|
 |
April 25, 2003 SOUTH KOREA....Roh Moo-hyun is the new president of South Korea. But according the Economist, "Roh" is pronounced "no." This is peculiar, isn't it? If his name is pronounced "no," why would the standard transliteration into English produce "Roh"? Elsewhere in their survey of South Korea, we get this:
Yes it is. UPDATE: I'm paraphrasing extremely broadly here, but the consensus of the commenters about the pronunciation of "Roh" seems to be that in Korean the initial sound of his name is something that doesn't exist in English but that sounds like an R, or an L, or maybe even an N, sort of, or maybe a combination of all three. And in any case, whoever created the transliteration scheme might not have had English speakers in mind, or might not have had any other suitable letters left after creating the rest of the scheme, or — well, who knows, really? In other words, the hell with it: just go ahead and pronounce it "Roh." Posted by Kevin Drum at April 25, 2003 01:50 PM | TrackBackComments
I'm pretty sure the "n" is either a typo or a mistake. (No subscription to the Economist, so I can't read it.) Korean has an "r/l" phoneme that sounds not too unlike a West Coast "r" when it's at the beginning of a word. Pronouncing "Roh" as "Row" shouldn't be incorrect. Posted by: Scott Martens at April 25, 2003 02:27 PM | PERMALINKI must say, the youth in South Korea may have a point. They have a situation, effectively, of mutually assured destruction with the North--with all the stability that comes from that. Personally, I just can't imagine a scenario in which the gov't of North Korea would "officially" launch nukes at *any* country. I know Kim Jong Mentally Il is not exactly a paragon of Reason, but he seems quite devious and savvy--not a raving lunatic. That leaves nukes sold to, or stolen by, terrorists. And who do most terrorists hate? That's right... So, I'm afraid that, no matter how much we bluster, no matter how much we demand that other countries in the region lose face... er, I mean negotiate in our place, it really is, in the end, our problem. Posted by: Realish at April 25, 2003 02:54 PM | PERMALINKScott: I just did a quick Google and found another site that said "Roh" is pronounced "no." If it's wrong, it seems to be a common misperception. Very odd. Posted by: Kevin Drum at April 25, 2003 03:17 PM | PERMALINKShort answer: the guy's wrong. The R represents a sound that doesn't precisely exist in English. It's normally written as an L or and R, both of which it kind of resembles (romanization of Korean is weirdly inconsistent, despite the fact that there are far fewer sound and combinations than in English), but occasionally some wiseguy spells it with an N, which it also kind of resembles. Korean does have an N sound, too, but that's not the one in Roh, (which should be spelled Ro, I think; full discloser: it's been quite a few years since I've used or studied Korean, mainly because I went directly from there to Taiwan, where you can't get a Korean textbook, and all the Koreans speak Chinese, which I already spoke a lot better, and which is easier to speak, if not read, anyway). Posted by: David at April 25, 2003 03:47 PM | PERMALINKCome to think of it, I don't think Korean does have fewer sounds, just different ones, in fewer combinations. Yes, you do care, deeply. Posted by: David at April 25, 2003 03:56 PM | PERMALINKOne more thing: disturbing, yes, but not surprising. Posted by: David at April 25, 2003 03:59 PM | PERMALINKI retract that last nastty comment, or at least the nasty sentiment behind it. I suspect that a lot of Americans have equivalent feelings. Posted by: David at April 25, 2003 04:14 PM | PERMALINKHmmmm, seems I'm always here to comment on matters of such utter unimportance, but this has always bugged me about quite a few translations from Asian languages. For instance, the correct way to pronounce the term Tao is apparently with the "D" sound. And the term that is pronounced "chi" or "tchi" is most often spelled Qi. Why is that? These languages don't use the western alphabet, so when the terms are translated, why don't they use a spelling that is more or less phonetic? Again, not a matter of great importance, but it certainly is frustrating if one's first introduction to such terms is written. Then when they are discussed with someone else vocally, I always feel like a fool for my ignorance of the correct pronunciation. Maybe I should just turn to Esperanto... Posted by: Danno at April 25, 2003 04:21 PM | PERMALINKHmmmm, seems I'm always here to comment on matters of such utter