The Korean is LIVE CHATTING at the Mixologist tonight, from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. EST. Follow the link the sign up for the LibraryMixer and the Mixologist. Remember to add "The Korean" as your friend on LibraryMixer.

The "Untranslatable Word" Trope

First of all, the Korean's thoughts and prayers for everyone in Japan today. Please be safe.

In reaction to Japan's earthquake, Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times wrote a blog post about Japan's national character that will assist the recovery from this disaster. The Korean generally agreed with the overall point made by Kristof, but he found this passage a bit annoying:

But the Japanese people themselves were truly noble in their perseverance and stoicism and orderliness. There’s a common Japanese word, “gaman,” that doesn’t really have an English equivalent, but is something like “toughing it out.” And that’s what the people of Kobe did, with a courage, unity and common purpose that left me awed.

Sympathy for Japan, and Admiration [New York Times]

What annoyed the Korean was the "untranslatable word" trope -- about how "gaman" doesn't really have an English equivalent.  Um, actually there is an English equivalent of "gaman" -- any Japanese-English dictionary can tell you the equivalent. "Gaman" means "patience" or "perseverance." And hey, "perseverance" sounds awfully like "toughing it out."

Of course, there are cases in which word-to-word translation is not possible. For example, a word like 온돌 -- Korea's floor heating system -- does not have a single equivalent word in English. Also, there are cases in which the word itself could be translated, the precise emotion evoked by a word is difficult to translate. (See this post for example -- the word "white" loses all poetic meaning when translated from Korean to English.)

But in general, there is no word that is truly untranslatable. Instead, the "there is no equivalent word in English" is a crutch, overused whenever writers need a cheap and facile way of describing another culture. Through this trope, the writer tries to give off this impression: "Oh, those mysterious Japanese people! (In Kristof's case.) They have this concept that we cannot truly understand. All we could do is to guess at it, as if trying to divine if there will be rain by looking at the clouds."

The Korean likes Kristof's reporting a lot, but this is just lazy writing. What is wrong with simply saying that the Japanese people have perseverance? By setting up the story with the "untranslatable word" crutch, Kristof put Japanese people beyond the understanding of ordinary American people, only reachable through Kristof's own description of the Japanese people. This is not a good way of trying to bridge the gap between cultures.

Kristof's point is that there is much to admire about Japanese people's persevering spirit. The Korean agrees. But by setting up the Japanese perseverance as something alien to us, Kristof abdicates his stated goal. When the Japanese are portrayed as these inscrutable beings whose mindset we cannot completely understand, there is no point in admiring the mindset because we can never have that mindset anyway.

And it is not as if Americans have not had disasters which they overcame by way of their perseverance. Kristof could have chosen any number of challenges that faced America -- the Great Depression, Civil Rights Movement, World War II, September 11 -- and reminded Americans of their own strength and at the same time identify themselves with the Japanese also. But instead of fostering connection, the "untranslatable word" trope fosters separation.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

This BBC survey is very interesting -- it asked people from different country whether a given country's influence in the world was positive or negative. The most interesting part for the Korean? 68% of Koreans believed that Japan has a positive influence in the world, while only 39% of the Japanese believed that their country has a positive influence in the world. (At p. 10.)

50 Most Influential K-Pop Artists: 33. Kim Jong-Seo

[Read more reviews from the Korean from the Library Mixer. To join, click here.]

[Series Index]

33.  Kim Jong-Seo [김종서]

Years of Activity:  1986-present

Discography:
As vocal of Sinawi
Down and Up (1986)

Solo Albums
Rethona (1992)
PETSDN2 (1993)
Kim Jong Seo (1994)
Thermal Island (1995)
Kim Jong Seo V (1996)
Seeds (1998)
The Seven Kim Jong Seo (1999)
Odyssey (2001)
No. 9 (2005)

As vocal of REI
High (2010)


Representative Song:  You Without a Reply [대답없는 너] from Rethona

대답없는 너
You Without a Reply

힘없이 멈춰진 하얀 손
White hand stopped listless
싸늘히 식어가는 눈빛
Gaze turning cold
작은 그 무엇도 해줄 수가 없었던 나
I who could not do any little thing
비라도 내리길 바랬지
I wished for a rain
며칠이 갔는지 몰랐어
Did not know how many days passed
그저 숨쉬는 게 허무한 듯 느껴질 뿐
Simply felt breathing was futile

이제 난 누구의 가슴에 안겨서
Now in whose arms will I be held
아픔을 얘기해야 하는가
And speak of pain
너무 힘들다고 말하고 싶지만
Want to say this is too hard but
들어줄 너는 없는데
There is no more you who would listen

비라도 내리길 바랬지
I wished for a rain
며칠이 갔는지 몰랐어
Did not know how many days passed
그저 숨쉬는 게 허무한 듯 느껴질 뿐
Simply felt breathing was futile

이제 난 누구의 가슴에 안겨서
Now in whose arms will I be held
아픔을 얘기해야 하는가
And speak of pain
너무 힘들다고 말하고 싶지만
Want to say this is too hard but
들어줄 너는 없는데
There is no more you who would listen

Translation Note:  A persistent difficulty translating Korean from English is that Korean language does not hesitate to modify pronouns with a dependent clause, while English is somehow adverse to doing that. The result is always awkward.

