Sino-Korean Vocabulary??韓国의 漢字語？

[IJN_Akagi]

I already started the all about Korean/Japanese post, here's a different take on Korean!

In a survivalphrases.com lesson, we learnt 이것 is 'this' and 저것 is 'that', if I remember correctly.

It just hit me like a bolt from the sky: 这个 and 那个！The other one I learned the other day was 모자 = 帽子！매일 = 每日! 'Tomorrow' also has 日／일 but I'm not sure what the first kanji/hanzi/hanja is.

I just thought I'd start a thread where difficult grammar points could be explained by 'oh, it's just like x in Chinese'.

I actually found a book here in Shanghai where the Hanja were shown along side the Hangul. It was really helpful since they sound so similar to standard Beijing readings of the Hanja. Maybe because Korea is so close to where the standard dialect of Chinese originated.

Do most people in Korea know the Hanja/Hanzi/kanji for various words?

One final tidbit: at one of China's big political gatherings, representatives of all the many minority groups were invited, and some groups were from such remote areas of China that they needed translators. One of these ethnic groups was from North East China, and spoke Korean! So I think Korean is one of the official recognised dialects of China.

Hmmm....
Some people think that Sino-Korean vocabularies are from Mandarin-Chinese (or Han yue - 汉语)

Well, that's misunderstand..

Right, it's true that ancient China created sino-ideogram (or Han zi (漢字））

But since 19th century, it was Japan that created 'modern' Sino-Japanese vocabularies for the modernization of Japan.

Actually, currently most of modern Sino-Korean vocabularies are from Sino-Japanese.

For example...
It's an Asahi article I 'randomly' chose...


　ＡＰ通信によると、ＣＤＣは米国で７万人が死亡したアジア風邪（１９５７年）のデータを基礎に、新型対応のワクチン接種の効果がみられないなど最悪のケースを想定して計算。ＣＤＣのシュキャット博士は「私たちはこうした想定にどう向き合うべきかを話し合ってきた。ただ、今はそこまで休業率は高くならないと思っている」と述べた。

　同日のまとめでは、米国で新型インフルエンザ感染が確認された人は４万３７７１人で死者は３０２人。同博士は「氷山の一角」としており、夏休期間中、児童・生徒が参加する夏季キャンプで「多数の感染が起きている」と話した。

When traslated into Korean (Kanji-Hangul Mixture, so called Kuk-Hanmun(国漢文))
(For who cannot read Kanji in Korean, I wrote Korean Pronouncations)

　ＡＰ通信(통신)에 의하면、ＣＤＣ는 米国(미국)에 ７万人(만인)이 死亡(사망)했던 아시아 감기（１９５７年）의 데이타를 基礎(기초)로 、新型対応(신형대응)의 백신接種(접종)의 効果(효과)가 보이지 않는 등 最悪(최악)의 케이스를 想定(상정)하여 計算(계산)。ＣＤＣ의 슈캿토 博士(박사)는「우리들의 그러한 想定(상정)에 어떻게 對應(대응)하는가를 서로 이야기해 왔다。다만、只今(지금)거기까지 休業率(휴업율)은 높게 되지는 않을 것이라고 생각하고 있다.」고

　그날의 結論(결론)에는、米国(미국)에 新型(신형)인플루엔자 感染(감염)이 確認(확인)된 사람은４万(만)３７７１人(인)이고 死亡者(사망자)는 ３０２人(인)。博士(박사)는「氷山(빙산)의 一角(일각)」이라 하면서、여름放學(방학)期間中(기간중)、児童(아동)・学生(학생)이 参加(참가)하는 夏季(하계)캠프에서 「多数(다수)의 感染(감염)이 일어났다」고 하였다。


Of course, like 敍述(서술), 生徒(せいと)( ->学生(학생)), 夏休(なつやすみ)(->여름放學(방학)) there can be some difference of vocabularies..
But as you can see(the bold text) , most of Sino-Korean vocabularies are same with those in Japanses article.

死亡者, 結論 is not in the original Japanese articles, but those words are also possibly in Japanese language.

On the other hand, I tried to read Mandarin Chinese....

