Koreans invented and developed Chinese chracters.

閲覧: 183 回
最初の未読メッセージにスキップ

Sukgeun Jung

未読、
2002/08/25 0:02:372002/08/25
To:
I insist that the so-called Chinese character was probably invented and
developed by Korean, although the populous Chinese also have used it as
their basic writing systems. I believe the number of population of any
ethnic group should not be a factor that obscures the origin. I explain some
evidences.

1. The original pictographs called 'gab-gol' (bone and shell) or 'bok-sa' in
Korean were certainly invented during the Yin dynasty (or Shang state, BC
1600~BC 1046), although it is uncertain who was the inventor. There is no
dispute regarding this matter between Korean and Chinese historians. There
are ample recent evidences that the dominant people of the Yin dynasty was
Korean, which some Chinese historians also acknowledge.

2. Among countries that adopted Chinese character, only Koreans use exactly
one syllable for one character. Chinese or Japanese used one or more
syllables for one character. A good example is the sounds denoting the
numbers. Only Koreans use just one syllable for one number. So, it is very
easy for Koreans to say any complex numbers quickly.

For another example, the sound for 'white' in Chinese character in 'baek'
(one syllable) in Korean but 'bai' (two syllable) in Chinese. Regarding the
character denoting 'head', it is 'doo' in Korean but 'tou' in Chinese. On
the other hand, it is the same for the character denoting 'mountain' -
'shan' in both Korean and Chinese.

Why have Koreans used only one syllable for one character, but Chinese one
or more syllables? It certainly shows that Chinese pronunciation system is a
variant from Korean counterpart.

3. Some basic pictographs reflect Korean life-style and customs.

For example, the character denoting 'house' (ga in Korean) contains a
character denoting a pig (hog) in the lower part. In the house, people live,
not a pig live. Why did they adopt a pig to denote a house? Only Koreans
raised pigs within their house.

Another example is the character denoting 'sun'. The character contains a
dot within a rectangle. Why did they contain the dot, seemingly
unnecessarily? The dot denotes a golden crow. Only Koreans had the legend
linking the sun to the golden crow.

Additional example is the character denoting 'surname' (ssi in Korean). In
Chinese, the character denotes only 'surname' while it denotes both
'surname' and 'seed' in Korean. 'Ssi' is a most common word in Korean and
compares the pedigree with the tree (i.e., the seed is a common symbol for
the original ancestor whose trace has been handed down by his surname).

4. Korean history book describes the origin of written systems, which is
inscribed in dolmens in Korea.

A Korean history book called Chun-bu-gyung records the origin of both
current Chinese character and Korean alphabet (hangul). Chinese character is
a kind of pictograph + ideograph, while hangul is the most advanced of
phonogram + ideogram in the world. Bone and shell inscriptions were a
pictograph, while hexagrams of I-ching invented by Fu Xi (Bokhwi in Korean)
are a kind of ideogram. The original character for both Chinese character
and hangul was 'Nok-doo-mun' (the most ancient writing system), according to
the Chun-bu-gyung. Currently, only Koreans still play a game called 'Yout',
which is believed to be very similar to the 'Nok-doo-mun'. The principles of
Yout game are essentially the same as I-Ching. Moreover, in Korea and
Manchuria, currently there are many ancient rocks (dolmen) in which various
kinds of primitive writings are inscribed (see some pictures at
http://myhome.shinbiro.com/~kbyon/culture/rokdo.htm)

Based on these four facts, I strongly argue that the Chinese character was
originated and developed by Koreans. The differences in pronunciation system
for numbers between Chinese and Korean clearly indicates it's Korean origin.

--- Footnote

I add my message on Fu Xi and I-Ching. Fu Xi (or Bokhwi in Korean) is one of
the candidates for the inventor of Chinese characters.

Han and 'I Ching'

The hexagrams of the I Ching were said to have been created by the
legendary emperor 'Fu Xi' after he had contemplated on a diagram
called Ha Do that was bestowed from the Heaven. Han scholars rewrote
many myths as fact to fill gaps in early Chinese history. Fu Xi was
declared to have been the very first emperor, ruling from 2852 to 2737
BC. He was said to have been the inventor of musical instruments and
Chinese handwriting [1].

Chinese legend says that Fu Xi is the most senior one among the three
ancestors. Together with N-Wa, the women who he married with, they
started the civilization of human being. The current Fu Xi's Temple in
Shandong was built on a 6-meter high terrace. In the main hall, Fu
Xi's state was placed and sacrifices are given. And in the back of the
hall, N-Wa's statue was placed [2].

It is said that the upper body of Fu Xi is that of a human being while
his lower body is in the form of a snake. Inferring from the
scientific nature of the I Ching, it may just be possible that Fu Xi
was an extraterrestrial. If Fu Xi was indeed the first ancestor of
Chinese, then how could the descendents describe their first ancestor
as a monster? Why did ancient Chinese historians initially consider Fu
Xi as just a legend? Ancient Chinese call their neighboring people as
"bugs" or"barbarians". The monster portrait suggests that Fu Xi might
have been from a neighboring country, not Chinese countries. What was
that country?

"Fu Xi came from the nationality called East Yi dwelling in the
Neolithic Age, along the coastal area of the present-day Shandong
Province and, therefore, Fu Xi turned out to have come from Shandong
Province" (quoted from a Chinese site [4])

What was "East Yi"? Of course, "Yi" means "barbarians" in Chinese.
Most Koreans know what is "Dong (east) Yi". People in 'East Yi' are
known to have been very good at archery, as Korean Olympic archery
teams are today. The Chinese character "Yi" indeed symbolize the
shape of a big bow. Surprisingly. the recently discovered Korean
history text titled "Han Dan Go Gi" describes the life of "Fu Xi"
(Bokhwi in Korean) [3].

