Proposal to add "Kore' as Suppress-Script for 'ko'
randy_presuhn at mindspring.com
Sun Jul 29 05:14:04 CEST 2007
I've been having a lengthy off-list discussion with Korean friends,
and one thing we've stumbled over is confusion between "Hanja-eo"
(words which at one time or other could be written using Hanja -
i.e., sino-korean vocabulary) and "Hanja" (the ideographs themselves).
This can lead to seemingly odd statements. For example, one claimed a
passage made up entirely of characters composed from jamos isn't
pure hangul if it contains "transliterated hanja" (sino-korean
vocabulary, which accounts for a large percentage of the language)
even when no ideographs appear!
This confusion leads to claims that ideographs are used more than
they actually are, and at the same time to a denial that "pure"
hangul is ever used at all.
Though I still think ko = ko-kore is probably the correct call,
I'm finding that the articles C. E. Whitehead cited are at odds
with at least some native speakers' perceptions with regard to
the current status of ideograph usage.
I'd encourage others with contacts in the Korean-speaking community
to dig into this, and, if possible, encourage those with first-hand
knowledge to contribute directly to this discussion.
More information about the Ietf-languages