The KOREAN Civilization: Things Every Civ Player Should Know

[connorkimbro]

damn, i'm sorry that i missed this thread until now.

yin: great work!!!! i'd have been here helping you out with this, but i've been unaware of this thread's existance. oh well. Go Korea!!

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by yin26
Can't remember back to the 13th largest economy in the world, eh?

I have to get into the middle of you gentlemen's argument, but, I'd like to make a point to Yin that I failed to mention earlier.

Yin, I sorry to say it but the size of the economy is only one (very) small part of what makes a great civ. My own home state of California would be the world's 6th largest economy if it was an independent country, however, you won't see me beating the drum to have a California civ included.
It just takes alot more world influence and alot more scientific achievement in order to build the whole package. Now Korea might actually have "the whole package" but ten or even twenty years of economic data just doesn't cut the mustard.

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by Mark L
. The Americans, British and Russians all displayed quite an interest in Iceland as a possible naval/airforce base to launch operations from. Amazing nobody annexed them in history.

The Icelandic CIV!! YEAH!!

The British did take control of the country (at least militarially if not in the day to day government) during world war 2 to keep the Germans out.

[Saint Marcus]

The British did take control of the country (at least militarially if not in the day to day government) during world war 2 to keep the Germans out.

True. But same with Korea and the Americans. I think American forces are still present there in large numbers (could be wrong about this though).

[yin26]

CONN: Could have used ya, pal!

Now Korea might actually have "the whole package" but ten or even twenty years of economic data just doesn't cut the mustard.

Agreed. That's why the thread went all over the place. Econ was just one of the things I mentioned...and I mentioned it in a specific context.

[mactbone]

Is there some kind of Thread Hall of Fame, because I think this one's worthy of a nomination.

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by Mark L
The British did take control of the country (at least militarially if not in the day to day government) during world war 2 to keep the Germans out.

True. But same with Korea and the Americans. I think American forces are still present there in large numbers (could be wrong about this though).

The U.S. still has several bases in South Korea; I servered their for a while when I was in the Army. Cheers.

[connorkimbro]

the US currently has about 35,000 Army soldiers stationed on the penninsula. I couldn't give numbers for marines or air force or navy service members.

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by connorkimbro
the US currently has about 35,000 Army soldiers stationed on the penninsula. I couldn't give numbers for marines or air force or navy service members.

This is an a-side, Kimbro, but I noticed you listed the Defense Language Institute as your location. Which langauge are you studying? Korean?

[Boliao]

Wow! I’ve been reading this thread every single argument, every fact, for 3 solid hours…. I really admire Yin for the fact that he can hold his argument well without hasty generalizations like Mark and Imran, who come across as western centric people.

I’ve learned so many things…

1)For arguments in a I-write-u-read type of media like a forum, in order to succeed one must not debase into senseless hurling of vulgarity and abuse without logic. I admire Yin for your cool handling of many posts without basis or facts but containing just pure unreasonable words like *&^%$#@….

2)My knowledge of Korea is boostered, so is knowledge of Holland, or Iceland for that matter.

3)Many times when I have came across Euro-centric Asian Bashing stances from Mark, I am tempted to post an angry reply, but I realized that an angry reply probably would not hold water, and would make one sound boorish and illogical. Then I tell myself, “let’s read on to what Yin has to say to that”. Before I know it I am at the end of 9 pages of the thread.

4)I am not Korean. And I am not anti- “any civ”. At first glance I thought Yin was a korean defending his homeland, then as I read on I found out that he is 100% white American, he has no reason to be called ‘Nationalistic’, in fact I think he has a good position being non-ethnic Korean to make these statements. I am sure no one disagrees

5)I think I have to be fair to those in Europe and the west as well that each of us are shaped differently according to the version of history we are taught. I do not know much about Byzantine History as much as say Mark, but from the experience my grandparents had with the Japanese, I can tell you what Yin said regarding atrocities etc is fairly accurate.

My granddad testified to the beheadings, the senseless bayoneting of pregnant women, throwing infants to the air and bayoneting them as target practice (He did not mention a popular torture method such as sticking a hose into a person’s throat and pumpin water till he is bloated then bayonetting the chap, but that is just details of gore.)

The experience of those in Singapore (the far end of the Japanese empire) does not differ much from those many miles in Korea. It was a universal atrocity, not just on Koreans and Chinese. One should consider the background of the person making the comment then he will realize the context.

