4. Conclusion The
author has so far reviewed the ‘making principles’
and the graphic shapes of Hangeul. As Hangeul
is a very conspicuous writing system in various
aspects and its distinctions were derived from
the unique principles of making graphemes, he
was bound to focus his discussion on these circumstances.
In order to grasp a unique thing rightly and to
describe it correctly, a unique standpoint and
a theory suitable for it are needed. Yet in the
case of Hangeul, it is pity that it has been described
with a general theory and general terms in spite
of its uniqueness. As a natural result, it is
not easy to grasp and describe rightly the distinctions
of Hangeul. If Hangeul by nature has a scientific
distinction, its description and application should
be scientific. Only this attitude can reveal the
true value of Hangeul on the whole. Finally, by
ascertaining this point again through the discussion
of the sequence of consonants and vowels, he will
put an end to this paper.
The sequence of consonants and vowels prescribed
in the present <The Orthography of Hangeul>
is different from that of ?Hunmin-Jeongeum?. Take
a sequence of consonants for example, the present
sequence is ‘ㄱㄴㄷㄹㅁㅂㅅㅇ...’, but that of ?Hunmin-Jeongeum?
was ‘ㄱㅋ?ㄷㅌㄴ...’. The latter was based upon the
theory at that time. In those days initial sounds(=onsets,
consonants) were classified according to the point
of articulation(牙/舌/脣/齒/喉) and the manner of articulation(全淸/次淸/不淸不濁),
and the sequence was determined by these two standards.
What is important is that the sequence was theoretical
at the time of the invention. Learning the theoretical
sequence of consonants and vowels is not to know
only the sequence, but to practice the theory
involved in the sequence altogether. The theoretical
thing, being logical, is easy to teach and learn.
The present sequence was not determined by a specific
theory, but by a simple observance of the traditional
sequence which had first appeared in ?Hunmongjahwe?(訓蒙字會)
and had changed little by little. It is problematic
that the writing principle was not followed by
a traditional principle but was changed, even
though the sequence of consonants and vowels closely
related to the writing principle was traditionally
observed. In other words, before the revision
of the orthography the sequence of letters had
had a theoretical basis, but the revision of the
orthography deprived the sequence of its theoretical
and logical basis.
In ?Hunmongjahwe? consonants and vowels were classified
into three groups: eight letters for both initial
and final sounds, eight letters for only initial
sounds, and remaining letters for medial sounds.
That kind of classification was plausible enough
in consideration of the orthography at that time,
that only eight letters might be used in syllable
final position(終聲). Additionally, even in the
inner sequence of three groups a coherent principle
could be ascertained. For example, the sequence
of ‘ㄱㄴㄷㄹㅁㅂ...’ was determined according to the
place of articulation and the sequence of making
letters. Thus, it was very theoretical, and learning
such a sequence could be effective in the study
of various areas--the sequence of making letters,
the orthography, and the phonological theory at
that time, etc.
In the present orthography, all consonants--not
just eight consonants--can be used in syllable
final position. Therefore, now the classification
into two groups and the determination of the alphabetical
sequence according to it as shown in ?Hunmongjahwe?,
has no theoretical basis and meaning. In fact,
the present sequence is somewhat different from
that of ?Hunmongjahwe?. In the latter it was ‘ㅋㅌㅈ(?ㅇ)
ㅊㅎ’, but now it is changed as ‘ㅈㅊㅋㅌㅍㅎ’. In short,
the sequential standard of the point articulation(牙-舌-脣-齒-喉)
has been broken. As a result the present sequence
of consonants and vowels is hard to remember for
both beginners and specialists. Because it is
not a theoretical sequence, we cannot logically
comprehend it and must unconditionally memorize
it. Even if we have memorized it with great difficulty,
it is no more than a mechanical memorization of
a sequence.
This is the result caused by neglecting the distinctions
of Hangeul. Hangeul is a writing system based
upon a scientific theory, and even though each
of its graphic shapes has theoretical information,
the present sequence has almost overlooked this
point. To cite an example, there is a common trait
in the sounds represented by the letters ‘ㄴ, ㄷ,
ㄸ, and ㅌ’,namely, that they have the same point
of articulation. This information was reflected
in the making of Hangeul, and is therefore expressed
in the shapes of graphemes. It follows that the
graphic shapes are easy to learn and some other
side-effects are expected, if these letters(=graphemes)
are arranged in parallel in the determination
of the sequence of consonants.
The true face of Hangeul could be revealed, if
we rightly understood the principles of making
graphemes. The principles of making graphemes
of Hangeul have not been finished yet. As long
as Hangeul is used, they could sustain their life
force and value as its basic principles of working.
Therefore, study and efforts to understand completely
and rightly the principles of making graphemes
should be continued forever. |