earticle

영어

One of the distinctive features of Korean language is that it has a fine hierarchical regimentation of language uses, perhaps finer than English, Chinese or Japanese. If English language uses have a hierarchical structure they are to be thick. You may respond to any of your male colleagues often by saying either “Yes, Sir” or “Yes, John”. But Korean speakers attend to the fine grades of differences of social positions of a speaker and a hearer and they show the respect of the difference by adding or dropping relevant suffixes of verbs which Korean language has developed. For example, one year difference would affect how you choose a suffix of verbs you use to speak to your hearer and two year difference often leads to the adoption of still another fitting suffix of the same verb. One year criterion works not only in army barracks, school dormitories but also in government offices, business sectors. Korean speaking people have been taught to use this finely regimented hierarchical language.I try, in this paper, to develop the idea that hierarchical regimentation of Korean language uses is not humane. I offer the main argument for the thesis as what follows: How could one justify the hierarchical regimentation of a language like Korean? Only if there is an essential structure in which the fine grades of differences of social positions of all the people are distinct; The essentialism here involved is not plausible. And I may add that language is to be used for the purposes of communication, rationalization and expression. If true, language use is a genuine art of liberation or humanization. Any overt hierarchical language tends to damage those purposes and more to enforce those oppressive elements already existing in the community. Then, a hierarchical language is to defeat its own purpose.