Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: conlan/natlang coincidences

From:John Leland <leland@...>
Date:Wednesday, June 25, 2003, 19:50
On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, Henrik Theiling wrote:
The new system came out within the last year or so, though I think it had
been in preparation before that. I got a batch of material attacking the
new system from the leadership of the Royal Asiatic Society: Korea Branch,
which strongly opposed it. Personally I felt that the new system made it
more likely that at least the average English speaker would pronounce
Korean in a way that resembled the spoken Korean I heard when I taught
there in 87-88. I recently ran across my copy of the RASKB mailing; I will
try to find it again and send more information.
On pronouncing Seoul, I am not good with the IPA, but the hangul spelling
indicates that it has two vowels, the first being what I would call a
short o and the second what I would call a long u. As another contributor
noted, the short o sound is correctly Romanized (in the old system)
eo, not oe as I had it in my previous post.
John Leland
 > Hi!
> > Concerning [duN] in Korean, {dung} in English: > > John Leland <leland@...> writes: > > The traditionally standard system for transcribing Korean into the Roman > > alphabet would probably transcribe this word as tong (or toeng?). > > I am not sure what the new transcription system the ROK government > > recently put out would do. > > A new Romanisation? Is there any info about it? How recent is that > system? > > For [duN], I learned that the spelling in Roman should be {tung} or > {dung}, depending on context (voiced context: {dung}, voiceless: > {tung}). For [dVN], {teong} and {deong} might correspond. > > Some vowel romanizations: > > {u} /u/ > {eu} /M/ > {o} /o/ > {eo} /O/ > > Thus e.g. Seoul /sOul/. > > How's this 'dung' written in Korean? If you only heard it, you don't > know the Korean spelling either, do you? > > **Henrik >

Reply

Henrik Theiling <theiling@...>