In 15 Words or Less:  The last hero of Korean rock before the dark ages.

Maybe he should have been ranked higher because...  Rock is a significant genre, and he should be recognized for carrying it through.

Maybe he should have been ranked lower because...  What has he done that is musically significant in the last decade?

Why is this artist important?
Once upon a time, not too far back in the past, "rock" was more than pop music based on electric guitar, bass and drums. It was about long hair, tight leather pants and wide vocal range. It was about urgent screaming of desperation. In other words, once upon a time, Kim Jong-Seo was rock music, personified.

In the late 1980s, rock was the most popular music in Korea, not the vacuous music featuring pretty puppets. The legends of Korean rock owned TV shows and screaming fan girls. And at the center of it was Kim Jong-Seo. Kim's musical talent is undeniable, as he had just the right mix of sensitivity and overriding manliness that his genre of music required. But Kim Jong-Seo's ascension owes to more than that. With his wiry build, long-flowing mane and uncanny fashion sense (Kim has said he frequently left Korea to buy $10,000 worth of clothes per trip) -- Kim Jong-Seo just looked like a goddamn rocker.

When approached critically, Kim Jong-Seo's music is not necessary more special than other rockers like, say, Lee Seung-Cheol or Deli Spice. But when it comes to influence, there is something to be said about being the first person associated with the word "rock." And Kim stood tall as the guardian of rock music as the pop music world around him slowly crumbled. For a long time, he was the only visible reminder of what was, what could have been.

Interesting Trivia:  Kim Jong-Seo married early to a Japanese woman who was studying Korean in Korea. She was Kim's fan, an unlikely event because at the time Kim was not yet a star, but a musician playing at bars and clubs. He hid the fact that he was married to a Japanese woman from the public for more than a decade.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

What to Make of Korean Wave?

Dear Korean,

What do you make of the 'Korean wave', is it just an easily replicable fad or are Koreans becoming a key player in Southeast Asian pop culture?

Joonki

Dear Joonki,

When many a K-pop group fills up stadium after stadium across Asia with their concerts, it is pretty hard to say that Korea is not a key player in Asian (not just Southeast Asian) pop culture:

Many of the readers of this blog come here because Korea's pop culture, so not much elaboration would be necessary about "Korean Wave". But of all the achievements of modern Korea, its rise as a soft power nation is the greatest surprise to a lay observer. One might have reasonably expected Korea to make better and better products until those products become world-class, but this? This is not just a function of having a lot of money. There are plenty of wealthy countries in the world which do not leave a particularly strong mark in the regional and world culture. Germany is far wealthier than Korea, but one does not hear all that much about German cultural products as far as pop culture is concerned. (That is, unless one counts the subtle yet undoubtedly powerful cultural influence generated by beautifully performing machines.) The same is true for, say, Canada or Spain, although they are about as wealthy as Korea.

What does the Korean make of Korean Wave? There are many factors responsible for Korean Wave's success. Here are some preliminary ideas of what some of those factors might be (that may well turn out to be really wrong):

- Korea is wealthy. Like the Korean pointed out above, this is not a sufficient condition. But it is pretty clearly a necessary condition. Only wealthy people have the time and money to nurture a pop culture. As a result, Korean dramas and Korean movies rarely lack production value. More specifically, having major production companies with the resource to commit to a longer-term strategy and delayed return on investment has been critical for Korean Wave's success.

- The competition in Korean pop culture market is cutthroat. Entertainment market in Korea is not very big. There is enough for a spectacular winner, but not enough for a second place who can get by. This is conducive to creating a type of "success formula" that can be widely shared within the industry. This means that Korean pop culture consistently maintains a level of excellence.

- As Asia became wealthier overall, the pop culture market in Asia grew enough such that there is an international demand of good pop culture products. This goes hand in hand with the fact that ...

- Korea's pop culture filled the need that was left unfulfilled by other major pop cultures, most notably from U.S. or Europe. Asian people want pretty Asian faces to whom they can relate. Similarly, Asian people want Asian-style narrative arcs, focusing more on the relationship between people instead of what happens next. (This is obviously a gross over-generalization, but bear with the Korean here.)

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

If Immersion Works So Well for Language Learning...

One of the most popular posts on AAK! is about what is the best method for learning a new language, based on the Korean's own experience of learning English at age 16. Many people found it to be helpful and correct, and just as many found it to be wrong and misleading. And the objector's points usually go like this:

I agree that memorization if vital but studying under stress will harm the learning process. So, why torture yourself memorizing invidivual [sic] words in flash cards... filed in your wall. Exposure in English is just the key and there are lots of means to do that. Listening, watching, reading aloud, speaking beginning from simple to complex. As how you learn your first language.