It writes that he was the son of the 5-th emperor of the Baedal
(B.C.3898- BC 2333) and his surname was "Pung" as he lived in
"Pung-san". Although the surname "Pung" no longer exists in Korean
names, some related words survived to today such as "Pung-chae"
"Pung-gol" and"Pung-shin", all of which are terms for describing human
body shape. Another daughter name was "Yeo-wa" (N-Wa in Chinese) [3].

It writes that she was known to have a magical talent to make a human
being from mud and to be extremely jealous (these two points, together
with the sound, might may remind you of Jehovah) [5].

Unfortunately only a few Korean scholars in universities accept "Han
Dan Go Gi" as a history book, insisting that the book was fabricated
in some points. Some Koreans, while acknowledging that a few points
might have been fabricated while copying, decry the university
historians as too much contaminated by Japanese colonial view of
history that tried to disparage Korean history in the 1910-1945
period, as they deny whole text book. Anyway, East Yi was located in
Shandong Province...... What does this mean? I would rather stop here
for today. But the point is that it will not be awkward that I link "I
Ching" to Han.

Some References on this footnote

[1] Microsoft Encarta "Fu Xi"
[2] http://www.china-sd.net/eng/sdtravel/scenery/30.asp
[3]
http://www.sejongnamepia.pe.kr/name_before.html
http://www.shaman.co.kr/newspaper/09/mago.htm
http://www.jsd.or.kr/a/truth_sh/korhist/k_hist_05.htm
[4]
http://www.sbbs.com.cn/English/RE-EXPLORATION%20OF%20BIAN-HEALING%20STONE.ht
m).
[5] http://www.hankooki.com/culture/200205/h2002051415292516030.htm
[6] http://www.chinaknowledge.de/History/Zhou/springautumn.htm
"Later historians said it was intended to protect the original Chinese
states from the intruding barbarian tribes Man 蠻, Rong 戎
and Yi 夷"

http://www.xsenergy.com/theme.html
"Yi is known by a variety of names: The East Barbarian, Yi the Good,
Lord Yi, and Yi Lord of the Hsia. As a result of this ambiguity, Yi is
seen both as a hero who is favored by the Gods as well as a villain,
murderer, usurper and adulterer. In this myth Yi is the hero as he
shoots the Ten Suns to avert disaster."

Bear Khan

未読、
2002/08/25 2:23:052002/08/25
To:
I'd been prouder if Koreans invented Kung Pao Chicken.

"Sukgeun Jung" <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote in message
news:ak9kss$4l4$1...@gamera.cbl.umces.edu...

Antti Leppanen

未読、
2002/08/25 2:37:272002/08/25
To:
Your wildly imaginative post (to put it friendly) may not be worth
replying, but just in case someone might take you seriously, I'll take
up only one of your points.

Sukgeun Jung <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote:

> 2. Among countries that adopted Chinese character, only Koreans use exactly
> one syllable for one character. Chinese or Japanese used one or more
> syllables for one character. A good example is the sounds denoting the
> numbers. Only Koreans use just one syllable for one number. So, it is very
> easy for Koreans to say any complex numbers quickly.

The Chinese pronunciations of the Chinese characters may take more than
on syllable only when written in _Korean hangul characters_. To write
'bai' in hangul, one needs the syllables 'ba' and 'i', which of course
does not mean that 'bai' is a two-syllable pronunciation in Chinese.

> For another example, the sound for 'white' in Chinese character in 'baek'
> (one syllable) in Korean but 'bai' (two syllable) in Chinese. Regarding the
> character denoting 'head', it is 'doo' in Korean but 'tou' in Chinese. On
> the other hand, it is the same for the character denoting 'mountain' -
> 'shan' in both Korean and Chinese.

> Why have Koreans used only one syllable for one character, but Chinese one
> or more syllables? It certainly shows that Chinese pronunciation system is a
> variant from Korean counterpart.

Because it looks like that when the pronunciations are thought of in the
terms of Korean writing.
Korea does not need to be made the center of the universe and the source
of East Asian civilization to have its own worth.
(Hm, come to think that if Sukgeun is being silly on purpose, I've only
ended up making fool of myself.)

Antti

Sukgeun Jung

未読、
2002/08/25 10:56:022002/08/25
To:
Imaginative post? I think I provided solid four evidences. I may have needed
only the first one, but you need to falsify all four to refute my argument.

Let me talk about your main point. I think you tried to falsify my 2nd
evidence, i.e., Koreans use only one syllable but Chinese use more than one
syllables for one character. Are you insisting that Chinese also use just
one syllable for every Chinese character like Koreans? If not, drop your
argument on the number of syllable for a character.

"Antti Leppanen" <alep...@cc.helsinki.fi> wrote in message
news:ak9tv7$2sd$1...@oravannahka.helsinki.fi...

sunnyday

未読、
2002/08/25 11:44:562002/08/25
To:
Wow, you should submit your papers of your new discovery that will shock the
world. Good luck. For the time being, I believe what's already there.

"Sukgeun Jung" <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote in message
news:ak9kss$4l4$1...@gamera.cbl.umces.edu...

Sukgeun Jung

未読、
2002/08/25 14:08:232002/08/25
To:
No. We do not need to shock the world. It will progressively be known to the
world. It takes time to change stereotype or belief of people. You will see
it during your life time. I guarantee it.

"sunnyday" <l_200...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:akau1o$a1f$1...@nobel2.pacific.net.sg...

Bear Khan

未読、
2002/08/25 16:09:492002/08/25
To:
Peking Duck comes from Kim Chi.


