banned

Don't worry this guy will get ban soon. What a nonesense!
I bet this guy is one of our existing Chinese troll

Correct your dodgy spelling before posting bull $hit artist!

banned

^ Mod, please ban this sucker!

Actually, Andrei Lankov is an expert on Korean history, it's just that early Korean history is not in his expertise. Speaking of Russian experts, R. Djarylgashinova, who is probably the most prominent European expert on Koguryo, said that China's claims on Koguryo are completely absurd.

And don't feed the troll. Just ignore him and report him.

banned

banned

Why you interested in Korean History? Why Why Why? You don't even care..
Just because few claims don't get justified as arguments, sorry; your little knowledge of Korean culture & history making me laugh like pelican.

Just leave this forum and never return to us. I bet you didn't even knew about Kim Busik after I've posted. What a d!ckhead.

bangaroo, don't feed the troll.

banned

banned

I think that it is sad that Koreans in general today do not understand their own history. Look at the Korean language itself. Native Korean words account only for about 35% of the Korean vocabulary, while about 60% of the Korean vocabulary consists of Sino-Korean words. The remaining 5% comes from loan words from other languages, 90% of which are from English.

With the indigenous movement (eliminating Chinese influence) most Koreans can no longer read the works of their ancestors. Although Hangul is easy to learn, it lacks grace and depth.

Without the ability to read Hanji, most Koreans today really don't truly understand their own history. You have a situation that it is now up to others to explain Korean history to the Koreans.

Japanese won't even think of eliminating their Kanji because they are proud of that part of their heritage. They understand that it is only through Kanji that they are able to truly understand their history.

Great this troll thinks he's Korean history expert, then why the hell you come here argue with us?
To me you sound like full of $hit and still sound lame, get a life bunko

Yamsamgum the great - LoL where did ya get this from?

I don't think that he is arguing with you. He is simply telling you that you can't read the works of your own ancestor, while he can.

I see, you quick to judge Korean again, so is Chinese dude.
It's more like Chinese lacks grace & depth to me.
You still don't know why Korean ditched Hanja? Get a life, why don't you go a learn Korean then write essay about how Korean should change their language.

I see where this coming from, don't tell me you are same gay that posted dumbest claims

My question is, if you can't read Korean history, why argue with someone who can?


.

I doubt the average individual in the U.S. needs to learn Latin or Greek to learn about European history. In the same regard, the average Korean does not need to learn Chinese characters to learn about Korean history. Granted, most ancient historical records are in Chinese characters, but that's for historians to learn and analyze. Same can be said about archaeology, another important component of history - the average individual doesn't have to learn archaeological methods to understand history.

In other words, unless one intends to become a professinal historian with the ability to analyze various primary sources systematically, both Chinese characters and archaeology are unnecessary for learning Korean history.



There's plenty of Korean history books available in Korean and English.

Don't try changing the subject, since you can't argue with us, you bring another execuse to start this "who's better" game, I know all about Chinese people and how they think Boy! What do you think we care about Who invented Chinese languages?

I have Chinese blood from my ancestor, your Chinese tactic don't work here.

And can you read Korean? Japanese? Russian? I bet you you can't even read all classic Chinese, why? do you know how many Chinese characters you have know to fully understand that Samguk Yusa? This is why later Korean Joseon Dynasty introduced "Korean" so that all Korean can understand.

Have you ever read Samguk-yusa? No I guess not, so don't judge Korea just bases on some anti-Korea troll's coments, he's claim to know Samguk-Yusa, But he only qouted few pokets of sentances thinking he knows them. If he really that smart & well educated in Asian history then he doesn't even need to come to this forum.

And for Japanese, they are not even proud of using Chinese kanji, they just don't even discuss it, Japanese knows it's Chinese, but refind to their needs as always have been.
If you can't believe it, just ask average Japanese, they will say "go $uck yourself"

Btw, Korean adopted hanja since Han Dynasty dominated early Korea and same for many other asian that adopted Hanja as writing system, and because of this many royal docs were written in Chinese classics. So what, many old Western docs written in latin or Greeks or even Romans. Do other foreigners care if their docs are written in other languages as long as it's gives valuable information.

