Talk:Hangul orthography

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Merge?

[edit]

i wonder if this article is really necessary, can i redirect to Hangul? Appleby 21:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the history of Hangul orthography can be put here if someone wants to do it. --Kjoonlee 11:37, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
By history I mean stuff like "몇 일" or "몇일" becoming ungrammatical in favour of "며칠" and stuff like that. --Kjoonlee 11:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice if this dealt more with the semi-official aspects of this, and also delved into the trickier points of hangul orthography (particularly spacing and the infamous sai sieot). -- Visviva 15:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 23 September 2025

[edit]

Hangul orthography → Hangul orthography (South Korea) – I'm not sure what's the best title; proposing this target for now, I may update it later.

Reason this title should be changed is because it's misleading; "Hangul orthography" implies it'll be the orthography of the script as a whole, but this article is specifically about South Korea's official orthography, when there's also North Korea's and past orthographies to think of.

Does this system have an official English name? I couldn't find one on quick search. I'll research more soon. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 22:12, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – The North Korean system is called Chosungul, not 'hangul'. No additional disambiguation is required. RGloucester — ☎ 08:59, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RGloucester and to @LivinAWestLife:
We use "Hangul" to describe the script in both Koreas. It's the WP:COMMONNAME and we apply WP:KO-CONSISTENT. For example, in the Hangul article we apply "Hangul" consistently throughout the body.
Also, "Hangeul" is the spelling used in South Korea; it's not even the spelling SK uses. It's the international spelling adopted by the ISO for the script based on the common spelling/name used in the West.
If you really want to use the South Korean name, use "Hangeul orthography", don't use the international name/spelling. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 14:49, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As a further note, part of the reason why I want this move is I'm planning to possibly create an article on the orthography of Hangul, including those in North and South Korea and historical. What would that article be called? grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 20:42, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The spelling is not the issue. Yes, the common name for the characters themselves is 'Hangul', but orthographic systems are a different kettle of a fish. The South Korean system is Hangul (the spelling is irrelevant; hangul is the common romanisation used in English), derived from the name of the country used in South Korea, i.e. 韓, and North Korean system is Chosungul, from the North Korean name of the country, 朝鮮. I am sure you are aware of this. If there is to be a single article on both of these orthographies, and maybe also previous ones, such as those used during the Japanese colonial period (such as 諺文綴字法), then the correct title for the article would be Korean orthography. RGloucester — ☎ 00:29, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
韓 isn't derived from the name of South Korea; it's an archaic name for Korea. Both Koreas used that name for the script until 1949.
It is the same script as North Korea's in almost every way; the only thing that differs is the orthography and what some people call it. It's very common for people to call the script in North Korea "Hangul" as well; if you read academic books on Korean that's the near universal practice in fact.
And we hashed out the Korean orthography issue below. I disagree with it. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 03:00, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per RGloucester. Disambiguation is unnecessary but the article should mention and link to North Korea's orthographic system for Korean. LivinAWestLife (talk) 01:04, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Korea, WikiProject Linguistics, and WikiProject Writing systems have been notified of this discussion. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 20:43, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would be opposed to including other orthographies under the name 'hangul'. In this case, I must insist on the title Korean orthography. RGloucester — ☎ 00:30, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RGloucester There are multiple Korean scripts. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 01:08, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and it would be logical to include information about Hanja-Hangul mixed script and Korean classical Chinese orthography in any given article, given that these are essential to understanding Korean-language orthography. RGloucester — ☎ 01:10, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's more than that. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 01:17, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and whatever more there is can be considered in the scope of the article. Consider that it is a good thing to allow for the possibility of expansion. Should we not take any chance we have to give the reader a broader understanding of Korean writing systems? RGloucester — ☎ 01:23, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Orthography" is a term used to describe a single script, but you're applying it to a language; grammatically the phrase doesn't work.
Orthographies of scripts for Korean may be more appropriate, but I also don't approve of the scope; it's more specific, when an acceptable alternative would be like Writings systems for Korean. Orthographies is more specifically about how each script works. I'd rather we start an article that's a broader overview, containing the histories of the various scripts and how they relate to each other, and also the orthographies.
Also, consider that the various romanization systems are also scripts for Korean. Do we talk about their orthographies as well? "Orthographies for scripts for Korean" is at once too broad and too specific; imo it's not a good project until we've fleshed out the individual articles as well. We just don't have the manpower for what you're asking at the moment. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 01:48, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is incorrect. 'Orthography' refers to the conventions governing the writing system(s) used by a given language. This is why we have articles like French orthography, Russian orthography, Spanish orthography. An article on orthography is not the same thing as an article on a writing system. In Korean, there have been many systems, and each may have one or more orthographies, some of which I have indicated above. Are you trying to suggest that all other languages on Wikipedia may have an orthography article, but Korean may not? In any case, I cannot accept including North Korean or Japanese colonial orthographies under the title 'hangul', as this is ahistorical and contrary to WP:NPOV. RGloucester — ☎ 01:58, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Those articles are basically about the single modern scripts; none of those articles address multiple scripts.
Korea is different from those cases, because Hangul being the dominant script is a very recent phenomenon. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 02:02, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing particularly difficult about addressing multiple scripts in one article, any more than addressing hangul and chosungul in the same article. This content doesn't need to be created immediately. Start with the two modern orthographies, and of course, leave room for expansion in future. This seems like a much better approach than having either separate articles all over the place, or all orthographies lumped under a name that does not necessarily apply. RGloucester — ☎ 05:54, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Difficulty is just one aspect of what I'm disagreeing with. I'm saying "Korean orthography" would read to most like it's about the orthography of a single script. I think "Korean orthographies" would be more suited to what you want; the plural is important. I still think grammatically what you want is invalid. There are multiple definitions to "orthography" (dont just look at the Wikipedia article lead) and many of them don't suit what you're saying grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 10:05, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RGloucester any additional response? grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 21:25, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To summarize:
  • I think the current title is misleading. Currently, the article is about South Korea's orthography specifically, but we use "Hangul" to describe all versions of this script, as per the international standard practice. Neither NK nor SK use "Hangul"; that spelling is used internationally
  • CMD suggested we could keep this page title and rescope it to be about all the orthographies of Hangul. I'm ok with that and just need consensus.
  • RGloucester is the only dissenter, and would prefer we use "Korean orthography".
    • I dissented against this because 1. there are multiple scripts for Korean 2. if RGloucester wants us the page to cover multiple scripts, I think it should be "Korean orthographies"
Frankly if we did rescope the page in the way RGloucester asked, the task of writing it would basically fall to me and I'm not really interested in doing what they're asking. If we did rescope the page to their ask, like >95% of the content would end up being Hangul orthography because I'm not going to write about the orthography of like Idu and Hyangchal.
Also noting that RGloucester is the only dissenter, can even just overrule. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 21:36, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]