When I see romanized Korean words such as someone's name or go terms, they are very irregular, and often there are several "variations" of this for a single Korean word.
이세돌 can be Lee Sedol, Yi Setol, Yi Sedol, .... 정석(joseki) can be jungsuk, jeongseok, jungseok, .... Seo Bongsu or Seo Pongsu.... and many many other things..
On the contrary, Japanese language have a very strict and regular system of romanization.

This thing suddenly span around my head, but the conclusion was simple.

First of all, Koreans usually do not like making and following rules, rather prefer believing in one's own feel (sense, intuition). Seems Robert Jasiek has criticized the Korean baduk rules for its incompleteness, but most Korean go players doesn't even know there are such documented rules for go. All they need is: how to count territory, what is ko, what is seki, triple or more ko = draw.
There are rules for Korean romanization, but very few people knows it properly, and many think this is not something important.

Also, the Korean language itself can be a problem. The pronunciation changes faster than any other language. Linguists say this is because 80% of Korean people have a more developed right-brain. I'm not sure what right-brain exactly does though. Anyway, it is quite easy to figure out a native Korean speaker's rough age by hearing the pronunciation. For example, 좋다(= good!) is pronounced like "dzot-ta" from teens to late twenties, younger kids say this like "jot-ta", thirties or forties say "dzoh-ta", older people say "dzo'ch'-ta" ('ch' here is similar to German ch sound, grinding sound). The Korean standard pronunciation, which was established in 1980s, is not too standard now.

_________________
Amsterdam, soon.

It is not that there is no standard way of writing Korean in roman letters - there are multiple standards.
But South Koreans have already cut it down to one, and nowadays you will almost always see Lee Sedol written as Lee Sedol. If you see Yi Se'tol, that is usually from a non-Korean source who likes that romanization and doesn't care for the confusion it creates.

You have the same thing with Chinese as well -- for example weichi vs. weiqi.
And other rulesets (including more familiar Japanese rules) also have flaws and are criticized by Jasiek (afaik). Though, I don't know, maybe the Korean rules are the worst?.

When you start building a sentence like that, isn't there in your mind any kind of trigger or subconscious alarm trying to call your attention?

Alguien, what do you mean -- generalizations and stereotypes always accurately reflect reality!

And Japanese is the same. Each system is regular within itself, but there are quite a lot of systems. XD

Edit: Actually there are probably some romanisation systems that aren't internally consistent.

Lee Sedol actually breaches the current standard, though surnames have been given a temporary exemption. The problem with the idiosyncratic, personal-preference system is that it is very hard, and sometimes impossible, to know what the personal preference is/was. Those who invent supposed personal preferences, which means that often up to half-dozen forms exist for one player, are the ones causing confusion. The GoGoD system, as with western library and scholastic standards, enables a reader to convert back to the hangeul form. These systems also allow reliable alphabetisation and indexing in English, a problem when the usually preferred Kim is changed to Gim as required by the latest standard. There is also the detail that the GoGoD system of using a hyphen ((as recommended by the standard, incidentally) allows a Korean name to be instantly distinguished from a Chinese one.

Yes there are standard but not many are interested at. Even the school teachers don't care. The standard romanization is part of the high school second grade literature and linguistics (국어) book, but most students, including me, does not learn it, because it does not come out in Korean SAT or NCT (수능). School teachers set questions for this test.

Road signs strictly follow the romanization standard by the way.

_________________
Amsterdam, soon.

It should be noted that the same kanji charater for the family name Lee is read out differently in North Korea and South Korea.
In short, the consonant L is dropped in actual pronouciation in South Korea, is pronounced as i as in fit or bit, not including the consonat y. (Your know, ear and year, east and yeast should be differently pronounced.)
But as in any other country, spelling retains old pronouciation, that's why it's still officially Lee even in South Korea.

For your information, the same character is prounced like Li as in Lit, in China and in Japan.

No, it's not. It's a personal, family choice. In the case of Yi about 95% of families have chosen Lee but there is no official requirement (beyond what you may choose to write on a passport). Still, one of the most famous Yi people in Korea is always written as Admiral Yi, never Lee, and even in the west many will know of former PM Syngman Rhee Yi Seung-man). There is a similar Lo/Ro/No split (and also Lho, Rho, Roh) but the percentages for personal choices are much less overwhelming. It is hard to say, without looking up government statistics, which version is favoured for e.g. Cheong: Chung, Djong, Jeong, Jung, Tschong, Zong. If you choose Chung or Jung, how on earth do you know Cheong is the hangeul as opposed to another common name (in hangeul) Chung? This latter also appears as Chong, Cheung, Joong, Joung, Jung. There is also no clear candidate for Paek: Baek, Baik, Bek, Beck, Paik. Within the go world, one such player appears to favour Paek and another Baek, but of course the media just invent their own choices anyway.

There are even cases where the hangeul spelling in Korean varies for the same player within the same book or magazine. Yu is often written Ryu in hangeul and in English appears as any of Yu, Lew, Liu, Lyu, Rieuw, Ryu, Yoo, You.

Some of the problems stem from the very many contextual sound changes that Korean is famous for. The L sound in Lee comes from reversing the name from Yi Se-tol to Se-tol Yi to follow western practice and the effect is just the same as producing that famous person Laura Norder who is the champion of Law and Order.

North Korea favours Ri, which is the Japanese sound. Li is the Chinese sound.

Current System

Old System

I get where you are coming from, but this is such a gross generalization. I could easily make the opposite case. I hope that we will refrain from such stereotyping whenever possible.

