In recent years, English has spread throughout the world and become a language used in various multicultural cultures and communities, transforming its status from an Anglo-Saxon language to one that is used globally as an internationally accepted form of communication. Studies have shown that the exposure of English and to other native languages “has come to affect the linguistic landscape of these regions” (Fayzrakhmanova, 2016, p. 2). This contact between English and other languages has increased with English being studied in Expanding Circle countries such as South Korea, where English is taught in schools and valued among corporations for its economic value. An interesting linguistic phenomenon surfaces. The local language itself is Englishised while English is nativised in the local language’s context (Rüdiger, 2014). Words and aspects from one language have meaning in another language, giving birth to translingual phenomena (Ray, 2015). In this essay, I will examine Koreanised English in South Korea, also known as Konglish, as a case study for translingual phenomena. Konglish, a creative mix created by the contact of English and the local language Korean, is widely frowned upon when used in the public sphere, for fear that it will taint the ‘purity’ of the Korean language (McPhail, 2017). However, the phenomenon of World Englishes appearing like Konglish may not necessarily a negative one. I will argue in my essay that Konglish is a unique and valuable cultural artifact born from translingual phenomena which reflects the local South Korean culture.
English originally became prominent in South Korea because of its practicality. With the English language being acknowledged as a lingua franca globally, South Korea placed great emphasis on teaching it as a foreign language. Teaching a new generation of South Koreans English would give them an economical edge, as they would be able to communicate with international peers.
In her essay ‘Koreanized English word from perspectives of Korean-English language contact’, linguist Yulia Fayzrakhmanova writes that South Korea spent “up to 20 trillion won” on English education in 2006. South Korean corporations also provided incentives for employees to improve their English language proficiency by sending them to English programmes and even conducting interviews in English (Fayrakhmanova, 2016, p. 4). South Korean firms recognise the importance of English proficiency in the global marketplace. They favoured employees with better English proficiency, which would translate to better communication skills with foreign companies where they would use English as a common language to communicate. English came to prominence in South Korea as it was economically beneficial for Koreans to learn the language.
Koreanised English, or Konglish, is a result of the contact of the English Language and Korean. Konglish can be defined as “a blend of Korean and English found throughout South Korea” (McPhail, 2017).
With the increased emphasis placed on English language proficiency by both the state and the corporation, it is no surprise that English has increasingly pervaded South Korea’s linguistic space. More Koreans are familiar with English language words than before (Rüdiger, 2014). Sofia Rüdiger, a doctoral candidate for the Department of English Linguistics and the University of Bayreuth, states that the result of English pervading into Korea’s linguistic space has resulted in the Korean language becoming Englishised, and English being nativised to South Korea’s culture (Rüdiger, 2014, p. 12). This is caused by an “immense influx of English loanwords” (Rüdiger, 2014, p. 12). This borrowing of English words to fit South Korea’s culture has resulted in the translingual phenomenon of Koreanisation, where English words imported into Korean take on their local flavour and meaning, independent of their original meaning.
The Koreanisation of English words stems from linguistic phenomena such as “semantic and morphological changes; semantic shift, creative compounding, mixed-code combination, and clipping” (Kim, 2012, p. 15). An example of a semantic shift would be the Koreanisation of the phrase “Fighting!”. While it has an existing meaning in English, in Korea, “Fighting!” means “You can do it” and similar forms of encouragement. It is Koreanised; it does not retain the original meaning of “Fighting” in English. The word “Fighting” is also Koreanised in the aspect where it comes to embody the Korean spirit of teamwork and “cooperation for success” (Fayzrakhmanova, 2016, p. 8). This is an example of translingual phenomena, which is common in countries where English is studied as a foreign language but has no significance to the native country. Or as Eun-Young Julia Kim writes, the English language takes on “the color and texture from its new environment to suit its speakers’ needs” (Kim, 2012, p. 17). Indeed, we have observed how English phrases like “Fighting” are given their meaning and local flavour after coming into contact with South Korea’s linguistic space. This unique blend of English, creatively and cleverly nativised to the Korean context, becomes what we know as Konglish.
Yet Konglish is given a low social status in Korea due to a combination of its lack of prestige and the discomfort felt at mixing a foreign language with their national language. In ‘South Korea’s Linguistic Tangle English vs. Korean vs. Konglish’, Sean A. McPhail claims that English gained a reputation as a “crucial component of national success and economic plenty” in the late 1970s (McPhail, 2017, p. 47). This prestige for the English language has continued to today, as seen by the emphasis placed on English fluency by corporations and the Korean Ministry of Education. Opponents judge Konglish “by the rules of Standard English, interpreting the new vernacular’s own rules as bad English” (McPhail, 2017, p. 49). The other key concern of detractors of Konglish is the “purity” of their native Korean language. McPhail states that these detractors claim that “Korean usage should be static, with change only occurring when introduced by important persons or institutions” (McPhail, 2017, p. 48). The issue is Konglish’s lack of prestige, being an unofficial mix of two languages.
However, while Konglish might not have the status of an official language and was born from colloquial use, it might not be as negative to South Korea as detractors claim. Salmon argues that the use of Konglish in Seoul’s tourism will be a success, as the promotion targets tourists who speak their brand of World Englishes (Salmon, 2015). McPhail also argues that while Koreans have an entrenched distaste of Konglish, Konglish’s use will continue to rocket in South Korea (McPhail, 2017, p. 50).
Furthermore, Konglish is a unique cultural artifact which should be protected. Konglish, with its Koreanisation of English loanwords, is in itself a reflection of Korean culture and heritage. Konglish is its language, which “enables a fresh perspective on language practices that are timeless and ubiquitous” (Ray, 2015, p. 89). It is a result of translingual phenomena, a World English that has evolved from the contact of two distinct languages and cultures and nativised into one that suits the South Korean linguistic landscape. Or as Kim argues, “modified Anglicisms in Korean . . . reveal the versatility and creativity of the new varieties of English as well as its speakers” (Kim, 2012, p. 17). Konglish is a unique cultural phenomenon and a monument to the creativity and inventiveness of the Korean people in adapting English to the Korean context.
In conclusion, we observe that English’s global rise in prominence has caused its rise in popularity in South Korea. The contact of English and Korean caused translingual phenomena where English loanwords were given new meanings when used in South Korea, coming to be known as Koreanised English or Konglish. While Konglish is widely frowned upon in the public sphere, Konglish has many positive qualities of its own. It is a cultural artifact unique to South Korea which reflects the local South Korean culture, a monument to the creativity of South Koreans.
References
Fayzrakhmanova, Yu. (2016). Koreanized English words from perspectives of Korean–English language contact, Asian Englishes, 18 216-231
McPhail, Sean A. (2017). South Korea’s Linguistic Tangle English vs. Korean vs. Konglish, English Today, 34 45-51
Kim, Eun-Young J. (2012). Creative adoption trends in Anglicisms in Korea, English Today, 28 15-17
Rüdiger, Sofia. (2014). The nativization of English in the Korean context Uncharted territory for World Englishes, English Today, 30 11-14
Ray, Brian. (2015). “It’s Beautiful” Language Difference as a New Norm in College Writing Instruction, College Composition and Communication, 67 87-103
Salmon, A. (2015, November 9). I.Seoul.U The case for. The Korea Times. httpwww.koreatimes.co.krwwwnewsopinon201511351_190560.html