Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Economist underestimates Korean interest in Sea of Japan.

Driving around the internet today I came across this paragraph on The Economist online:
WHENEVER the English claim the Channel, Frenchmen simply shrug, and go on calling it La Manche. Koreans describe their two seas as Western and Eastern, but if others want to call them the Yellow Sea and the Sea of Japan, who cares? The Iranians are not so easy going. The gulf that happily separates them from the Arabs is Persian, now and for ever, and a curse on anyone who differs.

The article is about the debate over the "Persian Gulf" and what it should be called, and certainly a naming dispute in the Middle East will certainly attract the attention of the English-speaking world quicker than something in Asia, but it's interesting to note that Koreans certainly do care "if others want to call them the Yellow Sea and the Sea of Japan" and have gone to some extreme measures to draw attention to its naming and territorial disputes.

A 2008 survey showed that 95% of Koreans believe the body of water should be called the East Sea. Not only in Korean, mind you, where it's called 동해, but in English as well. A KBS article recently noted that 55% of maps in a large collection refer to it as "Sea of Japan" with only 6% calling it "East Sea," and rather than acknowledging precedent, considered it an area for improvement. Around that time it was announced through a press release from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade that a new president of the "Society for East Sea" had been elected.

"There is no Sea of Japan in the world" said a full-page advertisement in the Washington Post last year, one of several such ads over the past couple years taken out by singer Kim Jang-hoon and friends.



The Korea Herald wrote up the occassion:
The ad expressed regret that the article had "a small but significant error," saying, "This body of water has been referred to as the East Sea by many nations over the past 2,000 years."

Remarkable, I had no idea people were talking about Asia in English 2,000 years ago. Some Koreans do consider it an "error" for English-speakers to refer to the body of water as "Sea of Japan," and some are quite aggressive on the point, even though they lack English proficiency. In addition to taking out ads in newspapers, some have taken out ads on the side of buses and petitioned US lawmakers to either stop calling it Sea of Japan or to start include "East Sea" in maps.

I blog about the Sea of Japan every now and again---you can read my thoughts on it here, among other places---and consider it arrogant to not only dictate against precedent how a foreign language refers to a body of water, but to suggest as an alternative a name just as exclusive.
The Northeast Asian History Foundation will exhibit historical maps that support Korea's claim that the term "Sea of Japan" should be replaced with "East Sea" or "Sea of Korea."

The East Sea is, in fact, east of Korea. I won't even entertain suggestions of "Sea of Korea." They're very mindful of foreign maps, but don't do a very good job of monitoring their own, lending support to the idea that you shouldn't try to control a language you don't understand.


A poster advertising the 2012 Yeosu Expo in my former school.

Interesting that The Economist mentions the English Channel as well, because that's something commenters mentioned on my site. Here's what commenter Keith had to say last fall:
Each language has its own names for geographic locations and this should be respected by others. For us English speakers the body of water that lies between Korea, Russia, and Japan is called the Sea of Japan. It has always been that way since Commodore Perry opened up Japan (and I assume long before that).

The body of water that lies between Great Britain and France is called the English Channel. The French calls it "La Manche" (The Sleeve). I speak French and when I am in France I don't call it "The English Channel" when speaking French. I call it La Manche. When I speak English, it is called the English Channel, not the Sleeve. I do not upset any French person when I say English Channel when speaking English. They respect that it is part of the English language. Why can't Koreans be civilized and mature and respect others like the French? (snicker)

A high school student picked up on that comment and, incorrectly, tried to dispute it in the JoongAng Daily:
First of all, in his idea that the name depends on what language we use, it seems he thinks that calling the name “Sea of Japan” is something natural in English. However, the name of an area is very important when it is directly related to the possession of a certain territory. Actually, the sea area is shared by Korea, Japan and Russia.

If foreigners don’t know the historical background, they are likely to think Japan possesses the sea as its national territory. Isn’t that a problem?

Furthermore, he used the example of La Manche, which is odd to use for this subject.

Actually, La Manche in French means that the strait looks like a sleeve. In the meaning there is no concept of the possession of the concerned area. So, calling it La Manche or the English Channel doesn’t matter.

However, there is a different problem with the East Sea and the Sea of Japan. The latter implies the ownership of the area.

The "West Sea" is a little different, and indeed people used to point to the use of Yellow Sea in English in Korea as evidence of Korea cowering to China and trying to guilt-trip-slash-bully Japan. "West Sea" is used more frequently now, and that's something I noticed especially last fall during the naval confrontations between North and South Korea, but take a look at this map on Korea.net, the official website of the Republic of Korea:



In an earlier post that I can't find this second I said I'd actually be okay with a movement in Korea to refer to the body of water as "East Sea" in English, while still acknowledging the internationally-recognized name "Sea of Japan." However, though nearly all Koreans believe it should be "East Sea" in English, and many insist on foreign maps printing both names, clearly in Korea it's "East Sea" or nothing, and that's something I can't get behind.

18 comments:

holterbarbour said...

What's really interesting e is to go to the "Sea of Japan" entry on Wikipedia and do a mouse-over of all the different languages having translations of that article. Almost every single one, whether Kiswahli, Turkish, Malay, whatever... they all use some variation of "Japan" in the name. I say "almost" because I can't read Thai, Hindi or Arabic script (but I can read Russian, Hebrew, and Chinese scripts to the extent that I can make out "Japan"). I'm willing to put money on them using "Japan" as well.

Perhaps more correctly, "THERE IS NO EAST SEA IN THE WORLD, ONLY SOME LOCAL VARIANT OF 'SEA OF JAPAN'"

Korean Rum Diary said...