Bear Khan

未読、
2002/08/25 16:11:392002/08/25
To:

"Sukgeun Jung" <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote in message
news:akb6el$etj$1...@gamera.cbl.umces.edu...

> No. We do not need to shock the world. It will progressively be known to
the
> world. It takes time to change stereotype or belief of people. You will
see
> it during your life time. I guarantee it.
>

This nonsense that Korea was at the center of all creativity, culture, art
in Asia is a cottage industy in Korea.
There are theories that Confucius and Lao Tzu were Korean.
It's like the cottage industry in Japan where Japanese didn't take anything
from Korea and developed it all on their own.
Koreans and Japanese are so stupid.


Sukgeun Jung

未読、
2002/08/25 16:47:202002/08/25
To:
Unless you can reply to my message by providing specific arguments and
counter-evidences with respect to my four evidences, I would like to
courteously advise you to shut up.

"Bear Khan" <bear...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:euBcqNHTCHA.2140@cpimsnntpa03...

JJGShin

未読、
2002/08/25 18:11:542002/08/25
To:
>From: dai...@earthlink.net (Daitaro Hagihara)
>Date: 25/08/02 5:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time

>Japan did learn a lot from China via way of Koguryo during early
>stages of Japanese development between 4th and 5th century when
>Japan subjugated a part of Korean penninsula known as Kaya.
>But that's not reason enough to say that Japan learnt from Korea
>per se, since Koguryo was highly sinicized when Japan first
>contacted them.
>
>DH

Tsushima is Korean territory illegaly occupied by Japanese
outlaws. As a law-abiding citizen, wouldn't you support
returning Tsushima to its rightful owners?

Sogaard

未読、
2002/08/25 19:05:552002/08/25
To:
YEAH KOREA IS TE CENTRE OF THE UNIVERSE U DORK


Sukgeun Jung

未読、
2002/08/25 21:11:502002/08/25
To:
As I think it seem to be impossible to explain ancient East Asian history to
you based on your knowledge, I will talk about a rather funny story, related
with this thread.

In previous article, I mentioned the gold crow to explain how the Chinese
character denoting 'sun' had a dot in the center. In various mural paintings
drawn during Koguryo (B.C. 37 ~ A.D. 668), we can see the gold crow. The
gold crow has three legs. See a picture of the gold crow at:

http://sarim.changwon.ac.kr/~dodemy/m-samjok.htm
http://www.haerasia.com/introduction/haerasia.html
http://museum.korea.ac.kr/2000/html/korean/181.htm

It was the symbol of the sun to Koreans, whereas a toad was the symbol of
the moon. The legend says that the crow eats fire of the sun. Why did the
crow have three legs? Two legs implies imperfection, so Koreans added
another leg. Koreans cherished the number 3. The most ancient Korean history
book called Chun-bu-kyung also started with the number 3 (1 + 2 = 3). Three
denotes perfection or maturation.

This seemingly forgotten three-leg crow became a news during the 2002
worldcup in Korea. The three-leg crow has been used as the logo of JFA
(Japan Football Association), probably since 1950, which most Koreans had
not noticed. Look at the log at:

http://www.jfa.or.jp/index_e.html

Of course, Japan has a record on the three-leg crow according the book
(Nihon Shogi dated in AD 720), apparently influenced by Koguryo. But Japan
do not have any ancient paintings on the three-leg crow or the related
legend. Why do Japanese try to copy even this kind of ancient logo of
Koreans?

"Daitaro Hagihara" <dai...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:daiyanh-2508...@sdn-ap-007njpennp0291.dialsprint.net...
> In article <euBcqNHTCHA.2140@cpimsnntpa03>, "Bear Khan"


> <bear...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >It's like the cottage industry in Japan where Japanese didn't take
anything
> >from Korea and developed it all on their own.
> >Koreans and Japanese are so stupid.
>

Bear Khan

未読、
2002/08/25 22:00:462002/08/25
To:

This is the same shit Afrocentrists are pulling to make it seem Greeks stole
from the blacks.
Just eat your kim chi and shut up.

"Sukgeun Jung" <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote in message

news:akbv8j$k41$1...@gamera.cbl.umces.edu...

Bear Khan

未読、
2002/08/25 22:04:502002/08/25
To:
Where did you get this 'scientific' study? I'll bet from some book written
by a korean scholar. Korean academics are strictly third rate, even worse
than the Japanese.

"Sukgeun Jung" <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote in message

news:ak9kss$4l4$1...@gamera.cbl.umces.edu...

Bear Khan

未読、
2002/08/25 22:08:212002/08/25
To:
Your bullshit and Daitaro's bullshit belong to the same category:
nationalist shit.

Your inflate your own cultures while belittling others. So Japanese say
Koreans taught them nothing and now some Korean idiot is Koreans taught
Chinese and no the other way around.
And your 'scientific' proof? Some book written by a Korean.
I have all of respected academia behind me when I say Korea didn't give
Chinese their written language.
Only stupid Korean universities teach this shit. And why do Koreans pretend
to have Chinese something? Because Koreans have nothing of their own to be
proud of.
Eat your kim chi and shut up.


"Sukgeun Jung" <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote in message

news:akbv8j$k41$1...@gamera.cbl.umces.edu...

Sukgeun Jung

未読、
2002/08/25 22:14:062002/08/25
To:
I agree. Korean scholars in academia are so stupid that they even can not
fake artifacts like Japanese counterparts such as 'hands of God'.

"Bear Khan" <bear...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:OusuBTKTCHA.2224@cpimsnntpa03...

ugly duckling

未読、
2002/08/25 22:23:472002/08/25
To:
"Bear Khan" <bear...@hotmail.com> wrote in message ...

> Your bullshit and Daitaro's bullshit belong to the same category:
> nationalist shit.

