SEOUL — On one side of the line that has divided two societies for so long, the words arrive as fast as globalization can bring them — English-based lingo like «shampoo,» «juice» and «self-service.» To South Koreans, they are everyday language. To defectors from the insular North Korea, they mean absolutely nothing.
Turn the tables, and the opposite is true, too: People in Seoul furrow their brows at homegrown North Korean words like «salgyeolmul,» which literally means «skin water.» (That’s «skin lotion» in the South.)
Two countries, mortal enemies, tied together by history, by family — and by language, but only to a point. The Korean Peninsula’s seven-decade split has created a widening linguistic divide that produces misunderstandings, hurt feelings and sometimes even laughter. The gap has grown so wide, scholars say, that about a third of everyday words used in the two countries are different.
North and South Koreans are generally able to understand each other given that the majority of words and grammar are still the same. But the differences show how language can change when one half of the country becomes an international economic powerhouse and the other isolates itself, suspicious of outside influences.
America’s huge cultural influence through its military presence, business ties and Hollywood has flooded the South Korean vernacular with English loan words and «konglish,» which uses English words in non-standard ways, like «handle» for steering wheel, «hand phone» for cellphone and «manicure» for nail polish.
In North Korea’s view, all that is just further evidence that the South is an American cultural colony.
When Pak Mi-ok first arrived in South Korea after her defection in 2002, she was told by a waitress at a restaurant that water was «self-service,» an English phrase she had not heard before. Too shy to admit she didn’t understand, she ended up going without water during her meal.
«I worried the waitress would look down on me,» said Pak. She started out working at restaurants but struggled to understand customers. «I thought they spoke a different language,» she said.
Pak gradually picked up on the new lingo, and in a recent interview she used words like «stress» and «claim» that aren’t heard up in the North.
The North’s isolation and near-worship of the ruling Kim family has also skewed the language. «Suryong» is the revered title for the North’s founding leader and his son, Kim Jong Il, the father of the current ruler, Kim Jong Un. But in the South, it’s used to refer to a faction or local leader from centuries ago.
Pyongyang is so eager to «purify» its language under its guiding philosophy of self-reliance that it vigorously eliminates words with foreign origins and uses homegrown substitutes. Shampoo is called «meorimulbinu,» or «hair water soap,» and juice is «danmul,» or «sweet water.» Such differences fascinate and amuse South Koreans, who love to examine them on quiz and comedy shows.https://www.therecord.com/news-story/5475558-after-70-years-apart-north-and-south-koreans-speak-increasingly-different-languages/
Misunderstandings can arise to seemingly innocuous Korean phrases like, «Let’s do lunch sometime,» which those in the South frequently use as a friendly ending to conversations, even with casual acquaintances. But newly arrived North Korean defectors take such invitations literally, and are often dismayed or offended when they don’t get a followup phone call.
«If someone uses such empty words in North Korea, they’ll see their relations with others cut off and be branded as a faithless person,» said a defector who asked not to be identified because of worries that doing so would put family members in the North at risk.
Linguists say it takes about two years for North Korean defectors to feel comfortable conversing in South Korea.
The communication gap widens when it comes to technical terms used in medical and technological settings, according to Han Yong-un, a South Korean linguist. About two-thirds of medical terms are different, he said.
«I think that North and South Korean doctors cannot work together in the same operating room,» Han said.
Over the past 10 years, there have been efforts to produce a joint dictionary containing 330,000 words from both countries — a rare example of co-operation.
But as is often the case, political tensions have interfered with progress. The meetings only resumed last July after a more than four-year hiatus following the 2010 sinking of a South Korean warship. A new round of meetings, tentatively set for last month, hasn’t been held as North Korea bristled over the annual springtime joint U.S.-South Korea military drills.
Even language experts from the two countries can have trouble understanding each other.
During last year’s meeting in Pyongyang, South Korean linguist Kim Byungmoon said he tried to explain how South Koreans use the English word «glamour» as a noun to refer to a voluptuous woman, but North Korean scholars had difficulty understanding its usage.
Given the completely different political and economic systems between the two countries, it also takes a while to learn the connotations and associations that some emotionally-laden words have.