I waver between amused and frustrated by the constant nationalist stupidity of people in this country. Really. I've said it before (along with you and countless others) - who the fuck do they think they are trying to change words and phrases in the English language?

Stafford said...

Different countries can call different things as they see it. I have no problem calling the sea of Japan The East Sea, as long as you call the Yellow Sea the West sea.
You can't mix and match.
Every time it comes up in class I say to my students that the most common name is Sea of Japan, and Korea uses East Sea. Pick one and stick with it. The use of East Sea with Yellow Sea holds an element of duplicity to it if you ask me.

NHJ said...

As long as everybody is clear as to whom the sea belongs to, then there shouldn't be any problem...Which brings us to Dokdo. I really think if Dokdo wasn't an issue, the Koreans would leave "the sea of Japan" alone.
And if the body of water is shared by the three countries like someone suggested, well "the east sea" isn't an appropriate name either.

Mike said...

God. Why don't they just have a freaking war and get it decided? Worked for the US and Mexico.

Rules:
No slapping.
No biting.
No crying.
No weapon systems made by other countries, even if you've paid for them.

Nik Trapani said...

인도양 should probably be fixed lest more confusion ensue in Korea and irk certain Sri Lankens while perusing Korean media. Perhaps they would prefer, in korean, 우리가중심에있는양. same for 멕시코만 which I know for a fact sends 98% of Americans in a rage when they're discussing it in Korean.

Softbank Sucks said...

It seems that at times in English, we refer to a marginal sea by the restricting strip of land that forms it. Curse the Pacific Plate for subducting! If Japan did not exist, there would be no Sea of Japan - it would simply be the Pacific Ocean. But, I have a feeling that there would be some people on some little peninsula that would want that body of water renamed as well.

chuck said...

wish the Koreans would take heed to not only your mentioning of what the French call the English Channel but what they Germans call the Baltic Sea in German, they call it the Ostsee or literally the East Sea and dont care what the rest of the world calls it.

I knew all those years in middle school, high school and undergrad school taking German would pay off at some point :>)

Bob said...

It is true that the Yellow Sea is called the Seo Hae in Korean, but many Koreans also call it the Hwang Hae (Yellow Sea). Never, ever say Il Bon Ui Hae (Sea of Japan).

Puffin Watch said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Puffin Watch said...

(lets try that again)

People who take out full page ads in the WSJ to argue a point:

- Homeopaths who think they've been screwed out of the Nobel prize for Medicine

- Irish companies trying to sell perpetual motion machines

- Heaven's Gate cultists who think a spaceship is following a comet

- Transcendental Meditation types who urge world governments to "ohmmmmm" their way to world peace

- Koreans pissed off at Japan

Doing so makes you not a player but a parody.

asadalthought said...

Seems like everything that needs to be said has been said on this issue here, so I what add anything related to that.

I will point out (whilst chuckling) that on the korea.net map, Dokdo is approximatley the size of Incheon. Classic.

Also, the Middle East is Asia. The area containing Korea, China, Japan etc is East Asia or North East Asia.

Well done Brian for calling out the Economist on this, by the way, as it really wouldn't have been that difficult for them to find out what Koreans really think about the name Sea of Japan. I'd have thought a 2 second Google search would do the trick.

Brian said...

Thanks for the kind words, asadalthought.

Really surprised they would bring up an example they didn't fully research.

I'm also surprised about two other things:
1) Nobody brought up that the Korea.net map just shows "Korea," not North and South.

2) Nobody said "Economist underestimates Brian's interest in Sea of Japan," since I blog on this more than most Koreans.

This has everything to do with Dokdo, though. Truth be told I don't care who gets the islets, but when I hear about Koreans mailing American legislators about "Sea of Japan" and protesting crap and putting stuff in papers, it makes me nearly as bat-shit crazy as them in my response.

Thanks, too, asadalthought for pointing out the Middle East / Asia thing. I should have been more specific. What I meant to imply is that people would be more worked up about people in the Middle East crazy about a name than they would about East Asians.

holterbarbour, you're right that a lot of languages call it "Sea of Japan." I wonder if Koreans get worked up about them, but for now I won't blog about that because I don't want to be responsible for ads appearing in papers all around the globe.

holterbarbour said...

asadalthought: I looked at the korea.net map (http://korea.net/korea/kor_loca.asp?code=L01#) and clicked on the image to enlarge. In addition to the Liancourt Rocks being disproportionately large, I find it even more interesting that the enlarged version excludes Jeju-do.

SuNgIk said...

When I clicked the map, Jejudo was still there...

But still - as someone who is from Jejudo, the whole Dokdo controversy and making Dokdo analagous to Hawaii or any other important island makes me angry.

holterbarbour said...

SuNgIk: Must be something with the browser or screen resolution. I checked again--Jeju was still missing and the new window didn't allow scrolling.

However, when I saved the image to my computer and opened it in a separate program, Jeju was indeed there.

Let's chalk that up to poor website design.

Muckefuck said...

I think it is time for Germans, Austrians and the Swiss to abolish the name "Bodensee" for that body of water that borders all three countries. They have to start using the anglicised "Lake Constance" in German.

Hans geht im "Lake Constance" schwimmen.

Can't Koreans see how fucking retarded they are?

Brian said...

SuNgIk, as I wrote in a post a little while ago about a Dokdo ad, my former students would often include Dokdo on their Korean maps but leave off Jeju. I've always wondered if Jeju residents resented all the attention.

Anyway, I thought people might be interested to know that "East Sea" is considered a hot issue by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade:

http://www.mofat.go.kr/english/political/hotissues/eastsea/index.jsp