6)People who think that the above is not important are those who do not have relatives who had experienced it first hand, or themselves have not had the experience. Thus it is understandable why a Jew might still hate a German even today, it is relative to the person’s experience and we cannot simple ignore that. Like wise if you had relatives who perished in the sept 11 incident, it would be very insensitive of me to brush it aside like how a person might brush aside the sufferings of someone who lived under the Japanese occupation. It is all relative. However certain things cannot be compared. You cannot say “The Nazi treatment of Jews can be compared to how the Vikings killed innocent people during their raids” It must be in context. Mass killing of civilians in an inhumane way is different from killing for conquest.

7) I really hope that when we do argue we do not include words like “****ing” or “you are an a$$”. It will not help you win the argument in anyway. In fact it will sway others to the other more rationale party like I switched from supporting Mark ( The first few posts were done rationally and were convincing..! I respect your(Mark’s) background as a philo student, then when you made the sweeping statement that Asian philosophy is nothing comparable to western, you lost a supporter. Not that I think Asian philo is superior to Western in any way)

8) I hope future posts will be done intelligently and not “because I am Korean I will fight all those who slam my country” type of post. I mean if its all based on insult and not reasoning, no one will believe you.

That’s all I got to say. As for which civ should be in, I think Korea is not in because Civ3 is made in the west ( as Yin pointed out) so its ok, no problem with that as it is a matter of perspective. I too am learning not to look at the other side of the world through tainted glasses.

[Boliao]

Wow! I’ve been reading this thread every single argument, every fact, for 3 solid hours…. I really admire Yin for the fact that he can hold his argument well without hasty generalizations like Mark and Imran, who come across as western centric people.

I’ve learned so many things…

1)For arguments in a I-write-u-read type of media like a forum, in order to succeed one must not debase into senseless hurling of vulgarity and abuse without logic. I admire Yin for your cool handling of many posts without basis or facts but containing just pure unreasonable words like *&^%$#@….

2)My knowledge of Korea is boostered, so is knowledge of Holland, or Iceland for that matter.

3)Many times when I have came across Euro-centric Asian Bashing stances from Mark, I am tempted to post an angry reply, but I realized that an angry reply probably would not hold water, and would make one sound boorish and illogical. Then I tell myself, “let’s read on to what Yin has to say to that”. Before I know it I am at the end of 9 pages of the thread.

4)I am not Korean. And I am not anti- “any civ”. At first glance I thought Yin was a korean defending his homeland, then as I read on I found out that he is 100% white American, he has no reason to be called ‘Nationalistic’, in fact I think he has a good position being non-ethnic Korean to make these statements. I am sure no one disagrees

[Boliao]

5)I think I have to be fair to those in Europe and the west as well that each of us are shaped differently according to the version of history we are taught. I do not know much about Byzantine History as much as say Mark, but from the experience my grandparents had with the Japanese, I can tell you what Yin said regarding atrocities etc is fairly accurate.

My granddad testified to the beheadings, the senseless bayoneting of pregnant women, throwing infants to the air and bayoneting them as target practice (He did not mention a popular torture method such as sticking a hose into a person’s throat and pumpin water till he is bloated then bayonetting the chap, but that is just details of gore.)

The experience of those in Singapore (the far end of the Japanese empire) does not differ much from those many miles in Korea. It was a universal atrocity, not just on Koreans and Chinese. One should consider the background of the person making the comment then he will realize the context.

6)People who think that the above is not important are those who do not have relatives who had experienced it first hand, or themselves have not had the experience. Thus it is understandable why a Jew might still hate a German even today, it is relative to the person’s experience and we cannot simple ignore that. Like wise if you had relatives who perished in the sept 11 incident, it would be very insensitive of me to brush it aside like how a person might brush aside the sufferings of someone who lived under the Japanese occupation. It is all relative. However certain things cannot be compared. You cannot say “The Nazi treatment of Jews can be compared to how the Vikings killed innocent people during their raids” It must be in context. Mass killing of civilians in an inhumane way is different from killing for conquest.

7) I really hope that when we do argue we do not include words like “****ing” or “you are an a$$”. It will not help you win the argument in anyway. In fact it will sway others to the other more rationale party like I switched from supporting Mark ( The first few posts were done rationally and were convincing..! I respect your(Mark’s) background as a philo student, then when you made the sweeping statement that Asian philosophy is nothing comparable to western, you lost a supporter. Not that I think Asian philo is superior to Western in any way)

8) I hope future posts will be done intelligently and not “because I am Korean I will fight all those who slam my country” type of post. I mean if its all based on insult and not reasoning, no one will believe you.

That’s all I got to say. As for which civ should be in, I think Korea is not in because Civ3 is made in the west ( as Yin pointed out) so its ok, no problem with that as it is a matter of perspective. I too am learning not to look at the other side of the world through tainted glasses.

