[Question]: why not hangeul but hangul?

[roeniss]

It seems that the correct romanization for 한글 is Hangeul. Is there any particular reason to use Hangul?

[roeniss]

reference: https://nl.go.kr/nlcol/html/data0007.htm

[99mini]

Hi @roeniss!

I find additional reference that Hangeul is correct, not Hangul. [hangeul과 hangul, 어떤 것이 정확한 표현일까요? - 국립국어원 답변] But, some government agencies use Hangul instead of Hangeul. [국립민속박물관 - 영문 페이지]

Perhaps Hangeul is correct, but it is also possible to use Hangul.

[roeniss]

Hi, 99mini! Thank you for additional references.

Ironically, the second URL you provided also contains 'Hangeul'.

[surri]

Interesting.
hangul is the McCune–Reischauer Romanization of 한글.
It was used in 대한민국 until 2000, and was replaced by hangeul using the Revised Romanization(개정 로마자 표기법).

I think "Kim" and "Park" could be used instead of the current standard "gim" and "bak".
Because, it's not mandatory.

But, I believe using the standard would reduce confusion for everyone.

[roeniss]

But, some government agencies use Hangul instead of Hangeul. [국립민속박물관 - 영문 페이지]

@99mini Do you have other examples too? The page you gave is fixed now.

[okinawaa]

First of all, I'm sorry for the late response, and thank you for suggesting a new perspective.

According to the correct grammar rules, I think Hangeul is right as the roeniss said.
However, I think foreigners are more familiar with using hangul than hangeul.

I searched on Google, and there were about 38 million search results for hangul and 5 million search results for hangeul.

If I had known the difference between the two before the library was made, I would have been able to think about it, but now We are communicating with Hangul, so if there's no big reason to change it, I'd like to keep it current.

If the same problem comes up in the future, why don't we try one more revisit?

[roeniss]

why don't we try one more revisit?

Of course it's on your decision and I'm enough with your opinion now. Feel free to close this. @okinawaa

[youngjae99]

Thank you for your feedback @roeniss :)