Or like this:

Learning languages well is NOT a simple matter of "memorizing grammar and vocabulary." Believe me, millions of learners have already tried and failed to learn languages this way (just look at how few English learners in East Asia emerge from a decade of formal study unable to understand or speak the language?) Memorizing grammar rules and vocabulary does little more than expand your declarative knowledge ABOUT the language, but does very little to help you actually ACQUIRE the language and be able to both understand and use it for communicative purposes. The key is getting lots and lots of interesting, comprehensible listening and reading input, and then doing lots of speaking and writing output once you're ready.

All this recently got the Korean thinking -- aren't the ESL teachers in Korea ideally situated for the alternative theory? Are they not completely surrounded by Korean language, all the time? Couldn't they listen, watch, read aloud and speak Korean, as they would learn their first language?

If "immersion" method works so well for language learning, shouldn't all ESL teachers in Korea leave Korea after one or two years, being completely fluent in Korean?

Something to think about.

-EDIT 3/9/2011-

Having read the (numerous and furious) comments, the Korean thinks he should clarify a few things.

1. The term "immersion" needs to be clarified. A lot of commenters understand "immersion" to mean "active engagement with the language." That is a fair understanding of the term. But that is not the way the Korean used the term "immersion." (Hence, the quotes around the term in the post.)

What the Korean wants to caution against is the attitude that as long as one surrounds oneself with the language, one would absorb the language to the level of fluency as if through osmosis -- "as how you learn the your first language." In other words, it is the attitude expressed by commenter Jo-Anna's friends: "Of course everyone said the same thing to me when I left for Korea. "wow! You'll be fluent in no time!"" That is just not true, and the comments seem to be near-unanimously in agreement with the Korean there.

So, to clarify, let's use the terms "active engagement" and "passive immersion." The Korean believes that active engagement is necessary to achieve fluency. But passive immersion will give you next to nothing, which is the point of the post. ESL teachers in Korea go through a huge degree of passive immersion in Korean, but they do not come out fluent in Korean unless they actually study. (A stark example from a reader email to the Korean about this post: "I knew an alcoholic who had been here six months who didn't know what 맥주 ("beer") meant.")

2. The way the commenters understand the word "fluency" is also different from the way the Korean is using the term. Commenter brutus got it exactly right: "I think the point tK makes about memorization is there is no shortcut to learning a language to a high level of fluency." (emphasis added).

The level of fluency that the Korean's "best method" seeks to achieve is very specific: it is the level of proficiency possessed by educated members of the society, i.e. college-level. It is the level at which one can comprehend and express complex concepts. That level is much higher than the ability to make small talk.

This, to the Korean, is a crucial distinction that determines the relative importance of rote memorization and active engagement. A method that largely relies on active engagement can get you to the level where you can make small talk. But only rote memorization will get you to the level at which complex ideas can be discussed. Even the most active engagement -- the kind advocated by commenter ohmygodimmike, i.e. cutting off everything in your native language -- will not get you the college level fluency. Think about it -- how often in your life do you discuss complex concepts with other people? Unless your job is the type that involves dealing with words and concepts (e.g. law, media, etc.), most of your conversation will be small talks.

And sure enough, available academic research bears this out: you only need about 4,000 words (listemes) to cover 95% of all words known in a text. Remember, a six-year-old child already knows 13,000 listemes. That means you can know LESS than a six-year-old, and still carry a conversation. This is not college level fluency.

Commenter Eugene precisely hit the point that the Korean wanted to make:

Immersion [TK: here, used for "active engagement"] will only get someone so far. There is a point where you will hit a wall and the amount of language you absorb from your surroundings will slowly decline. You'll start to notice that you're perfectly fine watching movies or TV shows, but still don't totally understand the news. And that's when it's time to break out the books. People can bitch all they want, but anyone educated in English has had to do plenty of rote memorization in English! Remember all those vocabulary and spelling tests in elementary school? Remember reading classes in middle school? Remember having to look stuff up in the dictionary in high school because you didn't understand what it meant, even though the book you were reading it in was in English?

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com

Ask a Korean! News: Is the Union the Real Problem in American Education?

As the New York Times noted today, it is fashionable nowadays for Americans to bash on teachers and teachers' union for the failing American education.

The jabs Erin Parker has heard about her job have stunned her. Oh you pathetic teachers, read the online comments and placards of counterdemonstrators. You are glorified baby sitters who leave work at 3 p.m. You deserve minimum wage.

“You feel punched in the stomach,” said Ms. Parker, a high school science teacher in Madison, Wis., where public employees’ two-week occupation of the State Capitol has stalled but not deterred the governor’s plan to try to strip them of bargaining rights.

Teachers Wonder, Why the Scorn? [New York Times]

But the funny thing is that Korea, whose student performance is among the world's best, has very, very strong teachers' unions. American critics decry that American teachers' job security is never linked to performance, but Korea's teachers are never evaluated on how well their students do on exams. American critics often point out that the best and the brightest are attracted to teaching in East Asia, but it is not as if teachers in Korea are wealthy, or even upper-middle class. The absolute, biggest draw of being a teacher in Korea is that you never lose your job until retirement and receive pension after retirement until you die -- because of the unions!

This is an incomplete thought, because obviously a situation from one country does not directly translate to another. But it is something worth chewing on. Is the union the real issue here?

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.