[Boliao]

sorry made a double post..pls forgive me

[Drake Tungsten]

First, Korean is the basis for the Japanese language.

I can't believe something this false slipped through the cracks! The truth about the Japanese language is that no one knows where it came from. It is one of the great mysteries of linguistic research. Korean is considered a relative of the Japanese language, but there are huge differences between the two that can't be explained and definitely show that Japanese was not based on Korean. The whole debate is actually pretty interesting, as both Korean and Japanese are thought to be most closely related to Finnish or various Turkic languages. Strange...

Even if Yin was referring to written Japanese, the characters used in Japanese are of Chinese origin and the syllabary is a native invention. The Chinese kanji probably spread to Japan through Korea, but were in no way a Korean invention. Just wanted to clear that up....

[Mou]

The Chinese kanji probably spread to Japan through Korea, but were in no way a Korean invention.

I do NOT think so. Chinese culture ,including Kanji, were introduced to Japenese systematically by those abroard students in about one hundred years after 646 AD, who were dispatched by Japenese govenment, at that time China is in Sui & Tang Dynasty.

Remember, the kanji is only "A Japanese system of writing based on borrowed or modified Chinese characters."

And it is so interesting that the typical sentence structures of Japenese and Korean are BOTH "subject + object +verb", dislike Chinese "subject + verb + object".

[Boliao]

Drake Tungsten....
Can you prove your facts?

I can't believe something this false slipped through the cracks! The truth about the Japanese language is that no one knows where it came from. It is one of the great mysteries of linguistic research.

Sonna henna hanashi wa kiita kota ga nai. Kaette benkyou suru atode toron suru ni kimasu.


Do you speak any of the Chinese languages, or Japanese languages?
I know for sure what Mou said is true as I can speak Chinese (Mandarin, Cantonese and Hokkien) and Japanese.
I know what Mou means by

"subject + object +verb", dislike Chinese "subject + verb + object".

(dislike is a typo error for unlike). I feel Drake is in no position to comment unless you are able to read Kanji, Hiragana, katagana or Hua(2) Yu(3). For example: Words like Shimbun, Ringo, Jitensha have uncanny semblance to the words of Chinese dialect Hokkien equivalent of Shimbun, Mandarin ping guo, zhi dan che.

I know what Yin said about Japanese language borrowing from Korean is true. The Grammar structure came from Korea, (I you took Japanese studies you would know what I mean) whereas many words are borrowed from China. The Katagana and Hiragana are extracted from Chinese strokes. A native speaker of Chinese will find learning the Vocabulary, and a native Korean speaker will have no difficulty with Grammar.

And Drake, please don't take this personally. I just want you to know the truth.

[Drake Tungsten]

I do speak some Japanese and am a major in East Asian history, so don't try and treat me like some uneducated American. I probably know as much (if not more) about the subject than you do.

Anyway, of course Korean and Japanese have the same sentence structure. They are related languages, as I said previously. The most accepted theory currently is that both Korean and Japanese are descended from a common ancestor language of the Altaic or Uralic family. This does not mean that Korean is the basis for Japanese; they are both independent languages that descended from a common ancestor. It is similar to French and Romanian both being descended from Latin; they both have similar features as they are both Romance languages, but Romanian did not form the basis for French or vice versa.

Japanese does have many loan words from China and this is to be expected as the two nations have been in contact for thousands of years. But Japanese also has many words that have no root in Chinese. Kami, the term for Shinto deities, is one of these words. There is also a completely Japanese way for counting (hitotsu, futatsu, mittsu, yottsu) that developed before the Japanese adopted Chinese numbers. Japanese is a very unique language and having incorporated words from another language does not negate the originality of a language. Japanese now also includes many English words, but I don't think anyone claims that Japanese is a rip-off of English.

Finally, your point that Japanese kana is derived from Chinese characters is true, but meaningless. English is written with an alphabet that is of Phoenician origin, but that doesn't mean that English and Phoenician are related in any way. When examining the origins of a language, you must deal mainly with the language in its spoken form. Spoken Japanese is completely different than Chinese or Korean, even though some of the written symbols may look similar.

As for proving my facts, go here.
http://humanities.byu.edu/classes/li...s/japanese.htm

[gopher]

Originally posted by yin26
Yes, yes. That is the canned response. Care to defend your choices, though? Mongols? Why? Because of mass invasions. What else?...and where are they now? Vikings basically fit that bill as well. Incas? They accomplished nothing greater than did the Koreans...AND where are they now?

