Translation of Classifications: Issues and Solutions as Exemplified in the Korean Decimal Classifica

1
Translation of Classifications Issues and
Solutions as Exemplified in the Korean Decimal
Classification

• Barbara H. Kwasnik
• You-Lee Chun
• Syracuse University
• July 14, 2004

2
Hospitable Translations Not Just a Question of
Translating Terms

• Many difficulties arise in the process of
  translation of a classification system from the
  source to another language and another culture.
• To be hospitable, a classification designed from
  one perspective must take into account other
  possible ways of identifying and labeling
  concepts and other possible relationships among
  concepts.

3
Our Study

• We analyzed one instance of a classification
  translation the Korean Decimal Classification,
  which was translated and adapted from the Dewey
  Decimal Classification.

4
The KDC

• The representative classification scheme in
  Korea, and used in most government, public and
  school libraries.
• Modeled in the 1940s on the DDC.
• Adopted by the Korean Library Association in
  1964.
• 1st edition published in 1964 the most recent
  4th, which we used, published in 1997.

5
The KDC

• Adopted the basic structure and main classes from
  the DDC
• Main difference languages located in 700s in KDC
  (400s in DDC)
• Many other differences throughout point to the
  attempts of the designers to accommodate the
  Korean balance and significance of subjects.

6
Study Design

• We isolated several sections of the KDC that we
  anticipated would demonstrate significant
  cultural and linguistic differences
• Religion
• Social Problems
• Customs and Folklore
• Domestic Sciences and Domestic Life
• Architecture
• Calligraphy

7
Guiding Question for Analysis

• How and to what extent had the KDC coped with the
  problem of adapting the culturally embedded DDC
  to accommodate Korean culture and sensibilities?

8
Procedures

• We made concept-by-concept comparison of terms in
  the selected sections of the KDC with the
  analogous terms or sections of the DDC.
• We noted differences and similarities of terms
  and structure.
• We also tried to determine the reasons for the
  differences, using the expertise of one of the
  authors, who is Korean.

9
Analysis

• We used the analytical framework developed by
  Kwasnik Locktionova in a previous study.
  Specifically we analyzed for
• Smooth and basically equivalent translation, or
• The presence of translation issues, such as
• Empty lexical or conceptual categories
• Differences in term specificity
• Differences in class placement

10
Empty Lexical or Conceptual Categories

• Instances in which terms appear in one
  classification scheme but not the other,
  suggesting that these are concepts specific to
  one culture or language but not the other.

11
Terms Unique to the KDC
12
Differences in Term Specificity

• Use of a broad, encompassing term in one scheme,
  with a correspondingly rich array of specific
  terms in the other.
• We inferred that topics that are more finely
  differentiated are of greater importance and
  require more precision in their expression.
• It does not necessarily mean the concept does not
  exist in the analogous scheme, only that it is
  not invoked.

13
Terms More Specific in the DDC

• Design and decoration of structures finely
  subdivided into e.g., Design in horizontal plane
  Decoration in mosaic, etc.
• Folklore developed along many dimensions, e.g.,
  Folklore about ghosts

• Many kinds of Railroad stations
• Many kinds of Recreation buildings, e.g.,
  Athletic clubs Dance halls
• Elaborately developed Buildings for religious and
  related purposes

14
Terms More Specific in the KDC

• Many kinds of Communications buildings e.g.,
  Telegraph offices Telephone offices, etc.
• Buddhism developed in great detail in its own
  section

• History of architecture developed with many
  specific terms in the schedules (rather than the
  Tables)
• Calligraphy has many specific terms for each type
  of writing and style

15
Class Placement

• A concept is present in both schemes but is
  located in a different part of the classification.

16
Differences in Class Placement

• Differences can be
• Small the concept occurs in only a slightly
  different location. The difference seems
  incidental and does not seem to indicate a very
  different way of understanding the concept.
• Moderate Indicates a somewhat different way of
  understanding the concept, but not so different
  that it would pose a stretch to either set of
  users.
• Radical KDC and DDC users construe the concepts
  in a fundamentally different way.

17
Small Differences
18
Moderate Differences
19
Radical Differences
20
More Radical Differences
21
Conclusions

• Designers of the KDC did an impressive job of
  adapting a Western-biased tool to the specific
  context of Korean language and culture.
• Admirable sensitivity to differences of emphasis,
  terminology, and conceptual structure.

22
Interesting Observation Which Korean Culture
Should Be Represented?

• The KDC reflects a culture undergoing rapid
  change.
• In particular, recreation, housing, social
  attitudes, the arts, and the notions of public
  and private domains are all shifting.
• Western attitudes are filtering into Korea, and
  the process is steady and longstanding.

23
Many Layers of Translation

• The KDC is faced with the representation of both
  traditional and contemporary ideas.
• Thus, this can be seen as layered on top of the
  issues of translation from the DDC.

24
Classification in a Global Environment

• We believe that it is a good thing to exploit and
  adapt existing conceptual schemes, such as the
  DDC, but
• Care must be taken not to violate the conceptual
  structures of the target language.
• At the same time, both our own cultural
  artefacts, and those elsewhere are shifting, and
  so the task of harmonizing classifications is
  made all the more difficult, and also more
  important.