It's a disease that is being continuously spread throughout Asia from
China.

> Your inflate your own cultures while belittling others.

This has been Chinese propaganda for God's knows how long. That's basically
how they puffed themselves up.

> So Japanese say
> Koreans taught them nothing and now some Korean idiot is Koreans taught
> Chinese and no the other way around.

It is because China always discustingly say, "We taught this and that to
inferior Korea and Japan." This kind of thing never happens in Europe.
They help each other out. If it weren't for Chinese shitheads, Asia
would be much better place to live.


> And your 'scientific' proof? Some book written by a Korean.
> I have all of respected academia behind me when I say Korea didn't give
> Chinese their written language.

At the same time, Koreans have been using Chinese characters as long as they
were first invented.

> Only stupid Korean universities teach this shit. And why do Koreans
pretend
> to have Chinese something? Because Koreans have nothing of their own to be
> proud of. Eat your kim chi and shut up.

We have plenty of things to be proud of. Chinese think having longer
history
is a pride. Rest of the world say, "China belongs to Museum."

ugly duckling

ugly duckling

未読、
2002/08/25 22:26:162002/08/25
To:

But definitely not worse than Chinese.

ugly duckling

"Bear Khan" <bear...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:OusuBTKTCHA.2224@cpimsnntpa03...

Sukgeun Jung

未読、
2002/08/25 22:27:292002/08/25
To:
I am not discussing nationalism, but historical facts. I have never denied
that China or Japan has influenced Korea in cultural and other aspects. It
is too obvious that culture and even people mix between neighboring
countries.

I do not see any respected academia behind you, but just hear your growling.
Just show me any fact you could provide.

Even you do not give me kimchi, how dare you say to eat it?

"Bear Khan" <bear...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:u91dKVKTCHA.2152@cpimsnntpa03...

t-d

未読、
2002/08/25 23:30:232002/08/25
To:
"Sukgeun Jung" wrote in message news:...

> I insist that the so-called Chinese character was probably invented and
> developed by Korean, although the populous Chinese also have used it as
> their basic writing systems. I believe the number of population of any
> ethnic group should not be a factor that obscures the origin. I explain some
> evidences.
>
> 1. The original pictographs called 'gab-gol' (bone and shell) or 'bok-sa' in
> Korean were certainly invented during the Yin dynasty (or Shang state, BC
> 1600~BC 1046), although it is uncertain who was the inventor. There is no
> dispute regarding this matter between Korean and Chinese historians. There
> are ample recent evidences that the dominant people of the Yin dynasty was
> Korean, which some Chinese historians also acknowledge.

So what is Korean?

The Mitochondrial Eve must have been Korean.

> 2. Among countries that adopted Chinese character, only Koreans use exactly
> one syllable for one character. Chinese or Japanese used one or more
> syllables for one character. A good example is the sounds denoting the
> numbers. Only Koreans use just one syllable for one number. So, it is very
> easy for Koreans to say any complex numbers quickly.
>
> For another example, the sound for 'white' in Chinese character in 'baek'
> (one syllable) in Korean but 'bai' (two syllable) in Chinese. Regarding the
> character denoting 'head', it is 'doo' in Korean but 'tou' in Chinese. On
> the other hand, it is the same for the character denoting 'mountain' -
> 'shan' in both Korean and Chinese.

What is YOUR definition of syllable?

ㅐ was pronounced as "ai", ㅔ as "ei" in the Middle Korean language,
but these diphtongs were monophthongized.

Kaminarikun

未読、
2002/08/25 23:49:582002/08/25
To:
Sukgeun Jung wrote:
> As I think it seem to be impossible to explain ancient East Asian history to
> you based on your knowledge, I will talk about a rather funny story, related
> with this thread.
>
> In previous article, I mentioned the gold crow to explain how the Chinese
> character denoting 'sun' had a dot in the center. In various mural paintings
> drawn during Koguryo (B.C. 37 ~ A.D. 668), we can see the gold crow. The
> gold crow has three legs. See a picture of the gold crow at:
>
> http://sarim.changwon.ac.kr/~dodemy/m-samjok.htm
> http://www.haerasia.com/introduction/haerasia.html
> http://museum.korea.ac.kr/2000/html/korean/181.htm

If B.C. 37 is the best that you could pull, that doesn't seem old enough
compared with China's.

3 legged symbol of China's Western Zhou Dynasty (1050-771 B.C.).

"Twelve Symbols of Sovereignty Twelve Chinese symbols representing
imperial authority,
that appeared on the sacrificial robes of the emperor since the
Western Zhou Dynasty
(1050-771 B.C.). The twelve symbols include the sun(3 legged crow),
moon, constellation
of three stars, dragons, pheasant, mountains, a pair of bronze
sacrificial cups, waterweed,
grain, flame, ax, and fu. "
"Sun One of the Twelve Symbols of Sovereignty, the sun is a symbol of
enlightenment and is
represented by the legendary three-legged crow on a red disc."
<http://www.sdmart.org/dragonrobes/glossary.html>