Mongols: Largest land empire EVER. Spread the chinese/eastern culture all throughout it's conquests. Ruled China (Until end of Yuan dynasty), basically slowed Eastern European development down a couple hundred years, etc. These guys basically WERE Asian history and culture for a few centuries.
Vikings: Defined the "Dark Ages", which really werent that dark. They basically were European civilization until the rise of the French and English monarchial states. Dont forget that they spread all over Europe, from France to Russia to Sicily (YES! thats why there are still a few blue eyed people down there) to North Africa. The best traders and explorers, hands down.
Incas: I agree. Not a good choice. Bring in the Canadians or Cartheginians instead.

If you were to actually sit down and compare any of those to Korea, you wouldn't be putting them first...trust me. However, if those conjure some kind of nostalgic feeling for civs that were powerful for a time and are now all but erased from the earth, feel free.

Unfortuantly, it is really hard to distinguish "Korean" culture and history from Chinese and Japanese. I know you will get mad, but sorry Korea has basically been under the Chinese heel for centuries, and the Japanese from 1880's to 1945. There is some uniqueness, but it is like comparing Scotland to England (overall, not many diffrences, chill out all you scot's!
Remeber, it's the INFLUENCE that matters of a Civ, not if they are still around. Thus, by your argument, Greece should not be in here, despite her being the basis of Western (and thus, Modern) existence in society and culture. After all, the modern greek state is nothing like Ancient Greece.

I would think, though, a "great" civ would have somehow managed to survive into the 21st century, eh? If you want to look at dead civs that did great things, that is fine. But why over-look a LIVING civ that DID and CONTINUES to do great things?

Pure illogical thinking. So then all those "other" civs should not be in? Leaving out Egypt, Rome, Greece, Babylon, and the rest is a crime of history. Thats why this game starts out in 4000bc, not 2001A.D. However, i think that you are just looking for a good troll, and it worked.

[yin26]

Boliao: Thanks for the support. Youd made some excellent comments yourself about Japan.

Drake Tungsten: "Even if Yin was referring to written Japanese, the characters used in Japanese are of Chinese origin and the syllabary is a native invention. The Chinese kanji probably spread to Japan through Korea, but were in no way a Korean invention. Just wanted to clear that up...."

Well, scholars are debating this topic. I wouldn't be so positive one way or the other. Logic dictates, however, that the Japanese language depended heavily on what came from the mainland, including China and Korea.

Mou: "And it is so interesting that the typical sentence structures of Japenese and Korean are BOTH "subject + object +verb", dislike Chinese "subject + verb + object"."

Precisely. You can argue that 'well, Japanese and Korean are just from the same language family' ... but that is missing the fact that Japan was a virtual wasteland of an island for a good, long time. (yes, there were native there from long ago ... and perhaps the language was already in place). But scholars sent to China and back and evidence of early Korean settlers going to Japan speak in favor of the notion that China and Korea influence the creation of the modern Japanese language.

Unfortuantly, it is really hard to distinguish "Korean" culture and history from Chinese and Japanese.

Sure it's hard ... if you haven't studied it and only accept broad-brush Western history courses. That, in fact, is why this thread was started. I dare say you would be surprised if you ACTUALLY studied the history and culture involved. Clearly you haven't.

[Boliao]

it is really hard to distinguish "Korean" culture and history from Chinese and Japanese.

If I as a non-European were to say this "It is really hard to distinguish "Dutch" culture and history from Belgian and French."

How would you feel?

[yin26]

LOL! Precisely. It's just too silly hardly even to argue with.

[gopher]

Originally posted by Boliao


If I as a non-European were to say this "It is really hard to distinguish "Dutch" culture and history from Belgian and French."

How would you feel?

I wouldnt like it, but it's true. Overall, there is really no difference between Dutch and Belgian/French, or even between France and Belgium, just like no difference really exists between the U.S and Canada, culture and history wise. This argument is not about FEELING about your culture, it's about the REALITY of culture

[yin26]

Oh, I see the line of logic. Well, then, no real difference between human beings and fish. Excellent point.

[gopher]

Originally posted by yin26
Oh, I see the line of logic. Well, then, no real difference between human beings and fish. Excellent point.

if you are comparing the difference between a human being and a fish to a human being and a rock, then there really isnt a difference, right?

Both have eyes, blood, bone structure, nervous system, heart, genes, DNA, cells, etc.

The point remains that you cant distinguish Korean culture from Chinese, over the course of both histories, as compared to other cultures. Thats why the Civ games try to diversify, with US and not Canada, Iriqouis (represent all N.A tribes), Aztecs (all advanced Latin American and S.A. tribes), Zulu (All Sub Saharan tribes), etc. The reason of distinction is why the game WILL NEVER have the Netherlands, Sweeden, etc. Because they are all represented by another.

