Dae~hanminguk!
Yonhap, quoting VANK, reports that on its page introducing the Korean language, the National Virtual Translation Center has marked the body of water between Korea and the island nation whose name we dare not utter the “East Sea,” and “East Sea” alone.
Sadly, however, the page introducing that other language is yet unchanged.
Oh, and you’ll be happy to know that VANK is back to normal following this week’s cyber assault.
{ 42 comments… read them below or add one }
I had just finished asking about that center on the Open Thread. Here is what I asked:
————–
Does anyone know anything about the per-word rates mentioned on the National Virtual Translations Center Web site?
Here is their promotional video.
Here is an interesting MSNBC news article from 2004 that mentioned the translation center: “Translation technology in the age of terror“
The name “East Sea” was probably used in the Korean Language description to avoid offending Korean-Americans, whom the translation center probably hopes to woo as translators.
However, if a Korean-American is offended by the name “Sea of Japan,” than that Korean-American may be a security risk since it suggests he or she may be more loyal to Korean causes than to American. I wonder what Robert Kim thought about the name “Sea of Japan”?
I can think of no valid reason for changing the ENGLISH name to East Sea, and I wish people would stop caving to it. Nobody is suggesting the name be 일본해 in Korean, though the logic of keeping the English name the way it is is usually lost.
Why don’t they argue so strongly for changing the Yellow Sea to “West Sea”? Don’t want to upset China?
I can understand why fellow Koreans don’t like the name “Sea of Japan” and want it changed, but it’s too much of an emotional rationale. Personally I don’t feel that it is absolutely necessary. (OK, honestly speaking I do find it a little desirable.) But it is just a name, much like the “Gulf of Mexico” is just a name and nothing more and it doesn’t step on America’s pride or imply any kind of ownership. Same with the sea in question, leaving it be won’t hurt our pride or threaten the status of Dokdo. And also, changing it to the “East Sea” is nationalisticly self centered because it implies that it is east of Korea. I just wish more Koreans would realize this before they strive so hard to change it. They could at least show an iota of rationality and go for a neutral name. What the hell, let’s call it the “Sea of Russia.” Or maybe the “Sea of VANK?”
“the Hub of Seas”…
I believe I’m on record on this very site as favoring calling it the “South Siberian Sea.”
I recall I offered We-Hate-Those-Bastards-On-The-Other-Side Sea. Works for both parties.
Anyway, I’ve always called it the Sea of Japan when speaking English to Koreans. No reason for me to put up with their silliness.
I think I remember seeing old maps with “Oriental Sea” on them. No country names, and no east or west of anything. Sounds neutral enough to me.
Darth (#9),
The “Oriental Sea” is not a neutral name because it suggests it belongs to orientals, just as the “East Sea” suggests it belongs to easterners, and “Blue Sea” would suggest it belongs to people with blue skin, blue eyes, or blue hair.
Demanding that the rest of the world change the name of a globally recognized sea just because of one country’s national inferiority complex is not a reasonable demand. It would be similar to Americans demanding that the world call French fries “freedom fries” because of American dislike for French policies. Even though “freedom fries” sounds more neutral than French fries, demanding such a name change would still be stupid.
I wonder how many Americans go into McDonalds and order freedom fries?
I think the Korean government should have pushed for the name Sea of Korea or Chosun Sea. At least then they could have a historical basis for their demands.
When we look at both early European and Japanese maps of this body of water it was frequently labelled as the Sea of Korea or Chosun Sea before Japan’s outward-looking Meiji Era influenced Western perceptions of NE Asia.
http://digarc.usc.edu/search/controller/view/seakorea-m1.html?view=1
Korea does has a right to have a say on what names are given to the waters that surround her territory Gerry. If it’s not such a big deal why does Japan lobby equally hard to keep the name?
I demand we change the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of Texas!
Calling the body of water in question the East Sea is not a compromise to the Japanese and will never result in a diplomatic agreement over the name as long as Korea stubbornly tries to push that one. It’s only east to Korea. Why would Japan agree to call the body of water on their west coast The East Sea? It’s like asking America to accept calling the Pacific ocean the Eastern Ocean. Makes no sense.
