Lost in Romanization

Too many changes confuse expats, tourists

By Kwon Mee-yoo and Kim Jae-heun

"Gyeongbokgung Palace," not Gyeongbok Palace, "Hangang River," not "Han River."

These are part of new guidelines for English names of Korean landmarks and geographical locations, announced last month by the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism (MCST).

"Gung" in Gyeongbokgung, the royal palace in downtown Seoul, means palace in Korean, and "gang" in "Hangang" means river. The major change under the new guideline is that the names of natural objects and cultural properties will be Romanized entirely.

Most expats were sympathetic about the new Romanization guidelines, apparently designed to address age-long confusion regarding various translations of English names of Korean landmarks.

However, they expressed frustration with the changes that have been made "too often."

Andrew Salmon, the author of "Modern Korea, All That Matters," said, "I have been living in Korea for 15 years, this will be the third Romanization system since I've been here. Bear in mind that every time the system comes in signage, books, websites, maps, all these things have to change and this takes years."

He said the issue is not that foreigners don't understand English, but they don't understand Korean.

"We are now in the third Romanization. A: Is it necessary? B: Who made the decision? And C: How long it's going to take before it's fully adopted. And how much confusion is there going to be during the adopting process," he said.

He said it is "unnecessary confusion."

"I just think it's really, really redundant to have yet another change to the Romanization."

Park Young-won of the Society of Korean Language and Literature also said that adding the translated attribute to the proper nouns is redundant.

"Gyeongbokgung means palace and Hangang means river within the word. Adding the unnecessary translation is the government's mistake, ruining the originality of the Korean language," Park said.

The MCST teamed up with the National Institute of the Korean Language to devise the new guidelines in cooperation with related authorities including the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, the Cultural Heritage Administration (CHA), the Seoul Metropolitan Government and the Korea Tourism Organization (KTO).

Michael Breen, CEO of Insight Communications, said, "The objective in translation for drivers and tourists should be simplicity and accuracy. This practice of repeating the word fails on both grounds. The word Gyeongbok is already a mouthful for English speakers. But a visitor would need a PhD. in linguistics to get Gyeongbokgung right."

Necessary change

However, some expats and analysts sided with the change.

Robert Koehler, who has lived in Korea since 1997 and works for Seoul Magazine as editor in chief, said, " My personal opinion is that people care way too much about this sort of thing. I've seen people get kind of emotional about this."

He said his magazine has used Hangang River and Gyeongbokgung Palace, although it's redundant.

"I guess in theory, you can do things like Gyeongbok Palace; Mountain Nam or Han River, but it's probably more helpful if they know their names. Hangang or Gyeongbokgung is probably not the most useful for inbound tourists, because they don't know what these things are."

Kwak Joong-chol, a professor at the Graduate School of Interpretation and Translation at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, said the decision was the best option they had regarding the current status of Korea and its language.

"The English orthography of Korean landmarks is for foreigners and we added the translation of the attribute of the venue because it helps them understand what it is," Kwak said. "If Korea and its language become known better and at least 50 percent of foreigners understand that Gyeongbokgung is a palace, then we could remove the explanatory addition of palace in its official English name."

Kwak, who has been working on this project since 2009, said different authorities had to compromise in determining the new rule. "We all shared the same goal — how to make the English names easily understandable for foreigners who visit Korea," Kwak said. "This was the best compromise we could reach to promote the Korean word as it is and help foreigners understand at the same time."

Some foreign residents in Korea responded positively toward the government's drive to homogenize English names of places.

"I think it is really good idea because it is nothing more confusing to a tourist than not being exactly sure where they need to go," said a 55 year-old American who has been in the country for six years. "My fear is that Korean people will continue to use the outdated names of places which won't match the new single name, so the confusion may continue, but it's a good start."

Shaun Justin Manning, a professor in English College at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, agreed on the need of English translation of the venue in its name.

"If you think about people coming to Korea for the first time, something like Hangang River actually will help," said Manning, who has lived in Korea since 1995. "If he knows the word ‘gang' means river (in Korean), it does seem kind of redundant. But, I think if I was in a taxi and said ‘take me to the Han river,' (the taxi driver) might not understand. If I say Hangang or Hangang River, the driver would be able to get me there more easily," Manning said.

Kang Mi-young, a researcher at MCST's Korean Language Policy Division, said it might be difficult to feel the change yet, but it will be applied gradually.

"The new guidelines will be designated as minister's instructions and after the designation, new road signs and other signs will all follow the style," Kang said.