EFSA發現，立頓紅茶所聲稱的“提神”功能實際上並不存在。立頓所屬公司聯合利華昨日向《每日經濟新聞》強調，立頓在中國的宣傳完全符合國家法規。

　　據英國媒體報道，EFSA發言人表示，該機構檢驗了生產商提供的証明各自產品功效的　“科學依據”，但在大多數情況下這些依據並不足以支撐生產商的宣傳
。。。。

The result? Of course, Failed to understand ...


Somehow
If Koreans use Kanji again, like 30 years ago, it's good for Japaneses who try to read Korean Newspapers.

well... I wish Kanjis are used in Korean again.. ^^ so that I can read Korean more easier....^0^

[Alexis]

Personally, although it's interesting, I wouldn't really want Korea to go back to using many many hanja characters. I actually LIKE that Korea has its own, individual alphabet. Why does Korean need to be easier for Japanese to read???

[javiskefka]

I definitely agree with Alexis on this one. Hangeul works really damn well as a writing system for Korean. It's so simple to learn that people who don't even have a background in the language can learn to read it in a matter of hours, a couple days at the most. Since there's only one reading in almost all cases for hanja, and a standard, brief definition for all of them (i.e. 가르칠 교, 사귈 교) it's not necessary to even know the form of the hanja except for reference's sake.

I'm not one for simplifying language to the point of losing access to history and culture, but this is a case where simplification really does help people communicate more easily with eachother.

[fjma123]

I pretty much agree. Korean is just fine the way it is. Korean is more similar to English in the fact that you can blaze through texts if you're fluent in reading because most letters have different shapes. That doesn't really work well with Japanese because only having 46 characters basically means there aren't distinct shapes to help you as visual cues. But with Kanji, you just memorize the readings and you can blaze through text.

Hmm, I don't know. My 40-year-old japanese teacher in high school said he went to China and he could pretty much understand the newspaper. But then again, most Japanese adults know at least 3000 kanji. I probably know.. about 250-300, I think?

So, basically, Korean has no real need for Hanja. I'm pretty sure there's no difference in reading speed between pure Hangul and Hanja/Hangul mix.

With Japanese, I'm almost positive even if they did have spaces, it would be pretty hard to read without Kanji. I prefer Kanji/Kana mix to just kana, because it is much faster.

[javiskefka]

I pretty much agree. Korean is just fine the way it is. Korean is more similar to English in the fact that you can blaze through texts if you're fluent in reading because most letters have different shapes. That doesn't really work well with Japanese because only having 46 characters basically means there aren't distinct shapes to help you as visual cues. But with Kanji, you just memorize the readings and you can blaze through text.

That's interesting. I've never heard hangeul evaluated from a visual acuity/perception viewpoint before.

[Alexis]

I have to ask, but... why does Korean always end up getting compared to Japanese??? Yes, Korea and Japan are close etc etc... but it seems as though so many people who are interested in Japan first THEN become interested in Korea and compare the two profusely. I don't understand. Sure, there are similarities, as the two countries are close in proximity, but it always seems as though Korea/Korean is a spinoff Japan to so many people. Seriously... WHY???

[fjma123]

Well, I actually learned the korean alphabet first when I was 6, but I never learned much korean because my grandmother thought it was better to learn English. I think Korea's a beautiful place based on what my mom has told me, so I want to visit there. I'm not learning korean because I think korean came from japanese.

I'm guessing you don't know Japanese, because the similarities are quite apparent. A lot of the explanations I skip in the lessons because the grammar is so similar and I know Japanese pretty well, so it's boring. Also, you do realize a lot of Koreans study Japanese, since the languages are pretty similar. I mean, there were probably about 8 korean people in my Japanese class of about 20 or so. I mean, some people might think that Korean is just a spin-off of Japanese, but ancient Korean and ancient Japanese weren't that different because they had a lot of contact with each other.
I mean, really, ask someone who knows English, Japanese, Korean well whether it's easier to translate from Korean to Japanese or Korean to English. I compare to Japanese because it's far easier for me to understand using Japanese than trying to translate to English.

If I had to say what Korean felt like, I would say to me it feels sort of like a mix between English and Japanese.