#10 is right in that Korea should switch to a more neutral name if they are so offended by The Sea of Japan.
I like “Sea of Peace”.
#10 Gerry,
You’re spot on today.
Koreans, particularly the nationalistic variety, should be able to realize that the naming of that body of water has gained a nearly world-wide acceptance because the Western world gained knowledge and a sense of Japan first, before they became aware of Korea and, for example the French, became enamored of it. When a Westerner asked the Japanese what that body of water was named, they were told that it was the Japanese Sea. I would guess that the West would be calling it the East Sea if Korea had been forced to open its doors to the West first, thus allowing our Occidental ancestors to become enamored of Korea before they did Japan.
Since you would know, who was running Korea in the late 1500s-early 1600s (my Korean history knowledge began and ended with Tangun)?
To Koreans, it’s the East Sea. As a Westerner, I apologize to any offended Hanner that my ancestors became aware of Japan more so or sooner than they did Korea.
However, it’s still the East Sea in Korea. I’m fine with that, and if I ever get the opportunity to refer to it in Korean I’ll call it the East Sea. But Korea shouldn’t expect to rest of the world to call a tomato a fruit when all other countries have been calling it a vegetable for 500 years or so.
I could be all wet with the above statements, but I have been fortunate enough to not have eaten a McDonald’s anything for more than 10 years, so I can’t be all that wet.
Not in English they don’t. They are welcome to call it whatever they wish in Korean. In Korean it is East Sea and West Sea. In English, it is Sea of Japan and Yellow Sea.
The French don’t petition the world to change the name of The English Channel to La Manche. La Manche is the French name, The English Channel is the English name.
Maybe we’d better stop using the word Germany. It is Deutchland after all (in German).
Oriental Sea = East Sea
The Korean name is East Sea.
The English name is the Sea of Japan.
What’s the Japanese name? The West Sea?
And no, it isn’t called the Sea of Japan because people became aware of Japan first, nor did they ask a Japanese person and were given that answer. It used to be called the Sea of Korea by some folks; it may still be in some languages. It’s called the Sea of Japan because of a few names that were in use, that was the one that stuck. It’s a fixed accident, but it’s fixed. It doesn’t need to be changed.
Dokdo is Korean, but the Sea of Japan is the Sea of Japan.
I may be mistaken but, so far as I know, this body of water has never historically been known in English as “the East Sea.” Renaming it the East Sea for purely domestic political reasons is a rather unrealistic expectation on Korea’s part.
From the perspective of geographical accuracy, the name “Sea of Japan” is correct while “East Sea” is not. It is the very existence of Japan that creates this sea (were Japan not there, there would be no Sea of Japan, just the Pacific Ocean.)
#13
To Koreans, it’s the East Sea. As a Westerner, I apologize to any offended Hanner that my ancestors became aware of Japan more so or sooner than they did Korea.
Err… incorrect. The west did not establish the name sea of Japan. Japan annexed Korea in 1910. The Japanese government then went to the IHB and requested the body of water be named the sea of Japan. Since Korea the country did not exist during colonial times, there were no protests. The name sea of Japan was given shortly after that in 1928. Korea was not liberated until 1945.
What makes Koreans so bitter about the name-sea of Japan is not only the unfairness, but also the harsh memory of colonial times. As well as the situation behind that name change.
In all fairness I believe the name should be changed. Koreans for the most part do not promote the unfair name Sea of Korea. Japan should follow suit and drop the equally unfair name Sea of Japan. On the other hand, the east sea is unfair to Japan as well. The name should be changed into something neutral.
Just as how some people believe its pointless for a name change by the Koreans, its far more pointless for the Japanese to desperately cling to such a colonial name. Just drop the name, go for something neutral and end this bitter fighting.
15
From the perspective of geographical accuracy, the name “Sea of Japan” is correct while “East Sea” is not. It is the very existence of Japan that creates this sea (were Japan not there, there would be no Sea of Japan, just the Pacific Ocean.)
And if it wasnt for the Eurasian continent, that body of water would be named the Atlantic Ocean. Eruasia is also much larger than Japan in significance and land size. And since most of Eurasia considers Japan to be located in the east, you could also argue that the name East Sea is far more logical.
