Poomse vs. Tul vs. Hyung

[puunui]

You could have but then it would have been very wrong.

I'm sure it would be wrong, but at least more people would pronounce Taekwondo correctly. Could be worse, we could go with Dakin Burdick's thing and write it as "Taegwondo" with a ' in there someplace.

 

[KarateMomUSA]

Gen Choi preferred the English word pattern & the Korean word Tul over form & Hyung, as forms was too general a word. Someone could have good form, but do a lousy Hwarang Tul or pattern. In other words, their form can be good, but their Pattern can be technically inaccurate, incorrect etc. He felt pattern better described what students were actually doing on the floor

 

[miguksaram]

I'm sure it would be wrong, but at least more people would pronounce Taekwondo correctly. Could be worse, we could go with Dakin Burdick's thing and write it as "Taegwondo" with a ' in there someplace.

In the last few years Korea has re-romanized how their spelling of words. A good example is Pusan is now Busan. Dan Burdick's spelling is probably one of the closest to correctness in his whole "history" report. However, if he is going to spell it with a 'g' then he needs to carry that rule throughout the word and spell it 'daegwondo'.

 

[Tez3]

You could have but then it would have been very wrong. Korean language rules would dictate that in a word structure such tae 태 kwon 권 do 도 would have three distinct sounds and would not merge like some words would. The first part of the word ends with the vowel ㅐ(as in pat). This signifies the next part starting with the consonant ㄱ (as in kite) would be a distinct sound. So when we romanize 태권도, it should actually be spelled out as one word (taekwondo). To spell it out as three seperate words is incorrect as each one by itself makes not sense in clarifying the overall meaning.

One of the hardest things about learning Korean language is remembering resyllabification rules. Certain combination of words will cause pronunciation to be different based on the letter structuring and give you a whole new definition.[/quote]


We have enough problems as it is with British English and American English!

 

[leadleg]

When someone says the new main language will be english do they mean American english or British english? Or is it oxford,because its not Scotts or Irish or Indian etc.

 

[Tez3]

When someone says the new main language will be english do they mean American english or British english? Or is it oxford,because its not Scotts or Irish or Indian etc.

It will be the Queen's English of course surely everyone understands that!

 

[miguksaram]

We have enough problems as it is with British English and American English!

Well if you would start practicing modern English (ie American) then we would not have this problem. You traditionalists are such a pain. ha.haha.ha