The scope and code system of
Hangeul in relation to the concept of Hangeul
gives rise to a very complex problem. Only a few
years ago, different code systems of various computers
for Hangeul prevented data from being exchanged
among computers, but now fortunately, most of
the Hangeul code systems in different computers
have been unified. First, let us compare two current
styles of Korean code systems: a complete Hangeul
system The method of endowing each of the syllabic
characters of the Korean language with its own
code value. and a system of combination
Hangeul The method of combining Korean consonants
and vowels which are already given their own code
value. Then we will discuss their merits and demerits.
The current complete style of Hangeul codes is
very difficult to accept from the standpoint of
the concept of Hangeul. It consists of 2,350 syllables
chosen out of all Korean syllables; 4,888 Chinese
characters, and 986 special symbols, totalling
8,224 characters. It has a fatal defect in that
it cannot accommodate all the Korean syllables
made by normal combinations of Korean consonants
and vowels. The limit on the number of syllables
does not pose any problem if we only use the given
2,350 syllables and do not use any other syllables.
There are, however, serious problems related to
the improving or expanding of codes in the future.
In the complete Hangeul system, one Korean syllable
made by combinations of consonants and vowels
is codified and processed as an unit independently,
as with Chinese. Moreover, it is ironically assumed
that it is literally a complete style so that
nothing can be modified in the code system. The
number of its syllables was originally restricted
for the purpose of facilitating international
exchange of information data. It may generally
be said to have no practical problems, but from
the viewpoint of Korean linguistics, it does indeed
have some practical problems.
The complete Hangeul is based on the current rules
for the Korean orthography and contemporary Korean
vocabulary. But since the current Korean orthography
and vocabulary will change with time, the code
system will need to be changed to accommodate
new syllables. When we have to use new syllables
owing to the future changes of the current orthography,
or meet a new word which has to be represented
with new syllables, the code system itself will
be compelled to change again for new syllables
or new syllables will force their addition to
the earlier code arrangement, with the result
that there is no way but to use the unmatched
Hangeul code.
Let's look at some Korean words as examples. /k?p
+ i # nanta/ is now pronounced as [k?psi # nanda]
by some people these days. Another word /kk?kk?s+i/
is also pronounced as [k’?k’??hi]. If these pronunciations
should be prescribed as standard Korean, the new
syllables ‘k?ps’ and ‘kk??h’ will be needed for
their grammatical representations. But the complete
Hangeul doesn’t have such syllables, so there
is no way to represent them in that style. Furthermore,
it is impossible to add such syllables to the
code system to match the Korean alphabetic arrangement.
The word ‘k?ps’ has to be inserted between ‘k?p’
and ‘k?s’, but there is no space between them.
In the same way there is no space for ‘kk?ch’
between ‘kk?ŋ’ and ‘kk?th’. If even one syllable
were to be inserted between them, the values of
the codes would be changed successively, which
would make a completely different new code system.
Changing the values of the Hangeul code would
make it impossible to use a number of accumulated
data without changing of the codes. The ensuing
problems would be intolerable. Moreover, to use
the present Hangeul code system with its unmatched
arrangement would also cause intolerable problems
in co-exchanging data. Therefore, it cannot be
over-emphasized that the best Hangeul code system
has to be chosen from a long-term perspective.
In this sense, the complete Hangeul is neither
proper for processing Hangeul data nor harmonious
with everyday use of Hangeul. It is unfortunate
that the complete style has been used as a Korean
standard code system by the government. The author
is worried that the Korean DOS made on the basis
of the current complete style is increasing in
popularity in spite of its expected failure in
the near future.
The values of codes are given to the complete
syllable made up of one or more consonants and
a vowel, not given to each basic consonant and
vowel in the complete Hangeul. Although one or
more consonants and a vowel are combined into
one syllable in practical usage, Hangeul is basically
a phonemic writing system. Therefore, the phoneme-unit
process has to be ensured for Hangeul data to
be stored in computers. Of course, it is also
possible to use the phoneme-unit process in the
complete Hangeul. But it is less efficient than
the combination style of Hangeul. If you select
the syllables that have, for example, a vowel
sequence ‘wa’, all corresponding syllables have
to be listed in the complete style of Hangeul,
but the combination style of Hangeul has only
to give the code values of ‘wa’ to the computer
to find all syllables which include ‘wa’. The
phoneme-unit process is needed not only in the
specialized field of Korean linguistics but in
everyday use of the Korean language. All syllable
templates do not have to be completed ones with
the CV(C) structure.
Sometimes they are made up of only one medial
vowel or only one final consonant, or a medial
vowel with a final consonant, or a final consonant
plus one whole syllable, etc. For these syllables,
consonant-or-vowel codification is necessary.
For example, /-nta/ in ‘kanta(=to go), onta(=to
come), and unta(=to cry)…’ shows the superiority
of the combination style to the complete Hangeul.
|