unimportance, but this has always bugged me about quite a few translations from Asian languages. For instance, the correct way to pronounce the term Tao is apparently with the "D" sound. And the term that is pronounced "chi" or "tchi" is most often spelled Qi. Why is that? These languages don't use the western alphabet, so when the terms are translated, why don't they use a spelling that is more or less phonetic? Again, not a matter of great importance, but it certainly is frustrating if one's first introduction to such terms is written. Then when they are discussed with someone else vocally, I always feel like a fool for my ignorance of the correct pronunciation. Maybe I should just turn to Esperanto... Posted by: Danno at April 25, 2003 04:21 PM | PERMALINKCan anyone point to a news report that includes North Korean nukes, but does not involve 'The War on Terror', 'The axis of Evil', Talks between America and North Korea, or overflights over Japan? Posted by: Factory at April 25, 2003 04:22 PM | PERMALINKDanno, part of the problem is that the Pinyin transliteration now used in mainland China (the one that produces "Beijing") is less phonetic than the older transliteration used in Hong Kong and Taiwan (whose name escapes me; it's hyphenated). It's not quite as bad as the lettering system that they used for Cherokee when they turned it into a written language (which stole Roman letterforms without any of the phonetics attached to them in any known language), but it's mighty annoying. Posted by: Chris Lawrence at April 25, 2003 04:28 PM | PERMALINKOh and about wierd romanizations, it's a mistake to assume that: Which results in interesting romanizations, like 'Thuy', which is pronounced 'Twee'. Posted by: Factory at April 25, 2003 04:32 PM | PERMALINKThe novelty may wear off (which is to say, people may get tired of posting commnets), but so far Calpundit's comments are the best I've seen on a blog. Posted by: Magik Johnson at April 25, 2003 04:50 PM | PERMALINKThe novelty may wear off (which is to say, people may get tired of posting commnets), but so far Calpundit's comments are the best I've seen on a blog. Posted by: Magik Johnson at April 25, 2003 04:50 PM | PERMALINKI heard, a few weeks ago here at Notre Dame, a lecture by the eminent historian of Korea, Bruce Cummings, and he pronounced 'Roh' just like one would expect. Posted by: Neil Dhingra at April 25, 2003 05:13 PM | PERMALINKDanno- The wade-giles romanization is the scientific, linguistic system. It differentiates between similar sounds not so much by how they "ought" to be spelled, but by how they're physically pronounced. It's all about aspiration. Say "duh" and "tuh" with your hand in front of your mouth; you should feel air against your hand with the "tuh," but not with the "duh." The "d" sound in Chinese is similar to a "t," but with no aspiration. So in wade-giles, the "d" sound is written "t," like "tao." Aspirated sounds are written with an apostrophe after them, like "t'ai." The same goes for "ch." "Ch" sounds like a the English "j" and "ch'" sounds like "q" or "ch." When you see taiqi written "tai chi," feel free to point and laugh, because it's incorrect. It's either taiqi or t'ai ch'i. Sounds in the pinyin system aren't pronounced exactly like they look, but pinyin has the advantage of seperate letters for aspirated and nonaspirated sounds. Neither one is really better; if you're studying the language and/or the country (like me), you have to be reasonably proficient in both. Kind of off topic, I apologize. The point is, romanizations are a tricky business, and you really have to learn each system's nuances if you really want to pronounce things correctly. Posted by: Z.J. Acreman at April 25, 2003 05:33 PM | PERMALINKI've been living in Seoul for the past few months - although my knowledge of Korean is still quite limited. I have always heard Roh pronounced No, or something pretty darn close, by Koreans and English-speaking foreigners alike. In the Korean alphabet, Roh is indeed spelled No. Of course, if all family names were transliterated into the Roman alphabet consistently using the current system, Park would be Bak, Kim would be Gim, and (my personal favorite) Lee would be I. That's right - just I. Posted by: Seoul Fundie at April 25, 2003 07:08 PM | PERMALINKSeveral people are coming close to the truth but just missing. It's true that the "R" letter in Korean generally is sort of in between the R and L sounds. But in a few specific situations, it's pronounced like an "N," (sort of like how "C" is sometimes pronounced like an "S" in English, but rarer