[yin26]

There's a difference between what a cartoonish computer game is programmed to represent and what human beings can understand about differences between cultures. You speak as if YOU can't distinguish the difference, and that's quite a bigger problem, if true.

And in any case, that's precisely why the civ that *IS* chosen creates such a stir. Do Koreans want 'Asia' represented by Japan or China? Hell no. Sure ... there's only so much space in the game, so then you are left arguing: Should Japan come in before Korea? You see ... that is the point of these discussions NOT some vauge 'humans and fish are basically the same' nonsense.

[gopher]

Originally posted by yin26
There's a difference between what a cartoonish computer game is programmed to represent and what human beings can understand about differences between cultures. You speak as if YOU can't distinguish the difference, and that's quite a bigger problem, if true.

I thought this whole thread was about why Korea should be in a cartoonish computer game. In that respect, I am right. About humans, you are correct. Try not to make personal attacks when debating, it makes the rest of your arguments seem less intrinsic, no matter how good they are,

And in any case, that's precisely why the civ that *IS* chosen creates such a stir. Do Koreans want 'Asia' represented by Japan or China? Hell no. Sure ... there's only so much space in the game, so then you are left arguing: Should Japan come in before Korea? You see ... that is the point of these discussions NOT some vauge 'humans and fish are basically the same' nonsense.

And do all my Chinese-Ameican friends want their culture represented by Mao_Tse? HECK NO!!!!!!!!! Do Canadians want to be represented by the U.S? No! Do the Quebecers want to represented by Canada? No. Should Japan come before Korea?
Although I realize the animosity of Japan and the rest of S.E Asia, there is no denying the massive impact of Japan on the world, espscially since the Meiji Restoration. Remeber, this is about the FRIGGIN GAME here. If you want Korea, edit it in! heck, replace Japan! Korea is a very viable country (Well, at least the south is
). But does that mean that it can replace other, more world defining cultures? Firaxis thinks so. Who knows? Perhaps you will be in the expansion pack, although reunification could help that campaign signifigantly

[Drake Tungsten]

Here's the number one reason Korea SHOULD NOT be in the XP.

Byung-Hyun Kim

Produce a pitcher who can finish a damn game and then we'll talk.

[Veracitas]

Originally posted by yin26 [*] Special Unit: Turtle Boat (most effective from 15-17th centuries): Nearly impossible to sink but has slow and rather poor offense.

Hey yin, awesome article. I don't have time to read the whole thing right now, and I'd like to write a longer response, but for now, just a quick suggestion over the special unit. It seems firaxis invariably chose land units over sea units as special units (possibly in the case of an all land map or what not) and while the proto-submarine turtle boat is probably the coolest weapon that the koreans innovated, it is a sea unit.

One of the most interesting land based fighters that Korea developed were the Hworang Youth Corps of the Silla dynasty (originally all women, if I recall). They were sort of a proto-samurai...

just a suggestion...hope to read more of this thread later.

[Boliao]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Here's the number one reason Korea SHOULD NOT be in the XP.

Byung-Hyun Kim

Produce a pitcher who can finish a damn game and then we'll talk.

sono kotoba wa taihen kodomoppo deshou. Kimi wa [Byung-Hyun Kim ga yakyuu no shiai ni jouzudewanai kara CIV3 no naka de kankouku ja arimasen] toiimasu ka? doushitta no? Honto ni machigatta iru! Sore dewa boku wa [ John O'Brien ga sakka no shiai no gouru mada hitotsu desu kara amerika kouku ga civ3 ni ja arimasu.] to iu wa tadashi desu ka? kouhei desu ka? Ja nai deshou...kimi ni doujou shimashita ne.

[Veracitas]

Originally posted by Veracitas

It seems firaxis invariably chose land units over sea units as special units (possibly in the case of an all land map or what not) and while the proto-submarine turtle boat is probably the coolest weapon that the koreans innovated, it is a sea unit.

After seeing the new civilisation of the week (The English) it appears I'm wrong about the land only special units (I'm in Seoul right now, so the only info I have on civ3 is what firaxis tells us on their website). So, I take back my objections to the turtle boat--probably the most innovative weapon of Medieval Korea (can I call it that?).

I would love to see the Koreans included in a possible expansion pack to civ3. Considering the incredibly profuse amount of strategy gamers here (enough to make you sick, though, granted, they are mostly starcraft/other real-time strategy gamers), I would be surprised if Firaxis did not try to directly court the gaming populace here by including the Korean civilisation.