Though I agree that the East Sea is unfair, the sea of Japan is far worse. Just go for a neutral name.
#16,
Then, at the time that Japan made the request, what did they call that body of water?
I didn’t realize I was making a cultural mistake each time I used the term ‘SOJ’, but at least all of us using that term were immediately aware of what body of water was being spoken of.
Its not a cultural “mistake”, its a historical mistake.
There was no official name before 1928. Western maps at the time used many different names including Sea of Japan and East sea. As well as other names such as Sea of Korea, Oriental sea etc. It was only when Japan colonized Korea and then went to the IHB that the term Sea of Japan was registered.
#19,
I guess I should have worded it differently.
Say a Westerner in 1859 asked a Japanese in Niigata what the body of water located to the east was called – what would the English translation have been of what he said? Would it have been the Sea of Japan, or the East Sea?
Well, it obviously wouldn’t be “East Sea.” It might be “West Sea,” though.
Wait a minute. Fairness? It’s just a name, for crying out loud, and not in itself insulting. I have never heard of an American decrying the unfairness of the “Gulf of Mexico.” In fact, from an American perspective, the river faces Mexico, and any American standing on the bank would be looking at Mexico.
So from a Korean perspective, wouldn’t the Sea of Japan be more appropriate? No, there must be something more to this than logic…
#21 Colontos,
That bit of geography escaped me – thanks. Although, technically, Niigata harbor could conceivably have a peninsula that curved around and….
What did the Japanese call that body of water at the time when the only Western travelers were the Dutch, the Portuguese, and the wayward English ‘Anjinsan’? Yes, it is true, one of my first infatuations with the East came through a James Clavell novel.
I think that’s in the 1600s, but since I’m neither a historian nor a geographer, I am asking you, Senors Bevers y CMC y Colontos, what the Japanese called it at that time?
Surely they had maps that gave a name to that aquatic piece of the early Greater EACS and some of those maps have survived the earthquakes, domestic fires and foreign firebombings and, even unto this day, give a name to the sea? That’s the name that to this day, has been adopted and used by Western peoples, maps, text and the like.
All I’m trying to say is that the West experienced Japan in the 1500s-1800s much more than it did Korea, as as such, would have adopted translations of the name that the Japanese used. It could have been the West Sea or the great Bight of Niigata (I did say I wasn’t a geographer, and that applies to undersea as well).
corrections –
‘…and as such…’
‘…Great Bight of Niigata….’
sorry
Dear Roberts, Sonagi, Dram Man, Wang Kon, et esteemed al.,
How hard would it to be to put a function on this blog to be able to edit one’s own posts?
I know, I know, I should have read it more than once to catch the errors, and then read it again later before posting. If I ever get rich, I promise to hire a professional proofreader.
Your adoring public wants to know.
Thank you!
I believe only Robert the blog owner has that kind of administrative power.
CMC (#16),
The name “Sea of Japan” was used on Western maps long before Korea’s colonial period, and had essentially become the standard by the start of the twentieth century. See HERE.
The motive for Korea’s name-change demand is not to correct some historical inaccuracy since the name “East Sea” was very rarely used on Western maps. Korea simply wants to change the name for selfish, nationalistic reasons.
Also, it is not only Japan that is against the name change; I think most of the world is against it because it seems like such a senseless waste of time and money. Regardless of what the sea was called in the past, the name “Sea of Japan” is now recognized as the standard by an overwhelming majority of the countries of the world.
Koreans are so blinded by nationalistic brainwashing that they seem unable to see how selfishly silly this name-change demand looks to the rest of the world.
Regardless of how many publishers Koreans may coerce into changing the name or into using it together with “Sea of Japan,” the stubborn demand for a name change, itself, is hurting Korea’s international reputation and probably making the world suspicious of Korea’s other claims and causes.
Gerry,
Would you tell us what that body of water was called by Japan in 1687 or thereabouts? I think the shogunate was in power and the Emperor (Tennoheikasama) was largely ineffectual…like today.
