동문서답 / East Question, West Answer

동문서답(하다)dong-mun-seo-dap(hada) Is a great phrase which simply does not exist in English. It captures a very Asian habit of not answering the right question.
It literally means "East question, WEst answer" and you apply it to whenever someone gives an answer to a question which is different to what they have been asked. This can happen often and it's great that there's a word for it. Now, when someone doesn't listen to what I say, I can tell them 동문서답 했군요dong-mun-seo-dap haer-gun-yo.

With a little bit of creative translation, this phrase can have an added meaning for English speakers. In the west, the questions we ask are often completely different to the ones Koreans pose. Just think about the Klassic Korean question when you meet someone: "How old are you?"
Same with the answers, some questions in Korea can elicit a (frustrating) Eastern response. The other day I met a journalist and asked "what newspaper do you work for?" She answered: "A very famous one in Seoul". I asked her for the name again and she said I wouldn't know it because I'm foreign! That's the whole goddamn reason why I asked!!!!
This is a classic case of "West question, East answer"! don't you think?

Another Klassic West question, East Answer

Me: Where do you live? (to a student in Daegu)
Terrified student on the first day: I live in Daegu
Me: Really? Where in Daegu?
Terrified student on the first day: (embarassed smile) I don't know

For other examples of crossed wires, weird questions and why Koreans answer questions so strangely, have a look at this post.

Consideration and Kindness

One of the best things about Korea is the kindness and helpfulness of the people here. People go out of their way to help a confused or lost foreigner. Being "considerate" is one of the most valued character traits in Korea. At dinner the reason everyone is so keen to pour you another glass or stock you up on whatever's been finished is because they want to show they are thinking about you.

But, they're not really thinking about you. They're thinking about a foreigner, or rather what they think a foreigner is, wants, likes and doesn't like. They even try to guess what you know and don't know. If you've been in Korea a while, you might have noticed that although they are extremely congenial and polite, sometimes they just don't answer a question. Especially if it's about something which they think you don't know or do.

In fact, Koreans spend so much time worrying about what you're thinking that they don't actually hear the words you're saying. A prime example of this was in one of my English classes with one of my best students (he improved amazingly in just 2 months). I told him "At the weekend we rented a car and drove to Namhaedo". Bear in mind this is a high level class... He pulled an extremely confused face, didn't say anything for a while and then "But taking a taxi there is very expensive". Before you all go and say "he didn't understand you..." Let me just point this out: "rent a car" in Korean is 렌트 카ren-tuh caa Furthermore I never mentioned a taxi which is also the same word in Korean. He simply could not believe that a foreigner could drive in Korea, let alone rent a car. He was being "considerate" and showed concern at what he assumed was something very irrational (but logical because Im a foreigner).

Another experience happened on a train, fair enough, my Korean is terrible and in all likelihood wrongly phrased. Also my question was in a way answered. I asked the conductor on a train "기차는 대구 역에 가요?"gi-cha-neun daegu-yeok-e ga-yo? / does the train go to daegu station? He proceded with a long list of all the stops between where we were and Seoul including what time the train got there. So fair enough, he did actually tell me that it was stopping at the station, but he didn't answer the question. So my response was "how weird!" What was a Korean friend's take on all of this? "how considerate!". He was covering all the angles and thinking about me, not actually listening to what I was saying, but rather trying to help what he saw as a lost foreigner.

I have had countless experiences like this, and it's only now that I've realised when Koreans take a long time to answer something, or give a strange answer, it's not about understanding. They are trying to fit an answer to you, not to your question. Korean culture (and in my experience, most culture except for the Anglo-Saxon/Northern European culture) is more about performing social function than giving information. Which explains why we Brits are sometimes taken aback by how respectful other cultures are, but it also explains why they talk so bloody-much!

REPEAT!!!

Some days this is really how I feel they teach us, and this is how they the way we learn. The only way is to constantly, repetitively and ceaselessly chip away at the mind with example sentences. No context, no variety, no interest, and as long as you can write an example sentence, you "know" it.

This is a sketch I did while both my teachers failed extremely successfully at explaining a semantically complex ending. "Look the students don't understand! Lets give them 3 hours of explanation and then command them to make example sentences off the top of their heads. Then give more explanations and then make them create more example sentences. It doesn't work? Let's do the same thing tomorrow and again and again until they just say 'yes we understand' to make us stop."

Guess how many students actually tried making example sentences? 2 out of 14. So 2 out of 14 actually did something. The rest? Silence. And because there was no context it was just a mad guessing game anyway.

Some days I just want a refund

...the dog ate my homework and other excuses

So today I’m missing the first class and I’m going to use various excuses, but there is one reason in particular. Every so often we spend the first lesson of the day practising rote-learned dialogues from the textbook.

I am going to stay as culturally neutral as possible, but this is a total waste of time. I waste more than 30 minutes memorising it of my free time, I waste 2 minutes in class reciting it, and then I waste the next 48 minutes of class listening to other people saying the same thing over and over again. This is a totally outmoded and anachronistic learning method.

Lets go back 2000 years to the time of the great Roman poets, when there were no computers, there were no books and there was very little paper. In these times, the only way to remember large quantities of new vocabulary was to put them into your head, by literally learning books off by heart. Instead of referring to a page in your notebook, you could go into your memory and find the right lines etc, or even more likely, be reminded of the word when you hear it.

When you were a child do you remember misunderstanding songs, and only realising what the words meant later in life, but you could sing the song perfectly anyway? Learning things off by heart does not help you to use and understand new vocabulary. It helps you to recite the things that you have learned off by heart. Anyone can learn any group of sounds together, you don’t need to know what they mean in order to do this.