"Taoist signs
A few examples found in Taoist literature are considered in the fifth
chapter.
They include the talismans, the twelve heavenly signs and the
twenty-four earthly
responses as described in the Heavenly Red Writing of the Five Ancient
Lords of the
Primal Origin, Perfect Writing in Jade Tablet (Yuanshi wulao chishu
yubian zhenwen)
and the auspicious omens mentioned in the Taishang Exoteric
Explanations of the Three
Heavens (Taishang Santian neijiejing). In the latter, an interesting
interpretation of
history from the beginning of time until the Liu Song dynasty in
provided. It says that,
in the course of time, Laozi manifested himself several times to
assist the emperors.
The Han dynasty had been blessed by Heaven not only with traditional
auspicious
omens, sweet dew, a phoenix, a three-legged crow, and a nine-tailed
fox, but also with
'Perfected-Immortals driving carriages', 'Saintly Assistants' and the
Lingbao Scriptures,
signs of undoubted Taoist origin. A few centuries later, the founding
of the Liu
Song dynasty, heir to the Han, was also blessed by the appearance of
sweet dew,
a nine-tailed fox, a three-horned ox, an elephant, twenty-two pieces
of jade, and a
jug of gold found by a Buddhist monk.
Tizina Lippiello, University of Venice, completed her PhD research at
the Sinological
Institute in Leiden in 1995. "
<http://www.iias.nl/iiasn/iiasn6/eastasia/omen.html>

> It was the symbol of the sun to Koreans, whereas a toad was the symbol of
> the moon. The legend says that the crow eats fire of the sun. Why did the
> crow have three legs? Two legs implies imperfection, so Koreans added
> another leg. Koreans cherished the number 3. The most ancient Korean history
> book called Chun-bu-kyung also started with the number 3 (1 + 2 = 3). Three
> denotes perfection or maturation.
> This seemingly forgotten three-leg crow became a news during the 2002
> worldcup in Korea. The three-leg crow has been used as the logo of JFA
> (Japan Football Association), probably since 1950, which most Koreans had
> not noticed. Look at the log at:
> http://www.jfa.or.jp/index_e.html
> Of course, Japan has a record on the three-leg crow according the book
> (Nihon Shogi dated in AD 720), apparently influenced by Koguryo. But Japan
> do not have any ancient paintings on the three-leg crow or the related
> legend. Why do Japanese try to copy even this kind of ancient logo of
> Koreans?

They do have it. In their shrines and burials.
<http://www.wbcci12.org/steve/Japan2001/JF28.jpg>

ugly duckling

未読、
2002/08/26 0:45:062002/08/26
To:
Actually, Korea has always been in the Blind Spot.

ugly duckling

"Sogaard" <soga...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:akbnp9$2j3g$1...@news.cybercity.dk...

Curtis Desjardins

未読、
2002/08/26 3:56:352002/08/26
To:
"Sukgeun Jung" <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote
> "sunnyday" <l_200...@yahoo.com> wrote
> > Wow, you should submit your papers of your new discovery that will shock
> > the world. Good luck. For the time being, I believe what's already there.
>
> No. We do not need to shock the world. It will progressively be known to the
> world. It takes time to change stereotype or belief of people. You will see
> it during your life time. I guarantee it.

Well, why don't you be the first to say it? There's always one the
skeptics said was a loon, but were later proven wrong. You can be as
famous as the guys that told the everyone the world was not flat, or
that the Earth was not the center of the universe.

Go ahead. Be the pioneer for us flat-earthers.


Curtis.

--
I'm sorry. The card says, "Moops". // It's not "Moops", it's "Moors".
It's a misprint. // Moops. // It's Moors. There's no "moops"! //
Moops. // Moors!

leon yin

未読、
2002/08/26 4:25:052002/08/26
To:
Let's put an end to this shall we?
You from your post know NOTHING about the Chinese language and are
blindly and falsely promoting korean propaganda.

> Among countries that adopted Chinese character, only Koreans use
> exactly one syllable for one character. Chinese or Japanese used one or more
> syllables for one character.

> For another example, the sound for 'white' in Chinese character in 'baek'
> (one syllable) in Korean but 'bai' (two syllable) in Chinese. Regarding the
> character denoting 'head', it is 'doo' in Korean but 'tou' in Chinese. On
> the other hand, it is the same for the character denoting 'mountain' -
> 'shan' in both Korean and Chinese.

FALSE. Chinese is STRICTLY one syllable per character. The Chinese
word white 'bai' is only ONE syllable, it's pronouced like the korean
'bae' NOT pronounced 'ba-yee'. The Chinese word for head, 'tou' is
also only ONE syllable pronounced like the english word 'tow' (as in
tow-truck); not 'to-ooh' as you had so stupidly IMAGINED.

> A good example is the sounds denoting the
> numbers. Only Koreans use just one syllable for one number. So, it is very
> easy for Koreans to say any complex numbers quickly.

FALSE AGAIN. The Chinese characters for numbers were strictly for the
Chinese language (yi/i, er/erh, san, si, wu, liu, qi/chi, ba, jiu,
shi). The Koreans had their own indigenous numbering system but later
used the Chinese because it was more logical and easier to use; to
this day Korea like the Japanese have two systems of numbers: the
native and the Sinitic. The Chinese have always just had THE ORIGINAL
numbering system; characters from 1 to 10. 11 is made by a [10] and a
[1] (shi-yi). the number 32 is made by [three][ten][two] (sanshi-er).
the number 183 = yibai-bashi-san ([one][hundred][eight][ten][three].
This concept was then adopted by the Japanese and Koreans as the
'Sinitic Numeral System.' This isn't some obscure knowledge, it is
pretty common knowledge. A Korean language textbook even teaches two
numbering systems (the native Korean which is polysyllabic and the
Sinitic which is monosyllabic).

The indigenous Korean numbers are the following:
1. Hana
2. Dul 20. Sumol
3. Set 30. Seron
4. Net 40. Mahon
5. Tasot
6. Yasot
7. Ilgop
8. Yodul
9. Ahop
10. Yul
11. Yulhana

They are not monosyllabic. The monosyllabic you were referring to are
the Chinese-derivative numbers: il (yi), ee (er/ni), sam (san), se
(si), etc. (enclosed w/ parenthesis are the Chinese pronounciations,
left open are the Korean).


