: <4kd461$hr1@juliana.sprynet.com> <SDLEE.96Apr9210621@wisdom.cs.hku.hk>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 18:38:11 GMT
Lines: 71

In article <SDLEE.96Apr9210621@wisdom.cs.hku.hk>,
Lee Sau Dan ~{@nJX6X~} <sdlee@cs.hku.hk> wrote:
>>>>>> "R" == R Jeffrey Grace <rjgrace@pobox.com> writes:
>
>    R> I was wondering how the Korean language is viewed by Linguists,
>    R> given the fact that it's alphabet is so unique.  How does it
>    R> stand to study?

	Note that it is possible to study the Korean language without
any reference to its alphabet.  Most English-language linguistic works,
for example, present Korean data completely in romanisation.  Only 
general introductions or works on writing systems discuss hankul/
han'geul.  The origin of hankul has nothing whatsoever to do with the
genetic classification of Korean, for instance.

>The  Korean alphabet is unique?  How?

	It is one of the only (if not the only) alphabet now in general
use which was devised by a group scholars according to definite linguis-
tic principles.  The fact that these scholars were largely unfamiliar 
with alphabetic systems makes this feat of invention nothing short of 
astonishing.  [Note:  There have been arguments that the scholars were
influenced by the Mongol alphabet or one of its derivatives, but I don't
find them convincing since a) there is no reference to Mongol script--or
any other alphabet--in their writings and no proof that any of them com-
manded any script besides Chinese characters and their simplifications
and b) there are only chance resemblances between Mongol script--or any
other script--and hankul.]

>Like the Japanese kanas, the Korean alphabets  each denote a syllable.

There is only one Korean alphabet.  The letters are arranged in syllabic
blocks, probably under influence from Chinese writing.  The kanas are
syllabaries.  Each character represents a syllable.  Since they are, in
origin, simplifications of Chinese characters, there is no systematic
relationship between form and sound as there is in hankul.

>However,  the Korean  alphabet is    highly systematic.   Each   block
>representing   a  syllable   consists    of smaller   components  each
>representing   a consonant or  vowel.   Both  the  Japanese  kanas and
>Koreans have existed  for  a few  centuries only.   They  are syllabic
>writings.
>
>But,  isn't    the  Arabic alphabet  also   unique?
[snip]
>Isn't the  Hebrew   alphabet unique, too?
[snip]
>Isn't the Thai alphabet unique, too?
>How about the cyrillic alphabet?

Of course, every alphabet is unique in some way.  Hankul is unique in
several, the most important one being the systematic relationship 
between speech sounds and their representations.  It's difficult to
illustrate this relationship in ASCII, but any decent reference work
on hankul will contain some explanation of how it was derived.

>Perhaps,  the most unique "alphabet"  is the  Chinese  one!  It is not
>phonographic.  Rather, it is ideographic.  Moreover,  its size is much
>much larger than most  other alphabets.  Traditionally, it is  written
>FROM TOP TO BOTTOM, although it is now very commonly written from left
>to write, like English.

The Chinese script is no more unique than any other.  Furthermore, it is 
not ideographic.  Originally, hankul was also written top-to-bottom and
this order still survives, though it is much less common than the left-to-
right order.

-- 
	 Daniel "Da" von Brighoff    /\          Dilettanten
	(deb5@midway.uchicago.edu)  /__\         erhebt Euch
				   /____\      gegen die Kunst!