And Korean written system is alpabetic and suited for future written language, soon China have to ditch their old way of writtings and move onto much more advanced written system, otherwise you guys will adopt English as new alphabet.

Do you know how hard is to type Chinese fonts from your keyboard? Here you go, Chinese is old way, Korean is new way. Which ever you wish to choose it

Researchers make distinction between "primary sources" and "secondary sources."

I don't see anyone who can argue with mobi747br when the primiary sources that he cited are being so clear on their face.

He is not citing Chinese or Japanese primary sources. He is citing Korean primary sources. I am not a Korean history expert, but it is obviously to anyone who can read the ancient text cited by him.

The distinctions are made because "primary sources" are not as reliable as "secondary sources". Primary sources have to be systematically analyzed by a professional for it to become useful information, a secondary source. And if you are having doubts that mobi747br is just spewing bul$hit and nothing more, then create a new thread on the topic concerned.

And by the way, the primary source that mobi747br cited is available not only in Korean, but also English. None of that which he cited discredits the professional opinion of many scholars that Koguryo attires were the predecessors of Hanbok. Again, if you want to go deeper into this subject, then go create a thread.

Are you saying that korean ancient documents, Samguk Sagi, is also written in English?
Shocking to know that ancient Koreans write English.

Anyway, between you and mobi747br, I believe mobi747br. At least I can read your Korean ancient document, Samguk Sagi (or whatever) for what it says myself.

But can you?



.

i just have to say that i agree w/ santa klaws on pretty much everything he/she has said...

Samguk Sagi has been directly translated into multiple languages, and the Korean translations are available online.



Good for you. You're only proving yourself to be an idiot who'd rather believe in the personal analysis of primary sources by some mindless troll than the secondary sources made by professional historians and arcaheologists such as this:



Sarah M. Nelson, Archaeology of Korea. The excerpt is from the part where's she's explaining distinct Korean cultural patterns. The tomb murals refer to those in Koguryo tombs. Again, you're welcome to make a thread on this if you want to seriously discuss about it.

Just because you recognize Chinese fonts, that still doesn't qualify to understand actual old docs, furthermore, that mobi747br gay wasn't showing the whole Samguk Yusa text, just few lines about Goguryeo & Beakje according to Chinese classics because the author (Kim Busik) usually cited his claims from various Chinese sources which most historic docs are. Just as Japanese and even Chinese text qoutes other older docs to justify the claims. And that gay was just using this as tease us, and yet you quickly jump to conclusion that he knows better than Korean who practically lived through Korean culture and heritage.

This is why I'm suspecting that mobi747br gay chracter is either you or meiyou or even some deluded Chinese troll to throw another ridiculous claims to bash Korean. Bashing Korean history is like abusing Korean ancestors. I know many Chinese thinks Korean as low life character just because Korean came from the Old Joseon, which many old NE Asian cultures are based on. And this is why Chinese don't want to accept it, they didn't want to be excluded from this league, so Chinese ultra-nationalists tries many dirty tricks to take Korean heritage from Korea, so that China can claim even Korea as theirs.

Btw, Korean don't bash Chinese history or your ancestors, yet many Chinese do actually bash our ancestors and our history, which is frankly lowest human can do.
Now, Davee what ever you are, time to leave this thread and back to the real subject " Who are Korea's future enemy & future friends?" Well I made my mine on this since what happended so far on this thread.

Bashing goes both ways, I think on this Forum. So there is no need for apology either way.

I still say this, this so called Northeast Project is misinterpreted by a lots of Koreans.

Unless someone shows me the primiary document (instead of just reporting by Korean media), I stand on what I believe.

Are you familiar with the concept of "lost in translation"? Chinese in particular does not translate well into other languages with out meaning loss or context shifts. There have been multiple "direct" translations of Chinese classics Ourlaws of the marsh yet none really captures the story in its original intention.

The question remains; Can any non-chinese forum member here read the Samguk Sagi in it's original?

