These Chinese Names in Japanese and Korean?

[ClassicTVMan1981X]

http://www.scientificjournals.org/journals2007/articles/1063.pdf

Scrolling down to page 21, I wonder what kind of translations we'd get in Japanese and Korean if all these Chinese names cited in the document the above link takes you to, using the same Han characters (called "Kan" in Japan, hence "Kanji") were to be translated using character-based conventions tied to the Romaji (Japanese)/Romaja (Korean) romanization convention.

Usage of Chinese characters outside of China and other Chinese-speaking countries (like Taiwan and Hong Kong) declined for the most part, when Korea adopted the use of Hangeul (also spelled Hangul) while Japan began using Kana characters (hiragana and katakana).

In Korea, for example, Chiang Kai-shek would be called "Jang Gaeseok" using the Revised Romanization convention, but in older textbooks the Korean translation of the same name would be "Chang Kae-suk."

Yangtze Kiang would likewise become "Yangja Gang" in RR, but "Yang-ja Kang" or "Yang-cha Kang" in older Korean language textbooks.

Also, Guangzhou (Canton) would be "Gwangju" or "Kwang-ju" or "Kwang-chu" from the same Han characters. In Japan, however, Canton would be transliterated as "Koshu" from the same Han, or Kan, characters. When the Japanese occupied China from 1905-45, certain Chinese place names were also romanized in the Kanji/Romaji convention, such as the Manchurian cities of Jilin and Dalian becoming Kirin and Dairen, using the same Han characters. Some of the Japanese names were also used in the Postal Map romanization system.

~Ben

[Tiana]

I think it's just a matter of transcription, so those names would be transcribed into a sound system that is used in the country concerned, namely Japan in your question. To put it another way, Japanese would on the whole read Chinese names in Japanese fashion.

You can of course have variations of the same names within the same country, and this is due to the fact that the country may use different transcription systems at different times (or even at the same time). The variations though superficially look different from one another, they should represent the same pronunciation if the pronunciation system has not changed through time.

[davoosh]

Japanese and Korean have their own readings for Kanji/Hanja which historically derive from the Chinese pronunciations (although somewhat adapted, and they often represent an older stage of Chinese pronunciation due to the time when the Hanzi were brought into Japanese/Korean).

So as you mention 廣州 (guangzhou), 廣 is pronounced 'ko' in Japanese and 州 'shu'. With Japanese however, the Hanzi/Kanji often have multiple pronunciations - one based directly on the historical Chinese pronunciation, and one which is native Japanese words imposed onto a Hanzi/Kanji. When reading Chinese names, I imagine a Japanese person would use the Chinese-based (onyomi) readings for each character. (Or they might just try and approximate however the person in questions pronounces it...)

With Korean I believe only Chinese-based readings occur for Hanja.

Variants like Jang Gaeseok, Chang Kae-suk are essentially just transliteration systems trying to describe the same thing.

[xiaocai]

Usage of Chinese characters outside of China and other Chinese-speaking countries (like Taiwan and Hong Kong) declined for the most part

!!!

And i'm really quite confused by the examples you gave. Can you write the names in their respective original scripts so we can tell the difference? Like, are "Jang Gaeseok" and "Chang Kae-suk" different in Hangul or just two different ways to romanise the same name in Hangul?

[陳德聰]

I'm confused about the question... You want to know the Korean and Japanese "translations" of those Chinese names, but in romanizations??

If you take the Sino-Korean and Sino-Japanese pronunciations of the characters and romanize them, you'll just get something that mildly resembles the way a Korean or Japanese speaker would pronounce the names if they couldn't speak Chinese but could read the characters in their "Chinese" pronunciation...

Take the first name on the list...

Chinese: 洪惟仁

Pe̍h-ōe-jī: Âng Úi-jîn

Pinyin: Hóng Wéirén

Hangeul: 홍유인 [Hong Yu-in]

Hiragana: こう・いじん [Kou Ijin]

Jang Gaeseok and Chang Kae-suk are just two different ways to romanize 장개석.

[Hofmann]

You wonder what kind of "translations" you'd get? Probably Hepburn for Japanese and Revised Romanization for Korean. Except some Korean names are rendered in some conventional way.