What I’m hoping for is a full-page ad in The Washington Post a la’ Dokdo/Takeshima. The newspapers need all the revenue they can get – one doesn’t get the joy of reading a big fat email on Sunday morning (Saturday here and it’s not fat, not like the LA or NY Times).
And, BTW and FWIW, your last posting….Sentence #2 of Paragraph #3 is Wikipedia material. It’s just the facts of the matter. Although instead of ‘overwhelming majority’ I would have used ’99.47% of those who cared an iota whatsoever’.
Can’t you see it as the standard reference sentence of thirty words or less on this issue?
Because all I’m seeing is citations on this one, baby.(said in a somewhat sleazy-yet-husky LA B movie producer voice).
#26,
Does Robert with The Power have a responsive email?
And in case I hadn’t told you before, thanks for translating your Korean postings into English.
Well, 1600′s would be the right time frame.
But I do not know any Japanese and I am not a Japan scholar or watcher, so I can’t answer your question. I very much want to know the answer, however, so I’ll repeat:
Is there anybody who can tell us what the Japanese name for the Sea of Japan 1) is now and 2) used to be before Westerners came in?
I’m going to bet that neither are “Sea of Japan,” but let’s see. Who can help us out?
21
I guess I should have worded it differently.
Say a Westerner in 1859 asked a Japanese in Niigata what the body of water located to the east was called – what would the English translation have been of what he said? Would it have been the Sea of Japan, or the East Sea?
You still make an irrelevant argument. Im not supporting either East sea of Sea of Japan. But I do find East sea more logical and fair then the “the sea that belongs to Japan”.
A westerner at the time(hint the word WEST in westerner) would have considered Japan to be located in the far east(note the word EAST). Furthermore there was no official name for that body of water in 1859. Various western maps at the time labeled that ocean differently.
==========
23
Wait a minute. Fairness? It’s just a name, for crying out loud, and not in itself insulting. I have never heard of an American decrying the unfairness of the “Gulf of Mexico.” In fact, from an American perspective, the river faces Mexico, and any American standing on the bank would be looking at Mexico.
So from a Korean perspective, wouldn’t the Sea of Japan be more appropriate? No, there must be something more to this than logic…
Why do you even bother Mizar? You never make any decent arguments. You’re clearly anti-Korean. It doesn’t take a genius to figure it out. You can deny it and claim that for some odd reason that you’re being open minded, but no one will believe you. I don’t care what excuse you make. You’re the kind of person who sides with any view opposing Korea. No matter how ridiculous it is. If it goes against Korea, then you preach it as if it were gospel. Korea is being far more logical then Japan is on this issue. Korea is not naming the ocean after themselves. Japan on the other hand is, even though it doesn’t belong to them. To make matters worse that naming was done when Korea actually did belong to the Japan. Im asking for the Japanese to drop that name and go for something that both sides can agree upon. While you’re defending such a one sided and biased name for no reason other than personal grievances. Personal grievances as in your belief that Koreans are out to get you. Personal grievances as in your belief that Koreans have some how wronged you. Personal grievances as in your desire to get revenge on Koreans for their “crimes” against you. I don’t know what happened to you in Korea but you seriously need to get over it.
What I find especially ironic about people like you is the level of hypocrisy and arrogance you and others like you exhibit. Take for instance Japanese colonization in which you tell Koreans to “get over it” and “grow up”. Well then, why dont you get over it and grow up over what the Koreans did to you? And im willingly to bet that what the old ajjushi taxi driver or punk teenager did to you pales in comparison to what the Japanese did to Korea. And judging by your attitude, I must say that whatever rude behavior you experienced in Korea was well deserved.
And one more thing, if Americans don’t want to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico then that’s their business. And the last time I checked, Mexico didn’t invade and colonize America for 35 years.
#21,
I am making no argument, irrelevant or not. Irreverent, yes, because I believe everyone should be offended. Why discriminate?
I am not asking at all what a Westerner would have called it – I am asking that, at the time in question, what did the Japanese call it? I am not asking what a Western map would have labeled it as. Everyone knows you can’t trust a yangnome.
My contention is that the Western world likely calls it the SOJ (and I don’t meant the Society of Jesuits)
because that’s the English (or Dutch or Portuguese) translation of what the 15th-century Niigatan would have called it when asked.