Oh, the Korean media you say. Then what about an American ambassador who's been to both China and Korea?



http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.2553.../pub_detail.asp

And I don't think anybody here is looking for an apology. It's simply that China is the greatest threat to Korea's national security, and this is a matter of consensus between the Koreans and those of other countries who share the mutual cause.



Yes, I'm aware of that. Many Korean historians understand Chinese characters, so really it's their business not mine. I don't pose myself as a professional historian, but I did read of a lot works by such historians, and I don't need to know Chinese characters to fully understand their work.

Ha. interesting! Never knew korea was not a single country. So we have an ancient country named XXXXX with dual origins from China, Korea, or whatever. What's the big deal? It's so fu-king funny to see korean evidences blow up in Korean nationalist's face though.

I don't think lost in translation is a good excuse to that particular quotation. Average Chinese can read that particular classic Chinese citation with little problems. It resembles Classic Chinese, but it's in a form very close to plain Chinese language. No analysis is needed. It's hard to believe people can translate that particular passage wrong. Let's see how Mr. Santa is going to twist it.



That American ambassador is a known China-hater. He was also the head of CIA. His job is to spew $hit.

And you don't spew $hit around here?
What evidence you are referring to, ah because you posted them yourself? Gottcha

I seriously believe you, davee, and that mobi747br gay is same dude. I notice you gays follow each other and never argue and when you post, other profiles don't post. Only seen davee on this thread.

C'mon, not the same tatic of cyber bullying again. you know what evidences I am talking about - Hanja citations made by mobi747br. Just so you don't get confused. This is what I am referring to,

Its funny. I thought that you, SantaClaw and what is his face, yes, Chunky are the same dude.

http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=136706

That troll has already been banned, and you're only degrading the discussion here and hindering AF moderation efforts by giving not just attention, but also support to this troll. If you have genuine interest on the topic of Hanbok or the importance of Chinese characters on understanding Korean history, make a fu-king thread as I have repeatedly requested. Otherwise, keep on topic, and keep the troll and his BS out of the discussion unless you want this thread to degrade further to meaningless b!tching.

Ha, you didn't read all my comment made on him didn't ya? I already have wrote about this already. Don't bring up that garbage claims again.
That hanja citations are no more than Author's citing of sources to claim he's docs. Don't play this trick to me.



Not even come close, Santa & Chucky, they are in North, I'm in down under mate. I notice you meiyou & davee posted comments exactly 9 mins a part, about time same due posting. If I'm not mistaken, then how come you guys always post message upon 6~10 mins aparts all the time. Don't tell me you guys lives same time zone?

Well, I'm done for today, unlike you guys I don't get paid for posting here. Adios Chinese nationalists I'm off now.

I have stated my position on the Northeast Project already. If you have actually read the original project report, please share it with the members here.

As I said, unless someone shows me the primiary document, I stand on what I believe.

As to the Chinese language, Hanji, etc. I don't think that there is any need for further discussion. I can read the writings of my ancestors. Whether you can or can't it is your issue.

However, isn't funny and ironic that when mobi747br posted something written by a Korean historian in the "Korean" language, he actually had to go through the motion of translating it for you Koreans.

.

davee, just shut your hole and make a new thread on that topic if you want to discuss them seriously, because I don't want to argue at length on something that's off-topic.

lol. you are so typical.



Not very hard. You can practically type one Chinese character with one or two keys with the help of Google Pinyin Input Method or Sougo Chinese Input Method. It's faster than English keyboarding actually.

Twisiting and spining again. China doesn't have to make historical claims to grab North Korea if she attemped to do so at first place. China could have stationed PLA army in North Korea indefintely after the Korean War. Alternatively, China could have annexed NK during North Korea famine of the late 1990's. North Korea was in her weakest state since the founding of the state back then. Why bothers to rewrite history or whatever to annex NK? It's fu-king stupid and illogical. Who the fu-king care about historical claims for territory legitimacy anyway?

Can't blame you for feeling being threaten.

It is just unfortunate that you have to sleep next to a giant.

I had similar impression. But I think bangaroo is just bangaroo. Santa and Chucky might be the same person.

Closed. Getting way too many reports and complaints from this topic.