> 1. The original pictographs called 'gab-gol' (bone and shell) or 'bok-sa' in
> Korean were certainly invented during the Yin dynasty (or Shang state, BC
> 1600~BC 1046), although it is uncertain who was the inventor. There is no
> dispute regarding this matter between Korean and Chinese historians. There
> are ample recent evidences that the dominant people of the Yin dynasty was
> Korean, which some Chinese historians also acknowledge.

No, the Yin Dynasty at that time had a writing system that was already
fairly advanced; it is commonly accepted that the Yin Dynasty had
borrowed the writing script from its predecessor the Xia/Hsia Dynasty.
The Yin Dynasty cannot be Korean since the concept of a Korean
ethnicity or nation had not even existed at that time. I don't know
what you are talking about. It is possible that the Yin Dynasty was
populated by more Central Asian like (Tungusic) peoples, but to say
they were Korean but not Turkish or Mongolian or proto-Chinese is
ridiculous (What are the 'Koreans' then? God?). However, even that is
a stretch considering the Yin Dynasty's territorial boundaries were
confined between the Yellow and Yangtse Rivers (although I agree it is
possible that expeditionary forces and settlements elsewhere existed,
like in the Korean peninsula; but the bulk of the civilization was in
Central China).

Please don't post false Korean national-pride propaganda as
scholarship. If you can find one Chinese character that has a two
syllable pronouciation, may you be god. Until then quit imagining the
Chinese pronouciation by its pinyin spelling. Bai = bae not ba'yee
just like Shanghai is not Shang-Ha-Yee. Quit IMAGINING THINGS that
aren't Korean to be Korean. You have many other things to be proud of
as a nation and a culture, what is the purpose of this obsession in
stating that the five thousands years of Chinese historical
civilization is Korean origin (which has a written history of only two
thousand yrs and the early ones being Chinese sources)?

I'm pissed that you could so 'matter-of-factly' say Chinese language
uses multiple syllables for each character (but not the Korean
language and hence your reasoning that Chinese is Korean-derivative)
when you are so damn wrong. That's like trying to play the piano
starting on the wrong note without transcribing the key signature.
Chinese numbers are Chinese, not Korean or Japanese; it may have
originated in India or the Arab world (even that is unlikely), but
definitely not from the far far East. The NATIVE Korean numbers
(hana, dul, set, net...) are Altaic, and the Chinese/Sintic (yi,
er/ni, san, si..) are not derivatives of your native Korean numbers.


"Sukgeun Jung" <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote in message news:<ak9kss$4l4$1...@gamera.cbl.umces.edu>...

K. Chang

未読、
2002/08/26 5:12:352002/08/26
To:
Chinese pronounces each character with ONLY one syllable. PERIOD. You
previously mentioned that the character for family/household
(pronounced Jia/Chia in Mandarin, and /ga/ in Korean, Cantonese,
Hakka, Fujianese and /ka/ in Japanese and Shanghainese) has a
pictograph of a pig under a house. The Chinese also raised pigs in
the house in ancient times as pigs were a valuable source of protein.
To this day, pigs are a staple of Chinese cuisine, not beef or chicken
as you might imagine from American Chinese restaurants.

All your other points are equally flawed and can be shot down as
simply as above, but I have no time with your amateur ponderings.
This thread is actually very amusing for a Chinese like me to read,
because it shows how little the Koreans are aware of things Chinese
and how little they credit the Chinese's influence on their culture
and civilization. Instead they bicker about what they 'think' Chinese
should be pronounced like and use that as evidence in showing that not
only did the Chinese NOT influence Koreans, but the Koreans instead
fathered Chinese everyday life even in numbers, words like family, and
origin mythology.

At least the Japanese credit their early civilization to the Chinese.
I picked up a Japanese textbook and it mentions that nearly 70% of
Japanese vocabularly is directly borrowed from Chinese or
Chinese-derived. Your ignorance of Chinese civilization and its
linguistic impact on Korean (nearly transforming a completely
unrelated Altaic tongue into a Sinitic variant; Korean is today Altaic
only by linguistic standards of very very basic vocabularly and
greetings; all other tests such as complex grammar, substantial
vocabularly origin, and idioms point it to Chinese) is disturbing to
me.


"Sukgeun Jung" <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote in message

t-d

未読、
2002/08/26 10:01:302002/08/26
To:
In Japan, such remarks as Sukgeun's are categorized as "tondemo"
(preposterous or outrageous).
http://isweb41.infoseek.co.jp/novel/togakkai/ (Japanese)

I show you three examples of Korean "tondemo".

1.
http://www.hanja.com/ (Korean)
"Eastern characters" (aka. Chinese characters ) were made by Koreans
and English words can be traced back to Korean words.

2.
http://www.ancientart.pe.kr/culture/sanggo.htm (Korean)
3. Koreans are the Ancesters of English People
6. Ancient Swords of Korea are Archetypes of All Swords of the World
9. Outer Aliens are fake

3.
The last one is a Korean cult religion. They swallow a book "Hwan Dan
Go Gi".
http://www.jsd.or.kr/a/truth_gz/truth_gz_hi_new/hi_history9000_1.htm
http://www.jsd.or.kr/a/truth_gz/truth_gz_hi_new/hi_history9000_2.htm ... _16.html
Hwanguk [桓國] was the first empire in the world, established by
Koreans a hundred years ago, centered on the Lake Baikal. Sumerians
and Native Americans were moved from Hwanguk. Chiyou [蚩尤] was a
Korean, Hwanung [桓雄] and made war against Huangdi [黃帝]. At that
time China was ruled by Koreans and Yin-Yang-Wu-Xing [陰陽五行] was
made by Koreans...


Character Coding: Big5


masa...@yahoo.com (leon yin) wrote in message news:<265898cc.02082...@posting.google.com>...