There is an "official" standard that is used by the government (and followed by major corporations) these days. There is no legal requirement to follow it though.

Also, "Lee"/"Rhee"/"Yi" is sort of a special case. The surname Lee comes from the Korean pronunciation of the Chinese character for plum tree. It has had more than one pronunciation, although "Yi" is the most common. The pre-war generation often used the "Lee/Rhee" pronunciation. Yi Seungman (i.e., Syngman Rhee) pronounced and wrote his name in Korean as 리승만 instead of 이승만 (This can be seen in old election campaign posters). The pronunciation of 리 is essentially Lee/Rhee. Most Koreans now prefer 이 (sounds like "Yi") as the pronunciation/spelling of this Chinese character but many have gotten so used to the notion of writing Lee that even people who pronounce their last name Yi will often used Lee as their Romanized last name.

"Yi Sedol" would follow the current standard. "Lee Sedol" is a mix of the new standard and a mistake that arose from old traditions. "Yi Setol" follows the old system.

While I don't think saying "Koreans don't like..." is the most sophisticated scientific generalization we can come up with, let's not get too worked up. Lovelove is actually Korean, and is reporting his own sense of how people in Korea view the system.

An analogy: some European countries have laws in place concerning the names that you can give your children. I might casually say "Americans would go crazy if someone tried to do that here." And that's right, as far as it goes. If I want to be super rigorous, I'd say that more Americans would be pissed off than would like it, but there's probably a substantial subset of people who'd support a rule that outlawed "those" names. And then a lot of other people might disagree with the change if it was proposed as a law, but if the law was in place, they'd support it out of status quo bias. But in a lot of contexts, the original generalization is good enough.

As a side note, I believe that we Americans are unusually sensitive to this sort of thing ( ) and feel weird about that sort of generalization about particular nations, even when it's coming from someone describing their own nation.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

To be more specific, being willing or reluctant to make certain types of crass generalizations is a marker of class status and educational attainment in many parts of America, but less so in other, less diverse nations.

I wasn't worked up. Just saying that there's some harm that comes from carelessly throwing out this kind of thing. I am also a Korean, albeit one who happens to disagree with that generalization.

I do not think that this generalization says anything negative about Koreans. If anything, I think that it says something slightly positive. Nevertheless, such generalizations are not bad because they say bad things about Koreans, but because it makes other future generalizations more acceptable. A Korean making gross generalizations about Koreans does not make that generalization any less harmful.

That said, I don't think that what lovelove said is a big deal at all. I don't mean to be impugning his character. I was just dropping some friendly advice, that is all.

1.) Romanization is easier in Japanese because of the nature of the language. When nearly every syllable ends in a vowel, it's easier to make a standard than in Korean, where sounds change much more often for a given character depending on its position relative to other characters.

2.) I feel personal preference should be respected. I don't go around spelling my friend Bryan's name as Brian just because I think it makes more sense to have an "i". That's just rude.

3.) Even more than that, I prefer the usage of the language's native characters whenever feasible. Even "good" romanization schemes often suck.

_________________
be immersed

Thank you John for your commenting on my misunderstanding.
I retract the wrong parts.

My story was based on what I heard from a Korean lady a few years ago.
I believe she didn't lie to me intentionally.
But I should have tried to verify it before posting on the net.
I apologize.

Also, I am ashamed to be told that Ri is Japanese sound, I am not supposed to make such a mistake, because I'm a Japanese!
(The lady? next to me is my wife, a Filipina. She says hi to you. My mistake amused her very much. )

I am not Japanese, so I will assume that you have authority on this, solomonko, but I feel it is a little misleading to say directly, "Ri is a Japanese sound," because, while り is commonly transcribed as "Ri," it does not always sound the same to me as an "r-sound" followed by an "ee" sound when I hear Japanese people pronounce this syllable.

In particular, the sound, to me, sounds to start with something between an English r-sound and l-sound, and can at times even have a sound similar to the letter d in English.

Probably in most cases, り sounds to start with a sound closest to the letter R in English, but it certainly does not seem to be definitely the case, in my opinion.

_________________
be immersed

Yes, you're right, Kirby.
It may sound like that.

Similar to what Kirby said.
I thought the beginning consonant of (ら、り、る、れ、ろ), the English R sound, and the English L sound are all different from one another.
(In fact, one could detect different dialects of the beginning consonant of (ら、り、る、れ、ろ) even in Hikaru the anime.)
Do we have linguists here to shed more light on this?

A potential "linguistic approach" might be to analyze the sounds phonetically, perhaps starting with taking a look at the IPA for Japanese (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_Japanese). In particular, there are two symbols "ɽ", and "ɺ" to represent what I believe to be close to the sound used for "ら、り、る、れ、ろ":



The corresponding pages have sound clips that you can use for listening:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroflex_flap
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alveolar_lateral_flap

---

From this, I conclude the following:
1.) The 26-letter English alphabet is insufficient to represent the sounds used in Japanese, let alone other languages with more variance.
2.) IPA can give you a better hint as to how a sound really sounds in a particular language.
3.) Even with IPA, it can be difficult to absolutely ascertain native pronunciation in all cases.

Despite this, I feel that native speakers can generally understand your speech if you come close to correct pronunciation.

_________________
be immersed

Kirby, I agree with pretty much everything you said. But I'm less interested in the IPA (precisely because of the limitations you mentioned),
and more interested toward the directions of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laboratory_phonology
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haskins_Laboratories