The basic terms including muncha(letter) are used for Hangeul and the other writing systems. But this same word muncha is clearly meant when used in the other writing systems; it becomes ambiguous and vague when used in Hangeul. In the case of the other writing systems except Hangeul muncha(letter) is a writing unit itself. In other words, simply to arrange letters horizontally or vertically, is enough to write words or sentences. Therefore, no other writing unit than the letter, which is and must be different, exists. There can not be a conceptual confusion about ‘writing’ (muncha), and the mutual substitution of three terms of ‘writing’ (muncha), ‘letter’ (k?lcha), and ‘grapheme’(cha) for one another does not cause any trouble at all. Whatever we call a Roman letter, the referent is always the same. A family is a good example. In a house with just one son,it does not matter whether the boy is called by name or addressed simply as ‘son’ or ‘boy’. This metaphor is true of the case of the Roman alphabet, Chinese characters, or Japanese Kana. But the case of Hangeul is completely different. The reluctant author cannot but repeat the uniqueness of Hangeul here again.

In Hangeul, as everyone knows very well, we do not simply arrange graphic units (consonantal and vocalic graphemes such as ㄱ, ㄴ, ㄷ, etc.), but put them together according to a certain principle to write words or sentences. For example, we do not write ‘ㄱㅏ ㅇㅅㅏ ㄴ’ , but ‘강산’. This very principle unchanged from the time of its invention, requires another writing unit different from a graphic unit in Hangeul.

The two units can and must be differentiated rigorously, as a phoneme and a syllable are differentiated in phonology. However, unknown reasons have prevented this differentiation until now. It cannot be that scholars do not know the existence and difference between the two units. Yet they do not prepare the dividing terms and do not even attempt to tell them. This could be compared to a family with more than two sons in which all sons are called just ‘son’ or ‘boy’ without using their names. Consequent confusion may well arise.

(a) Now Hangeul has twenty-four cha (=letters or graphemes),
but originally it had twenty-eight.
(b) A name with only one cha (=syllable) like ‘Hur, Chun’ (허 준) is called a single cha-ed name.
(c) Sound symbolic k?lcha (=writing or letter) is called sound-representing muncha (=writing or letter) in another name.
(d) Please fill in the blank with a four cha-ed (=syllabled) word.

  As we see in the above examples from (a) to (c), the three Korean terms ‘cha’, ‘kulcha’, and ‘muncha’ are indiscriminately used in two senses. They sometimes meant a letter (=writing or grapheme), sometimes another unit with united letters. Thus, a sentence like (d) is ambiguous. This undesirable phenomenon is caused by the fact that the terms and concepts for other writing systems are used without change for Hangeul. In other words we say that we know of the distinctions of Hangeul very well, but practically we do not give it special treatment appropriate for the distinctions. A phonological theory even without any division between a phoneme and a syllable could be rightly treated. If this is so, today’s theory on Hangeul cannot avoid a similar estimation. The division of two units is the very basic work, and practically the failure of this very division becomes an enormous burden for us. 5)
The author can not understand the reason why they have neglected this problem so far, and they have put up with the ensuing burden.6)

It is thought that readers have just become aware of the reason why the author could not start with the main argument, but had to begin with a tediously long preface. At least for the time being, the subject of this paper itself, ‘principles of making graphemes and their graphic shapes’ is somewhat ambiguous. It is impossible to have a clear discussion when the subject itself is unclear. Therefore, the author will at first take a general survey on the concept of terms, ‘principles of making graphemes and their graphic shapes’ which will appear in this paper, and start the discussion about it.