That’s all. Really I have no professional or personal stake in this, but since you’re misconstruing my point, I’ll tell you…
Personally, I really am for #8 Seouldout’s suggestion, because it describes it in the most understandable and intractable terms. I would like to see shirts bearing his(?) suggestion, in Hangul, on Chongno tomorrow. It’s bound to make The Sparkle shine more.
24
What did the Japanese call that body of water at the time when the only Western travelers were the Dutch, the Portuguese, and the wayward English ‘Anjinsan’? Yes, it is true, one of my first infatuations with the East came through a James Clavell novel.
I don’t remember entirely. But I do remember the Japanese calling the Pacific ocean “the great Japanese sea”. Obviously that name did not stick. Wouldn’t it be ridiculous If Japan somehow invaded and colonized America then registered the name “the great Japanese sea”? Cause that’s basically this Korea-Japan dispute in a nutshell. Just replace America with Korea.
All I’m trying to say is that the West experienced Japan in the 1500s-1800s much more than it did Korea, as as such, would have adopted translations of the name that the Japanese used. It could have been the West Sea or the great Bight of Niigata (I did say I wasn’t a geographer, and that applies to undersea as well).
Not true, western maps regularly gave that body of water different names. Two thirds of historical maps dated before 1800 within the Library of congress for example used names like the Sea of Korea, East Sea, Oriental sea etc. Furthermore, the west did not register the name “sea of Japan”. Japan did shortly after they annexed Korea and blocked any form of protest or dissent.
=====
27
CMC (#16),
The name “Sea of Japan” was used on Western maps long before Korea’s colonial period, and had essentially become the standard by the start of the twentieth century. See HERE.
You just shot yourself in the foot. The same link you provided also states that the term East sea was used by westerners before colonization. It also states that other names were popular before colonization. It also provides several arguments that are in favor of Korea. I have no idea why your brought such a link cause it hurts your cause. The entire point of your argument was to somehow claim that all maps before 1928 labeled the body of water as the sea of Japan. If not then you really have no argument.
The motive for Korea’s name-change demand is not to correct some historical inaccuracy since the name “East Sea” was very rarely used on Western maps. Korea simply wants to change the name for selfish, nationalistic reasons.
Do you read the stuff you write? Koreans are being selfish WHEN ITS THE JAPANESE WHO REFUSE TO DROP THE NAME IN FAVOR OF A NEUTRAL NAME? Koreans are also being nationalistic, WHEN ITS THE JAPANESE WHO NAMED IT THE SEA OF JAPAN AND REFUSE ANY OTHER NAME CHANGE? Last time I checked, Koreans are not promoting the sea of . The Japanese on the other hand are. What you just accuse the Koreans of is far worse in Japan in this instance.
Japan would save a lot more money if they simply dropped the name rather than fight tooth to tooh over preserving a biased name. Funny how you claim that Japan would waste money doing so. When all they have to do is sign a piece of paper. If the Japanese were truly unselfish and un-nationalistic then they would have dropped the name in a heart beat and went for something that wasnt so one sided. Why are they so hell bent on keeping the sea of Japan?
Also, it is not only Japan that is against the name change; I think most of the world is against it because it seems like such a senseless waste of time and money. Regardless of what the sea was called in the past, the name “Sea of Japan” is now recognized as the standard by an overwhelming majority of the countries of the world.
Most of the world does not care about the name change. Most of the world does not even know about this dispute. Quit exaggerating reality.
Koreans are so blinded by nationalistic brainwashing that they seem unable to see how selfishly silly this name-change demand looks to the rest of the world.
Because sea of Japan isnt a nationalistic name? And refusing to change the name into something both sides can agree upon on isnt selfish on Japans part? Japan would save a lot of money and time if they agreed to a neutral name. Instead they waste money and effort trying to preserve it and wage war for Japans honor(which they dont have in the first place). Whos being selfish and nationalistic here?
I also have no idea why you brought up brainwashing? This dispute has nothing to do with brainwashing. No one here is brainwashed. Ignorant and uninformed? Yes. Biased and illogical? Yes. Brainwashed? No.