In South Korea, «spec» refers to qualifications and credentials that college students need to land a good job. While defectors can quickly learn what the word literally means, it takes much longer to understand the immense stress associated with the word for young job-seekers in South Korea’s ultra-competitive society, said Jeon Young-sun, a research professor at Seoul’s Konkuk University.
Those in the South, meanwhile, may struggle to understand the emotional impact of «saenghwal chonghwa,» the regular meetings in the North at which people are required to reflect on their behaviour and criticize each other. The phrase, which literally means «group discussions on daily lives,» isn’t used in South Korea.
«We were sick and tired of it,» Pak said. «I still get goosebumps whenever I hear that word.»
The Associated Press
Alquilar: significa tanto dar algo en uso a cambio de un precio durante un tiempo determinado como tomar algo para usarlo a cambio de un pago. Es decir, el sujeto de la frase «Pedro alquiló un piso» puede ser «tanto quien cede algo en alquiler como quien lo toma”.
Animal: puede usarse en sentido figurado para hablar de una “persona de comportamiento instintivo, ignorante y grosera” y también para referirse a alguien “que destaca extraordinariamente por su saber, inteligencia o esfuerzo”.
Se trata de esclarecer lo más posible la lengua misma. Es decir, que la gente aprenda a diferenciar entre esa lengua que está en una subconsciencia a la que podemos llamar pueblo de la escritura y la cultura que el poder puede dominar. Por mucho que el poder intente intervenir en la literatura y en la cultura, en la lengua, que tiene sus propios elementos secretos y sus reglas, no puede mandar nadie. El poder puede usar la lengua para sus propios fines pero no puede alterar ni su aparato ni la diferencia entre los fonemas, ni las reglas sintácticas ni ninguna otra cosa. La función de una gramática honrada y fiel sería descubrir lo que todo el mundo sabe sin darse cuenta de que lo sabe y contraponerlo a todo lo sabido, a todas las opiniones y las ideas establecidas acerca de la lengua.
Mi relación con la Academia es de odio y de desprecio declarado. No hay por qué ocultarlo. En la Academia se da la falsificación de la lengua en su nivel más alto: la confusión con la escritura. En la escritura se puede mandar y al poder le viene muy bien que haya academias que pretendan hacer falsamente esa labor. Junto a eso, los diccionarios y las gramáticas conservan una serie de pedanterías que en vez de hacer penetrar en la lengua la desvirtúan y la confunden. Hay un cultivo de la literatura como si fuera la autoridad o representante de la lengua, cuando la lengua no es de nadie. Un cultivo de la literatura que viene a hacer que luego en la enseñanza, en las clases de lo que se llama lengua y literatura, se hable de autores y nombres propios en torno a la literatura y, sin embargo, se olvide la práctica de la lengua.http://www.circulobellasartes.com/revistaminerva/articulo.php?id=443
THE DICTIONARY OF OBSCURE SORROWS http://www.dictionaryofobscuresorrows… The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows is a compendium of invented words written by John Koenig. Each original definition aims to fill a hole in the language—to give a name to emotions we all might experience but don’t yet have a word for
Paywall: The Business of Scholarship is a documentary which focuses on the need for open access to research and science. The film questions the rationale behind the $25.2 billion a year that flows into for-profit academic publishers, examines the 35-40% profit margin associated with the top academic publisher, Elsevier, and looks at how that profit margin is often greater than some of the most profitable tech companies such as Apple, Facebook, and Google.
Research Assessment in the Humanities. Towards Criteria and Procedures. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-3-319-29016-4
This book analyses and discusses the recent developments for assessing research quality in the humanities and related fields in the social sciences. Research assessments in the humanities are highly controversial and the evaluation of humanities research is delicate. While citation-based research performance indicators are widely used in the natural and life sciences, quantitative measures for research performance meet strong opposition in the humanities. This volume combines the presentation of state-of-the-art projects on research assessments in the humanities by humanities scholars themselves with a description of the evaluation of humanities research in practice presented by research funders. Bibliometric issues concerning humanities research complete the exhaustive analysis of humanities research assessment. The selection of authors is well-balanced between humanities scholars, research funders, and researchers on higher education. Hence, the edited volume succeeds in painting a comprehensive picture of research evaluation in the humanities. This book is valuable to university and science policy makers, university administrators, research evaluators, bibliometricians as well as humanities scholars who seek expert knowledge in research evaluation in the humanities.