-
Reasons for revision
The old system is widely used throughout the world, why change it now?
While it is true that the old system has been widely used around the world to record the pronunciation of Korean, from a general linguistic point of view it had various shortcomings. The difference between some voiced and non-voiced sounds are in Korean little more than allophones, but old system transcribed these as entirely different phonemes. This is a problem that should have been remedied long ago, but unfortunately has had to wait until now for attention.
Because the old system did not reflect the phonetic characteristics of the Korean language, it was never compatible for easy and consistent use of native speakers of Korean, even if it was used outside of Korea without particular difficulty.
This difficulty contributed to confusion and inconsistency in the Romanizing of Korean. The old system differentiated between voiced and non-voiced consonants, making it very difficult for Koreans to understand and contributing to spellings such as "Kumkang" and "Hankuk" for "금강" and "한국" instead of "Kumgang" and "Han'guk," as would have been correct according to the old system.
There were contradictions as well. "대구" was written "Taegu," but 동대구, the name of Daegu's largest passenger train terminal, was Romanized "Tongdaegu." And because "ㄷ, ㅂ, and ㅈ" have to be written in a way that a distinction is maintained between "ㅌ, ㅍ, and ㅊ," people rarely wrote "ㄷ, ㅂ, and ㅈ" as "t, p, and ch," even when they were conscious of the fact that this was not correct according to the old system, since they would not want to have words confused with the "t', p', and ch'" that often had the apostrophe omitted.
The result was that "ㄷ, ㅂ, and ㅈ" were written "t, p, and ch" on road signs but as "d, b, and j" almost everywhere else, such as personal names and the names of companies and schools.
This revision of the Romanization of Korean was undertaken with the belief that if not corrected, this confusion and inconsistency would only continue to worsen with time. Priority was given to pronunciation instead of Korean orthography out of consideration of the needs of foreigners, and in this sense the government's Romanization policy remains unchanged. The difference is that phonological opposition is made clear in the new system.
-
Special symbols
The old Romanization system was based on the one developed privately in 1939, and was unfit for the information age. The old system used the breve (v), which is not to be found on a computer keyboard. The apostrophe is on all keyboards but was still omitted more often than not in common usage. , , k', t', p', and ch' are all lacking in existing ASCII code, making them difficult for everyday usage with computers and the Internet. It is only a matter of course that, rarely used properly anyway, these be left out of the new system.
-
Distinctions of consonants
Why does a Romanization system have to differentiate between "ㄱ, ㄷ, ㅂ, and ㅈ" and "ㅋ, ㅌ, ㅍ, and ㅊ"?
Massive confusion occurs if a distinction is not made between "ㄱ, ㄷ, ㅂ, and ㅈ" and "ㅋ, ㅌ, ㅍ, and ㅊ." The difference between many personal names cannot be made without respect for this distinction, for example in the case of "대수" and "태수" names that can easily that of two brothers. Without guaranteeing this distinction, one ends up with a situation like would be in English by writing both "Tale" and "Dale" as "Tale." While perhaps not a particularly dire problem in some languages, in Korean the distinction is critical, particularly for personal names.
-
Distinctions of vowels
Why is the difference between "어", and "오" and "으" and "우" so important?
"어" and "오" are completely different phonemes in Korean. A distinction not only must be made but is also possible. The same goes for the two vowels "으" and "우." Korean family names are an easy example, as the names "선" and "손" both become "Son" when the breve is omitted, just as "성" and "송" both become "Song." The native speaker of Korean clearly feels a difference between the vowels, and so many have little choice but to improvise. Again in the case of names, someone with the name "성" does not want to become "Song," so, having no guarantee that their name will be written consistently as "Sng," often felt the need to write "성" as "Sung" to make this distinction, leaving it to guesswork to determine how that person may have Romanized their name.
-
The characteristics of the Korean language
Does a Romanization system have to reflect the characteristics of the Korean language?
Romanization systems exist for the purpose of reflecting the phonetic characteristics of a given language that does not ordinarily use Roman letters. Any Romanization system that does not respect the phonological opposition of Korean is not maintaining the principle purpose of a system in the first place. Phonological opposition with consistency is entirely possible when Romanizing Korean, and so it is only a matter of course that this be assured with a new system.
-
Usage overseas
Most of the maps and encyclopedias of the world use the McCune-Reischauer System of Romanization of Korean Language for Korean place names, won't the change cause confusion?