Korean is more like English because they skip the particles a lot. Japanese doesn't do this except usually only with the object particle. So, actually, I think Japanese is more correct in this sense.

Korean is like Japanese because of the word order, the particles and verb/adjective conjugations, and addressing by titles and not "you". Also, the fact that no one ever says "I love you. if it's your girlfriend or boyfriend. They would only say "I really like you."

[Alexis]

Actually, although I don't KNOW Japanese, I have had a lot of exposure to it. My sister learnt it for a good eight years or so, my husband has watched a HUGE amount of anime and other Japanese movies, as have I, I have listened to a lot of Jpop and I learnt Japanese myself for about three years. So I have been exposed to Japanese quite a lot.

I have no objections to people learning both languages. Perhaps I've simply been around the wrong people, but I just don't really understand why Korean seems to be a secondary interest to people to Japan.

But getting back to the post at hand, although hanja is interesting, in that it has a lot of history and it can be fascinating to learn and see how far the language has come, I simply think that hangul works because it's so simple and works for people as a whole. It was created so that everyone could be literate and literacy wouldn't be reserved for only those of upper classes. Everyone deserves to be able to read and write. Why complicate things further when there's something that obviously works so well?

[javiskefka]

Well one reason for converting Korean texts to hanja/hangeul would be to quickly enable Japanese speakers who don't know Korean but are interested in information only available in Korean (maybe the latest gossip about Korean celebrities, for example) to be able to get the gist of the text, without having to translate the whole thing.

However, you would have to be cautious with this because, as Manyakumi pointed out, related words may exist in both languages, but the way they are actually used could change the meaning.

As for people viewing Korean through the perspective of their past experiences with Japanese, I think that it's only natural for people to try to categorize something unfamiliar by comparing it with something that is familiar to them. When you're first learning a language, you have nothing to compare it to butyour own and other foreign languages you might have learned. In my case, I think that my experience with the different ways to say "you" in French prepared me a little bit for the concept of speech levels and honorifics in Korean, because there's nothing like that in English.

As you've no doubt experienced yourself, media from Japan is just more readily available in Western countries than media from Korea, so as a consequence you hear a lot of stories about people having had more exposure to Japanese before whatever it was that caused them to want to learn Korean. People who have learned some Japanese before learning Korean seem to notice the connections between the two languages, and rightly think it will be helpful to other in similar positions to share that knowledge.

We exchanged a few tweets about this the other day, but what bothers me is when a subordinate relationship is assumed or implied to exist between the two languages. Talking about how such and such particle or word in Korean is quite similar to its counterpart in Korean may be helpful to many, but to people like me who have little or no knowledge or Japanese, it's much less useful that giving a more thorough explanation of how the item under discussion is used in Korean. For an example of what I'm talking about, see the wikipedia article on Korean honorifics, and the constant comparison to Japanese.

In my experience, I've found that a couple times that I have watched something in Japanese with Korean subtitles, I've been able to pick out the meaning of certain Japanese words because the word order is similar. I know that my understanding of that bit of Japanese depends on my knowledge of Korean, but I wouldn't go so far as to assume that others would categorize the two languages in the same way. I can only say that for myself, because that's been my experience.

[fjma123]

Hmm. It probably would be easier for Japanese to read. But it's kind of pointless for Koreans. Then again, I think they study a lot of Hanja in school. 1500 in elementary school, 500 in high school, 1000 in college. So if they changed, it wouldn't be any harder for people in Korea, just Koreans everywhere else.

I understand what you're saying. If you don't really know Japanese, then it's not really useful. I guess it is more useful to you with the English explanation than the Japanese equivalent. And maybe there's no real underlying connection between the two languages, but that doesn't really matter, does it?

But on that wikipedia page, for me, it really helps when it says this is pretty much equivalent to the Japanese word "..." because I've heard it and used it enough to know what it means without really translating it to English.

Like the topic and subject particles, it's difficult to translate that information into English. With particles, the best way is repetition, and repetition. And I've repeatedly used those particles in Japanese, so if I simply use Japanese, I understand when I should use which particle without really thinking about it. It just sounds better to me.