> Let's put an end to this shall we?
> You from your post know NOTHING about the Chinese language and are
> blindly and falsely promoting korean propaganda.

> > 1. The original pictographs called 'gab-gol' (bone and shell) or 'bok-sa' in

> "Sukgeun Jung" <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote in message news:<ak9kss$4l4$1...@gamera.cbl.umces.edu>...

> > I add my message on Fu Xi and I-Ching. Fu Xi (or Bokhwi in Korean) is one of

ypark

未読、
2002/08/26 12:48:562002/08/26
To:
Antti Leppanen <alep...@cc.helsinki.fi> wrote in message news:<ak9tv7$2sd$1...@oravannahka.helsinki.fi>...
> Your wildly imaginative post (to put it friendly) may not be worth
> replying, but just in case someone might take you seriously, I'll take
> up only one of your points.

His argument is mostly flawed and would not be taken seriously by
any reputable scholars. However that does not mean that chinese
characters were developed by the ancestors of han chinese exclusively.
If you are not aware of this, I have no need to go on any further as
you are putting at least about 30% of Korean historians and perhaps
90% of mongolian scholars as "lunatic fringe".

It is much like accupuncture. You say this was also invented and
developed by han-chinese exclusively? Bye bye.

Y. Park

Bear Khan

未読、
2002/08/26 13:07:072002/08/26
To:
You're not discussing historical fact but academic theory according to
nationalistic historians in korea.
Why don't you show me that this theory is supported by anyone other than
some stupid korean. Then, I'll take you more seriously.
Why is it that only Korean scholars say Chinese learned from Korea and only
Black scholars say Greeks stole from blacks. why? Because they have
political agendas.

Moron.


"Sukgeun Jung" <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote in message

news:akc3mf$l0d$1...@gamera.cbl.umces.edu...

ypark

未読、
2002/08/26 13:07:192002/08/26
To:
"Sukgeun Jung" <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote in message news:<akar6c$cjk$1...@gamera.cbl.umces.edu>...

> Imaginative post? I think I provided solid four evidences. I may have needed
> only the first one, but you need to falsify all four to refute my argument.
>
> Let me talk about your main point. I think you tried to falsify my 2nd
> evidence, i.e., Koreans use only one syllable but Chinese use more than one
> syllables for one character. Are you insisting that Chinese also use just
> one syllable for every Chinese character like Koreans?

sigh... Whatever...
In any case, Korean pronunciations of chinese characters were
regularized so that one chinese character is pronounced with one
Korean syllable. This happened during Sejong and is closely related
to the development of hangul.

Even the most nationalistic Korean historians(say Yun naehyon) do
not claim what you claim. They are more realistic;peoples ancestral
to or akin to the ancestors of Koreans contributed significantly. The
best candidates for this are peoples like Longshan(yongsan) who lived
in Shantung(Sandong) before han chinese came in. They were called
Tongyi as well.

However your other points are not so crazy even though your
conclusion is certainly overstated ,over-confident and certainly false
as it is.(Yangso culture's connection to han-chinese is indisputable
and they were the ones who carried the bulk of the development of
chinese characters and culture)

This episode clearly indicates your lack of scholarly credentials.
Scientific and scholarly common sense..... these are very important
though you will never realize. Ones who don't have them will never
acquire them.

Y. Park

ypark

未読、
2002/08/26 13:21:452002/08/26
To:
zen...@c4.com (K. Chang) wrote in message news:<1ffee964.02082...@posting.google.com>...
> but the Koreans instead
> fathered Chinese ..

Not Koreans but Mongols and Manchus might have, hehehhe.


> At least the Japanese credit their early civilization to the Chinese.
> I picked up a Japanese textbook and it mentions that nearly 70% of
> Japanese vocabularly is directly borrowed from Chinese or
> Chinese-derived.

Norman-French was introduced into English by norman invasion, so
this means that Normans were Italians!!!! You know what I am talking
about? No.


> Your ignorance of Chinese civilization and its
> linguistic impact on Korean (nearly transforming a completely
> unrelated Altaic tongue into a Sinitic variant;

What????

>Korean is today Altaic
> only by linguistic standards of very very basic vocabularly and
> greetings; all other tests such as complex grammar, substantial
> vocabularly origin, and idioms point it to Chinese) is disturbing to
> me.

Your persistence to babble without knowing anything is even more
disturbing.
What response do you think you will get if you posted this to
sci.lang.

The linguistic affiliation of Korean is disputed. Chinese is one
that is NEVER a candidate for a linguistic relative of Korean.
Even Indo-European language group is sometimes mentioned(nostartic
theory, Greenberg's etc). Some even mention austornesian but never
chinese.

Puahahahaha.

You pieces of little disgusting shit.


Y. Park

ypark

未読、
2002/08/26 13:28:012002/08/26
To:
"Bear Khan" <bear...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<u$BWvQKTCHA.2300@cpimsnntpa03>...

> This is the same shit Afrocentrists are pulling to make it seem Greeks stole
> from the blacks.
> Just eat your kim chi and shut up.

Your little jjangkke pork lard bags should not use khan even as your
pseudo name.

My ancestors were khan, they were koso-kan, marip-kan etc. Your
subhuman ancestors never were. Instead they were little appenditures
in service of Mongol, Turkic, Manchu masters. Reassume your proper
place as a slave.

Y. Park

ypark

未読、
2002/08/26 13:38:112002/08/26
To:
masa...@yahoo.com (leon yin) wrote in message news:<265898cc.02082...@posting.google.com>...
> Let's put an end to this shall we?

Really. I am begging you.