Much confusion can be expected for some time. The old system, based on the McCune-Reischauer system of Romanization for the Korean Language, is widely used overseas, particularly in Western countries. Many other documents besides maps and encyclopedias use the old system as well. It is indeed believed that it will take considerable time before the new system is recognized around the world. Confusion between the old and new systems can be expected. But if we delay making this needed change out of fear of this initial confusion, problems of inconsistency will only worsen, making the situation only more difficult to rectify for the next generation. The Korean government is prepared to do its part so that the new system is widely recognized and understood in Korea and around the world. The new system will not be accepted overnight, but the government is prepared to apply patience and effort to making this new system work.
-
The benefits of revision
What's so good about the new system?
While at first there may seem to be little advantage to following the new system, the benefits will be great over the long run. Since in the old system both "ㄱ, ㄷ, ㅂ, and ㅈ" and "ㅋ, ㅌ, ㅍ, and ㅊ" end up written as "k, t, p, and ch," even simple tasks such as Internet searches suddenly become highly inefficient. Since 대성 and 태성, for example, but become Taesong when the apostrophe is omitted, a search for either would turn up both. A system that is easy to follow and always maintains critical and frequent phonetic differences will make finding people, places, and everything else immensely easier because phonetic distinctions will be maintained consistently and there will be little cause for arbitrary improvision.
-
Consonants
Westerners tend to hear "ㄱ, ㄷ, ㅂ, and ㅈ" as "k, t, p, and ch." Why do these consonants have to be written "g, d, b, and j"?
It is true that most Westerners hear "ㄱ, ㄷ, ㅂ, and ㅈ" as "k, t, p, and ch" when these consonants appear as the first letter in a word. But the problem is that "ㅋ, ㅌ, ㅍ, and ㅊ" also seem like "k, t, p, and ch" to the average Western ear as well, and the differences between each of these vowels are important in Korean. The Korean phonological opposition must be given first priority in a Romanization system designed for Korean, even if to foreign ears these differences are not easily recognized. In addition, when the differences between "ㄱ, ㄷ, ㅂ, and ㅈ" and "ㅋ, ㅌ, ㅍ, and ㅊ" are written with consistency, it makes non-native pronunciation of Korean more distinguishable to native speakers.
-
Vowels
Aren't "eo" and "eu" rather distant from "어" and "으"?
When it comes to views about the new system, many have expressed opposition to transcribing "어" as "eo" and "으" as "eu." Some may think it ideal to write "어" as "o" and "으" as "u," but then there becomes no way to distinguishing "어" from "오" and "으" from "우." This leaves one with little choice but to develop a way to make this distinction. As long as "" and "" are no longer going to be used, the only option available is to Romanize "어" and "으" using two Roman letters.
"어" is a front vowel, while "으" is a back vowel. Both lie between "o." "으" comes from closer to the front of the mouth than "u," and so it was decided to place add "e" in front of "o" and "u". Given the phonetic characteristics of Korean, a language of many written vowels all of which experience no variation, we are left with little option but to explain to non-native speakers that "eo" is "어" and "eu" is "으." Roman letters will have their own sound value in every language, whether that languages uses Roman letters as its main script or only when Romanized. Using "eo" and "eu" to Romanize "어" and "으" is unavoidable.
-
Family names
Will family names be written according to the new system?
In principle family names should follow the new system, but there are names that will have difficulty doing this. The family name "이" should be written as "I," but no one with this family name currently writes their name this way. Ninety five percent of all persons with the family name "이" write their name "Lee," though one can also find "Rhee," "Yi," "Ri," "Li," "Rhie," and "Lie." The Ministry of Culture and Tourism will continue to work towards determining methods of Romanization for family names that might have difficulty following the new system and announce these separately. Some family names may require the setting of a separate standard for the sake of consistency within that name. This will be determined as the soonest date possible.
-
Business names
Will business and schools have to change the spelling of their names?
Just as in the case of Romanizations of personal names that have already been established, businesses that so desire may continue to use previously established Romanizations. Business names such as Samsung and Hyundai, both known the world over, will not be required to change to "Samseong" and "Hyeondae." New companies, however, will be encouraged to follow this system. Also, the government will gladly welcome decisions by companies using inconsistent names to follow the new system.