Hmm, I guess it's possible that other people would not see the two languages in the same way, but they share some Chinese loanwords and the syntax is very similar. Like the syntax of English and French is similar (although where adjectives are placed differ).

It seems here that someone also thinks Japanese helps with Korean:
http://forum.wordreference.com/showpost ... stcount=17
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=333953

[Alexis]

We exchanged a few tweets about this the other day, but what bothers me is when a subordinate relationship is assumed or implied to exist between the two languages. Talking about how such and such particle or word in Korean is quite similar to its counterpart in Korean may be helpful to many, but to people like me who have little or no knowledge or Japanese, it's much less useful that giving a more thorough explanation of how the item under discussion is used in Korean. For an example of what I'm talking about, see the wikipedia article on Korean honorifics, and the constant comparison to Japanese.

Yes, what you said at the beginning of this paragraph was what I was talking about. ^_^

[javiskefka]

I understand what you're saying. If you don't really know Japanese, then it's not really useful. I guess it is more useful to you with the English explanation than the Japanese equivalent. And maybe there's no real underlying connection between the two languages, but that doesn't really matter, does it?

But on that wikipedia page, for me, it really helps when it says this is pretty much equivalent to the Japanese word "..." because I've heard it and used it enough to know what it means without really translating it to English.

Like the topic and subject particles, it's difficult to translate that information into English. With particles, the best way is repetition, and repetition. And I've repeatedly used those particles in Japanese, so if I simply use Japanese, I understand when I should use which particle without really thinking about it. It just sounds better to me.

Like, I said, I think it makes perfect sense for you to use your knowledge of Japanese, and the fact that there are grammatical similarities and lots of cognates between the two languages to your advantage. Just be aware that the semantic associations that other people who know something about both languages have formed in their minds might flow in the opposite direction. For example, I might conceive of the Japanese word 'oretachi' as meaning something like '우리들'.

I agree with you that Korean is more similar to Japanese than to English, so comparisons to English can get a little convoluted. What's even better than using Japanese to figure out the meaning of a new Korean phrase is to see if you can understand it using the knowledge of Korean that you've already gained. In fact, KC101 uses this method in their Advanced lessons. Periodically, they summarize what they've been talking about using simpler words.

What I do to get my head around grammar or the nuance between different words in Korean is to see how it's defined in a Korean-Korean dictionary, just to get an explicit explanation. You'll see unfamiliar words in a dictionary definition, because they are trying to be precise in defining it, but it's worth learning some of those words, because you'll see them used over and over. Then, I look at the different examples given by the dictionary. After that I do a few key word searches on the Naver blogs and knowledge base to see how the structure actually comes about in people's writing. After that, I'll practice using it when talking with a Korean friend, and wait for them to either laugh at me for my strange expression, or say something like, "Wow, when I'm talking with you, I sometimes forget that you're a foreigner."

Hmm, I guess it's possible that other people would not see the two languages in the same way, but they share some Chinese loanwords and the syntax is very similar. Like the syntax of English and French is similar (although where adjectives are placed differ).

It seems here that someone also thinks Japanese helps with Korean:
http://forum.wordreference.com/showpost ... stcount=17
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=333953

Let's not lose sight of what started this discussion, Sino-Korean vocabulary, or we might go as far as the guy in that thread who claimed that Japanese and Korean were dialects of Chinese because they had so many cognates with ancient Chinese dialects. There is also a huge body of vocabulary in Korean that has no corresponding hanja.

Word reference is a great forum, by the way

[kizzozzo]

Yes, basically you are right. The neologism in Japan by using chinese kanji, during the Meiji era much influenced modern Korean language. but, it also influenced modern Chinese and Vietnamese.
But in above page you are wrong, because many of words that you believe <Waseikango> were actually classical chinese origin. For example,
I found these words in Annual of Choson dynasty written in Classical chinese.
http://sillok.history.go.kr/main/main.jsp