than that). "Roh" is actually a correct transliteration in a way, because it's spelled "Roh" in Korean but pronounced "No". [I know this because I'm Korean-American. My Korean is pretty poor, but I know enough to know how "Roh" is spelled and pronounced.] Posted by: JP at April 25, 2003 08:02 PM | PERMALINKMy bad. It's actually both spelled and pronounced "No" in Korean. But there's a reason why it's transliterated "Roh" - it's based on an archaic Korean spelling or something. My dad explained this to me once upon a time, but I forget what it was. Posted by: JP at April 25, 2003 08:11 PM | PERMALINKAs a face-saving move, just wanted to tell you all that if you say "Thai" Kwon Do, you're wrong. It's pronounced just like it's spelled (i.e. "Teh" Kwon Do"). I'm sure about this one. Posted by: JP at April 25, 2003 08:16 PM | PERMALINKI just tend to think South Korean youth are in denial, and I probably would be too, in their shoes. MKK Posted by: Mary Kay at April 25, 2003 11:42 PM | PERMALINKI believe that Korean does have fewer sounds, just like most languages, than English. English has an amazing number of vowel sounds (notice how, for example, the "a" in "cat" and "cab" are not the same). A similar problem occurs in the romanization of Japanese. The Hepburn system is generally used when translating into English-- it translates words into how they would sound in English. There are several other official systems that romanize words according to the systematic spelling in Japanese. Thus, "sa shi su se so" is "sa si su se so" in different romanizations, because in Japanese, the "s" consonant followed by the "i" vowel (think standard Spanish language/ Romance vowels) is assimilated to the "shi" sound in English. Similarly "ta chi tsu te to" and "ta ti tu te to." Of course, it's not that just other languages are weird-- English is certainly the same way. The sound that an "r" makes in "er," "ir," etc. is almost completely unrelated to its other typical sound. Similarly, while English doesn't exactly distinguish aspirated and non-aspirated "p" and "t," there are a complex set of rules (automatically followed by native speakers) about when to aspirate both letters. Consider the difference between the p and t sounds in "pot" and "top." The different systems actually have their uses-- Hepburn is easiest for people who don't know Japanese, and when you're romanizing scattered Japanese words into English. The other systems match Japanese spelling better, and can be easier for learning the language. The other big problems come with long vowels, which in Japanese are merely vowels held for double length. Writing a vowel twice does not produce the same effect in English, hence the use of "oh" or "ow" for double "o" (written in Japanese as "ou" usually but pronounced as a double "o"), although in some situations "ow" or "oh" will be pronounced wrongly in English. Complicating it further is that people are somewhat free to choose their own custom romanization for their own name, and ask that people use it. Posted by: John Thacker at April 26, 2003 08:29 AM | PERMALINKI hate to add to this mountain of comments, but I have an interesting angle on all this. Several years ago I had a Korean professor who not only could not explain to me why "R" is pronounced "N" (or why the "N" sound is transliterated as "R"), he could not explain why South Koreans were so willing to overlook the savage butchery committed by North Korean spy-terrorists against South Korean cabinet officials at an international conference in Southeast Asia that they would send aid money to the North. The deep emotional desire for reunification in the face of nuclear blackmail defies all logic. Posted by: Andrew Clem at April 26, 2003 09:38 AM | PERMALINKRealish writes, "...the youth in South Korea may have a point. They have a situation, effectively, of mutually assured destruction with the North...." How so? South Korea does not have nukes, so it has "mutually assured destruction" only because the U.S. has pledged protection. If the U.S. withdraws that pledge, South Korea is toast. And while Realish may not be able to envision any situation where North Korea would use nukes, apparently they can. Else why would they be developing both the weapon and the means to deliver it? Don't forget that the "Dear Leader's" father invaded South Korea because he thought he could get away with it. Kim Jong Il may be thinking the same way. Posted by: OldBull at April 27, 2003 12:37 AM | PERMALINKLots of people simply write and pronounce it as "Noh". Just as correct, and a lot easier for English speakers. Besides the problems with the various "official" transliteration systems, one should also point out that individuals can choose to transliterate their names however the heck they want. So a lot of Korean-Americans basically chose to employ pre-existing American names that were fairly similar to their Korean names, rather than transliterating on a letter-by-letter basis. Thus Park for what is in Korean something more like "Bag", Kim for Gim, and Lee for I. Posted by: Troutgirl at April 27, 2003 11:56 PM | PERMALINKI would like to shed some light on the "Roh." The short answer is