Furthermore you opinions do not represent the rest of the world? It represents the opinions of and old man whos bitter over personal grievances. Please follow Mizars advice and “get over it”.
#24,
Thanks for an answer to my question.
Now that I know that, the proper name for the body of water in question is ‘The Less Japanese Sea’, obviously.
^
Did you just thank yourself for answering your own question?
The Japanese are not refusing to drop anything. Talk to the 1000s upon 1000s of places that use the name “Seas of Japan” around the world. Ask THEM why they are not changing the name.
CMC is correct. It’s Korea’s Sea as well they should have a say on naming it.
Gerry, what’s the point of linking us to page that states “The neutrality of this article is disputed…” at the top of the page itself.
Even Japanese maps themselves listed the name “Sea of Chosun” on some of their maps.
http://www.momaf.go.kr/eng/intl/eastsea/I_eastsea04.asp
Japan’s historic case for keeping the name “Sea of Japan” is based almost entirely on Western maps from the mid to late 19th Century and onward. Before that era the name Sea of Korea, Chosun Sea, Oriental Sea were also used equally as often. So from a purely historical standpoint Japan’s case is weak.
To compare other bodies of water with the East Sea/Sea of Japan is a poor analogy. First the Koreas’ EEZs extend far into this body of water, they own an equal share if not more than Japan.
Also, the historical (expansionist-colonial) legacy the name “Sea of Japan” carries with it no longer reflects the political situation in the region. At the time this standard name was imposed upon these waters, Japan was already running roughshod over the region.
Put simply, Korea doesn’t like the name and much (if not more) of this sea is part of their country. It’s not to say they have the right to unilaterally demand a name. However, it would be good thing for both Japan and the Korea’s to negotiate on a name that better suits the East Sea/Sea of Japan. Either that or use both names of maps.
Japan’s MOFA is pretty slick. They try to put on this passive facade, but they aggressively lobby harder than any pheasant-munching VANKER out there.
Gulf of Mexico, Indian Ocean, Gulf of Arabia, English Channel … are all fine analogies.
This guy (Jewook) gets it and he’s Korean (I think):
“But it is just a name, much like the “Gulf of Mexico” is just a name and nothing more and it doesn’t step on America’s pride or imply any kind of ownership. Same with the sea in question, leaving it be won’t hurt our pride or threaten the status of Dokdo. And also, changing it to the “East Sea” is nationalisticly self centered because it implies that it is east of Korea. I just wish more Koreans would realize this before they strive so hard to change it.”
Jewook faps a lot to Japanese porn.
There is too much bias here.
The Japanese are not refusing to drop anything. Talk to the 1000s upon 1000s of places that use the name “Seas of Japan” around the world. Ask THEM why they are not changing the name.
No one is demanding the world go back and change all maps and history books ever published. A name change would only call for published material up to that point to stop using “sea of Japan”.
It happened before in 1928. Why not now? And you act as if using something other than “sea of Japan” was a monumental task. Sorry but name changes as well as various other changes in maps and history books are done all the time each year. Is it really that hard to replaced Sea of Japan with something else? Really?
But it is just a name, much like the “Gulf of Mexico”…..
If it was just a name, then Japan should have no problem agreeing to a name change. Afterall, its only a name right?
CMC has a point. Names of geographical features and political boundaries historically come and go. They reflect the politics of the nations that govern(ed) the region.
Thus why should the name of the East Sea/Sea of Japan remain stuck in the Japan’s expansionist Meiji Era? And why should international agencies have the right to impose names on geographical areas within another country’s borders. Japan and Korea should work on a new name.
CMC touched on a point. A reasonable compromise is a neutral name, however, it’s doubtful Japan’s right wing groups would agree to such a proposal. Japan is being just as pig-headed by insisting the name “Sea of Japan” remain.
Slim, the Gulf of Mexico wasn’t named as such from Mexico colonizing America. It’s the historical backdrop to the name that irks Koreans. Japan only wants to keep the name “Sea of Japan” because she is afraid it will degrade her ongoing territorial/border issues with every one of her neighbours.
You must log in to post a comment.
{ 1 trackback }