或有疾病不救, ＜死亡＞不藏, 人倫風俗, 甚爲不美。
臣問民弊, 其所＜最惡＞者, 助戰將也。
第虞＜計算＞之乖, 未副委任之重。
然人皆規免, 而役使者, 皆無告之家＜兒童＞婦女, 殊失殿下哀矜之意。
然當官者, 或有受職於初二番頒祿之後, 勤勞春夏, 而見代於＜夏季＞;
使臣求美髢綠黑軟細極長者, 以國庫米豆, ＜多數＞貿易, 及時上送。
“在我理直, 雖使予＜對應＞泰論辨, 少無可畏。

明治期に漢字を元に造語された多くのいわゆる和製漢語が韓国語に影響を
及ぼしたのは事実であり、その多くは漢字の本家たる中国やベトナム
にまでも輸入されています。たとえば、警察、社会、政治などの言葉はこの
四カ国すべて共通の漢字を使っており、発音だけがそれぞれ異なりますが、これらの言葉は日本で作られた和製漢語ですね。
しかし、貴方の取り上げている記事の例は別の検証をせずにただ韓国語
と日本語の間に一致する漢字語を和製漢語と看做しているだけだと思います。韓国と日本は共に漢字文化圏の国であり、近代以前は中国が知識のおもたる輸入先でした。だから韓国語と日本語の漢語における共通語彙は
和製漢語だけでなく、古漢語（漢文）にも当然みられるはずです。
あなたはそれを区別していないと思います。
「映画」とか「共和国」など西洋の概念や近代になって新しく現れた物事に対する漢字語はおそらく西洋語を翻訳してできあがった和製漢語である
可能性が高いですが、「死亡」だの「多数」だの「夏季」といった言葉が和製漢語だという言説はおかしいです。それらの概念は既に昔からあったためですから。
たとえ、博士という単語は学位としては和製漢語となりえますが、ハカセの意味では中国起源になります。また、近代の概念を表す言葉の中でも従来和製漢語だと知られていた言葉が中国でヨーロッパの宣教師のより先で造語され、日本語の翻訳の時採用された例もかなりあって和製漢語の判定は必ずしもハッキリしないし、ときときあいまいです。あなたがとある単語を和製漢語だと主張されたい場合はそれらの単語が中国や韓国の漢文で書かれた文献で既出ではないか同じ意味で使われていないかを確認する必要があります。
同じ意味の単語があるとしてもそれは漢文（古漢語）から日韓両国語への借用である可能性もあり、和製漢語である可能性もあります。
それに和製漢語はほとんどが西洋語の翻訳語でありますから、文献を探るともとになるヨーロッパ語の単語も分かります。例えば「哲学」という言葉は「西周」によりphilosophyの訳語として誕生しました。

[kizzozzo]

And these are some kind of hanja'eo made in Korea (or 韓國製漢字語) not found neither China nor Japan. For example like this;

명함(名銜) 선물(膳物) 수표(手票) 약방(藥房) 양말(洋襪)
장갑(掌甲) 차례(次例) 편지(便紙) 방석(方席) 방학(放學) 주유소(注油所)
편의점(便宜店) 출시(出市) 전세(專貰) 이앙기(移秧機) 민폐(民弊)
무궁화(無窮花) 절차(節次) 성수기(盛需期) 비수기(非需期) 허풍(虛風)
환절기(換節期) 원어민(原語民) 관형사(冠形詞) 빙상장(氷上場)
공주병(公主病) 감기(感氣) 독감(毒感) 통섭(統攝) 춘곤증(春困症)
안습(眼濕) 해일(海溢) 죄송(罪悚)

[kizzozzo]

fjma123> Korean didn't come from Japanese nor mix of English and Japanese.
Actually, loanword from English is much more in use(Katakana-go) in Japanese than Korean.

The only spin-off of Japanese or sibling language is Okinawan or Ryukyu language.
It retains many obslete features of archaic Japanese, and both languages consist a Japonic language family. Japanese language considered has Substraum from Austroasian language for its simple phonology, and some Japanese scholar such as
Ohno Susumu thought Tamil language as one of its root language. . But no one proved its origin and still obscure.

The other language (endangered) in Japan, Ainu, but is language isolate. It's not easy to make sure the origin such languages and relationship between them. It could be Sprachebund effect, or could be genetic relationship. But
the basic words (such as Swadesh chart,number words, body lexicon) totally different both languages, so Korean is language isolate officially now.