that Korean, like all living languages, is changing and "Roh" pronounced
"Noh" is a product of the changing times. This was also the case with
another previous South Korean president, Roh Tae Woo. The long answer
is that "Roh" in most everyday Korean writing/speech are spelled and
pronounced "Noh." However, the Chinese character that underlies the
majority of Korean names (each syllable can be written as a Chinese
character, that is pronounced in a Korean way) can be pronounced in two
ways: 1) something between "Roh" and "Loh," and 2) "Noh." Traditional
Korean grammar dictated that initial syllable of a word that begins
with the R/L consonant be modified to an N or Y consonant (e.g. "Ryu"
could be pronounced "Yu"). Enough with the mans name, already. Does anyone else remember in this article, we mentioned North Korea and Nuclear Weapons? The only name that we should be worrying about now, is the name of WHO do we talk to in order to defuse this? Posted by: Ron at May 4, 2003 03:49 PM | PERMALINKwhy aren't there any sites online that will tell you what your korean name means or even part of it. Does anyone know what the name means?? i can't find the translation anywhere. Thanks sebby549@yahoo.com Posted by: Troy Hamilton at May 7, 2003 09:31 PM | PERMALINK~* BEFORE YOU READ THIS PLEASE CLICK ON VEIW ON TOP OF THIS WINDOW, CLICK ON ENCODING, AND CLICK KOREAN TO READ THE CHARACTERS BELOW *~ MY NAME IS JAMES RO (???) no kyeongjin
Just so you know….. Many Chinese Characters are pronounced the same in Korean. This is also true in Japanese. You’ll find that a word might be written and pronounced the same but it might be written differently in Chinese character. Know that the Japanese and Korean alphabet is sounds and Chinese Characters are meaning words. You’ll also find that if a word can be written in Chinese characters it will sound alike. A good example is the word “sea” ? hai (Chinese), hai (pronounced “he” (short ‘e’)) (Korean), Kai (Japanese). To Kevin Drum:
You said, “Korean does have an N sound, too, but that’s not the one in Roh” I’ve got one thing you say to you learn more Korean.
It’s spelled Taigweondo and pronounced Tekweondo. When is it spelled Thai? Posted by: James Ro (???) nokyeongjin at September 6, 2003 04:31 PM | PERMALINKSmut Land - Jerk Off Movies - Karas Xxx - Ebony Fantasy - Teen Steam - Lesbian Pink - Major Melons - Classic Mature - Teen X - Asian Pleasures - Club Cock - Totally Teens - Nasty Boys - Asian Heat - Adult Chat Network - Karas Amateurs - Fetish Hotel - Absolutely Male - Tight Anal Sluts - Trannies Online Posted by: Cum Fiesta at June 21, 2004 06:02 AM | PERMALINKGroup Thrills - Hidden Eyes - Latina Kiss - Big N Plump - Blowing Loads - Dirty Cheerleaders - Fantasy Toons - Fort Booty - Oral Addiction - Perfect Toes - Petite Latinas - Pregnant Babes - Red Hot Pornstars Posted by: Cum Fiesta at June 21, 2004 06:02 AM | PERMALINKGAY MALE Nude Gay Males Hot Nude Cocks Boys Hot Sex Huge Cocks Sexy Twinks Naked Studs Hot Sexy Boys Teen Nude Muscle Hunks Nude Amateur Boys Naked Teen Boys BLACK MEN Gay Ebony Men Gay Black Nude Men Big Black Gay Men Dicks Big Ebony Studs Black Big Cocks Big Black Hard Cocks Gay Ebony Muscle Stud Black Men Huge Cocks Black Boys Fucking videos Muscular Black Men Pure Black Men Huge Cocks GAY BEAR Bear gay hairy men Bear Hairy Men Mature Big Hairy Bear Gay Gay Bear Fucking Gay Male Mature Sex Hairy Chested Nude Men Hairy Muscular Guys Huge massive monster cocks Men mature muscle cocks Nude Amateur Gay Hairy Men Older gay men sex GAY AMATEUR XXX Nude Gay Amateur Young Amateur Men Amateur Hardcore Gay Gay Amateur videos GAY MATURE XXX MALE SUPER SITE GAY VIDEOS XXX GAY INTERRACIAL XXX GAY BIG COCK SEX GAY BOYS BEAUTIFUL TRANNY TRANNY HOUSE Best videos Best videos gay site Best movies gay sex gay links Posted by: roy at July 2, 2004 02:25 AM | PERMALINKSENIOR GAY MALE
Best XXX Sites - Is it true or not? Could the pill work for me? Get more information! |
|
|
Powered by Movable Type 2.63 
|
||||