>
> The indigenous Korean numbers are the following:
> 1. Hana
> 2. Dul 20. Sumol
> 3. Set 30. Seron
> 4. Net 40. Mahon
> 5. Tasot
> 6. Yasot

Hehe. Not that others are correct but just that this one is hilarious.

>
> No, the Yin Dynasty at that time had a writing system that was already
> fairly advanced; it is commonly accepted that the Yin Dynasty had
> borrowed the writing script from its predecessor the Xia/Hsia Dynasty.
> The Yin Dynasty cannot be Korean since the concept of a Korean
> ethnicity or nation had not even existed at that time.

Then by the same token it can not be chinese either.

Y. Park

chinks buster

未読、
2002/08/26 13:48:302002/08/26
To:
zen...@c4.com (K. Chang) wrote in message news:<1ffee964.02082...@posting.google.com>...


It is not really soly chink or korean invented these characters. Both
should
give credit. There are part of Chink Characters can't be reconginze by
chink
that used by korean. There are other character can't be recognize by
korean
used by chink. The problem today is Chink does not want to validate
korean invention and chink contiune to claim all characters are owned
by them. This is what "Chink Imperialism" is. Chink should not do
that. You must not do that, Mr. Chink! Mr.Chink asshole must back off
if your race want to be respected.


DOWN WITH CHINK RACE!
DEATH TO CHINESE CULTURE!
DEATH TO CHINESES IMPERIALISM!

1...@abc.com

未読、
2002/08/26 13:48:362002/08/26
To:

Losers argue over things that happened over thousands of years ago
that they had absolutely given no help in creating rather just
inherited.

Winners creates something new that wins the admiration of people
today.

Choose your own legacy.

Yaofeng

未読、
2002/08/26 15:00:542002/08/26
To:
"Sukgeun Jung" <skj...@wam.umd.edu> wrote in message news:<ak9kss$4l4$1...@gamera.cbl.umces.edu>...
> I insist that the so-called Chinese character was probably invented and
> developed by Korean, although the populous Chinese also have used it as
> their basic writing systems. I believe the number of population of any
> ethnic group should not be a factor that obscures the origin. I explain some
> evidences.
>

So what's next? Reverting the current Korean writing method to
Chinese (or Korean) characters which is rightly Korean according to
your logic? The Chinese would love that.

Yaofeng

TK Sung

未読、
2002/08/26 15:37:322002/08/26
To:

"Daitaro Hagihara" <dai...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:daiyanh-2508...@sdn-ap-007njpennp0291.dialsprint.net...
>
> Japan did learn a lot from China via way of Koguryo during early
> stages of Japanese development between 4th and 5th century when
> Japan subjugated a part of Korean penninsula known as Kaya.
>
Stupidity of this thread in general proves that anyone can make up a story
and pass it as history. You need to restudy your Japanese history. This is
not even close to Nihon-shoki fiction, let alone facts.

Austin So (Hae Jin)

未読、
2002/08/26 15:40:152002/08/26
To:
While I agree that Sukgeung's convictions are quite "remarkable", might
I suggest you consider your own japanese "tondemo"...

Makes for far better fantasy than any korean ever could...

Austin

ugly duckling

未読、
2002/08/26 16:05:492002/08/26
To:
You misread him.
He was trying to say that such remarks are "tondemo."

ugly duckling


"Austin So (Hae Jin)" <hae...@ubc.caX> wrote in message
news:3D6A841F...@ubc.caX...

ugly duckling

未読、
2002/08/26 16:08:302002/08/26
To:
"TK Sung" <tks...@wahoo.com> wrote in message

> "Daitaro Hagihara" <dai...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > Japan did learn a lot from China via way of Koguryo during early
> > stages of Japanese development between 4th and 5th century when
> > Japan subjugated a part of Korean penninsula known as Kaya.
> >
> Stupidity of this thread in general proves that anyone can make up a story
> and pass it as history. You need to restudy your Japanese history. This
is
> not even close to Nihon-shoki fiction, let alone facts.

What about Kojiki?
The thing is that Korea and China had been doing alot of history
distortion in the past as well as now.

ugly duckling


Austin So (Hae Jin)

未読、
2002/08/26 16:49:032002/08/26
To:

Whatever your point is, Doohwan, you are not making it clear enough...

The Kojiki is mainly a history of Paekche, and as a number of *western* and
*japanese* scholars will state, both the Nihon-shoki and Kojiki use uniquely
Korean words when read as Idu.

Given this, one must wonder why two fundamental japanese historical
works would have Korean terms...

Austin

Austin So (Hae Jin)

未読、
2002/08/26 16:49:492002/08/26
To:
No...I didn't misread him, Doohwan.

When I wrote "...consider your own japanese 'tondemo'...", I am saying
that he should consider japanese statements which can be categorized as
"fantastic/outrageous".

Yes...Koreans are guilty of statements that are "tondemo", but this is
no different and oftimes pales in comparison to some of the statements
made by japanese which can easily be categorized as "tondemo".

BTW...since when do you believe in Jeun San Do?

Austin


ugly duckling wrote:
> You misread him.
> He was trying to say that such remarks are "tondemo."

> "Austin So (Hae Jin)" <hae...@ubc.caX> wrote in message


> news:3D6A841F...@ubc.caX...
>>While I agree that Sukgeung's convictions are quite "remarkable", might
>>I suggest you consider your own japanese "tondemo"...
>>
>>Makes for far better fantasy than any korean ever could...

>>t-d wrote:

ugly duckling

未読、
2002/08/26 18:14:022002/08/26
To:
What is Jeun San Do, Austin?

"Austin So (Hae Jin)" <hae...@ubc.caX> wrote in message

news:3D6A946D...@ubc.caX...

Jonathan Thor Lim

未読、
2002/08/26 19:35:062002/08/26