This teaching method is totally irrelevant to modern day life, is highly inefficient and ultimately pretty much useless. It restricts you to only the learned conversations, it makes you unable to put your own sentences together and it destroys your confidence in the language. By learning like this you will never understand anyone because people don’t speak the exact same dialogues as in the textbook.

그래서 선생님, 내가 결석 했다geureseo, seonsengnim, naega gyeolseok haedda / check google translate to see what that means

Why are Koreans so pedantic?

One of the mainstays of the Korean course so far has been the "dreaded" 받아쓰기badasseugi, better known as a dictation in English. We get dictated 10 sentences at random speeds which we have to write down. These sentences all come from the textbook, either from the selection of example sentences or from the dialogues. So the most studious of students just memorise the lot. According to the teacher, the purpose of this test is to improve writing and spelling.

The total score is out of 10 and even the smallest mistake means the whole sentence is wrong. This is something which has always baffled me. Because of the time constraints and speed writing a learner of a foreign language is naturally going to make silly mistakes ie: -먄-myan instead of -면-myeon. I know how to spell that, I just was in an unnatural situation and lost concentration! Yet they never take this into account.

Yesterday though there was a small mark on the paper, which appeared to change 니까-nikka to 나까-nakka / looks worse in English doesn't it?. An equally silly mistake, however the fact is that with a little bit of inspection it was obvious that this was just a mark. The teacher was looking so hard for mistakes, that even when they weren't there she found them. By focusing on this kind of error it shows that she is expecting students to make mistakes, whatever the reason! If they were actually testing spelling, then surely they should focus on difficult to spell words like the cursed "괜찮아"gwaenchana / it's ok instead?

As a teacher doing this kind of task, I would take away marks accordingly, accounting for the different kind of mistakes. But in Korea wrong is wrong, no discussion, justification and to the Westerner it seems just overly pedantic.

But in a way, they do have a point, even the silliest and smallest errors can cause confusion, at the very least! But why be so intolerant in such a controlled environment? Why the lack of task focusing?

I can think of a few reasons:

• Historical: When Koreans wrote in Chinese characters, even the smallest mistake can totally change the meaning of a whole word, not like a spelling mistake which often just looks weird. This tradition of learning and teaching has been inherited by modern Korean.
• Linguistic: Korean, in it's nature is very "pedantic" There are literally thousands and thousands of words which have extremely specific meanings. You don't know that word and you can't say the phrase. Same with the endings that they use. There are many different endings which have extremely specific, one off, meanings: You use it wrong and you can insult someone. So be careful from the beginning.
• Cultural: Mistakes are seen differently here. People will go to extreme lengths to avoid making a mistake, to the extent that they will actually remain silent when they don't know the answer to a question. Extremely rude in Western culture, totally normal here.

Perhaps then, by our standards, Koreans are "pedantic" when it comes to tests, but this is clearly just a cultural perspective. They find it equally difficult and confusing when an English native-speaker is completely "tolerant" of even the smallest mistakes they make! Finally a lasting testament to Korean accuracy can be seen in the Tripitaka Koreana, a collection of Buddhist texts written in Hanja: 52,382,960 chinese characters and not one error!

Just one of the reasons why I love learning Korean

It’s a bit long, but keep reading, and you might understand why I chose the title. By studying Korean at a university, I’m not just learning a set of words or a grammatical code by which to interpret them and I’m not just learning about Korean culture and my culture. I am also learning about how Koreans see their own language and culture and by extension all language and all culture.

Unsurprisingly the Korean text book is divided into the same sections in every chapter, one of which deals with grammar and another vocabulary. Today’s grammar was about turning verbs into nouns and using them as the subject of a sentence: “Swimming is difficult” as opposed to “I swim with difficulty”. This can be done in different ways in Korean, but today we dropped the -다-da and added -기-gi to the stem: 수영하다 > 수영하기suyonghada > suyonghagi / to swim > swimming. Then to make it clear it’s the subject added the subject particle -가ga. 수영하-기-가 어려워요suyongha-gi-ga oer-yeoweo-yo

In fact we had already learned this -기-gi form in the context of 때문에ddaemunae / because of . So 수영하기 때문에 피곤해요suyonghagi ddemunae pigonheyo becomes because of swimming I am tired (not great English, but you understand it!). Now as a student of European languages and culture, it seems obvious that 수영하기suyeonghagi / to swim can be used anywhere in a sentence where you would use a noun. As the subject, object, indirect object, following a preposition etc. etc. So I was a little confused.

Why teach it as the subject only. Can this -기-gi form only be used as the subject? My European brain was instantly applying some kind of order or grammitcal pattern to this and I began to question the the whole schema, why would they teach us this in only one case when you can learn all of them at once? (see how latin is taught for reference). So I asked the teacher “can -기-gi nouns only be the subject?”

Can you guess her answer? If you’re Korean you probably can, if you’re European, you probably can’t!

She told me “this(어렵다oer-yeopda / to be difficult) is an intransitive (descriptive) verb (ie, it takes only a subject eg. sleep), so it can only be the subject”. ARRRGHHH!!! She didn’t answer the question. She saw my problem in terms of only the example sentence. My question on the other hand dealt with rules and grammar, and not the example sentence.

This experience highlights the day-to-day communication breakdowns that occur when West meets East. In the context of language learning it specifically demonstrates how Eastern and Western views of language differ. Essentially for a Korean 수영하기suyonghagi / swimmingas subject, object etc. etc. is a different 수영하기suyonghagi / swimmingevery time. Where for the European it’s always a “gerund” (or whatever name we choose to give it). With these parallel views, everything must seem different, depending on the language you speak and the culture you grew up in. And that’s why I chose the title!