While I don't really care what it is called, I feel that it should be called East Sea. After receving barrage of critics, I will post my reasons and so forth...

 

Same as the English Channel, goes to England and the Irish sea goes to Ireland. It doesn't imply ownership.

 

In a few decades when the waters rise and Korea is an island. You get top call the sea that seperates you from China, the Korean Sea.

I believe the Koreans term the body of water East(ern) Sea in their own language.

 

The only issue is what to call it in the English language.

 

Do Koreans have the right to demand that Japan changes what they call it in their own language?

 

Or that English-speaking nations change what they choose to call it in their own language?

 

Or how it is translated to what different countries call it in their own respective languages?

 

In the Vietnamese language, the term Biển Đ�ng (literally Eastern Sea) refers to what is termed as South China Sea in English language maps.

 

The Danish term �sters�en, the Dutch term Oostzee, the German term Ostsee, the Norwegian term �stersj�en, and the Swedish term �stersj�n as well as Old English term Osts�, all literally mean Eastern Sea, but they all refer to the Baltic Sea.

 

Even the calqued Finnish-Swedish term It�meri, which translate to Eastern Sea, refers to the Baltic Sea, despite the fact that the body of water is west of Finland.

 

The same body of water is referred to as L��nemeri in Estonian, which means Western Sea, which is geographically accurate with reference to Estonia.

 

 

Since nobody own the damn sea then each country names it as wants, I never heard the French threatening the boycott the London olympics just because in English maps it's the "English Channel" not the "Manche" like the Iranians did when they threatened to boycott the Asian games just because Qatar said it was the "Arabia Gulf" in Arabic maps only, the rest of the maps said it was the Persian gulf. Such stupid sensitivies are just that, stupid. It is a damn name thats all, no soverignty no nothing.

 

Al-Jassas

The sensitivities are symptoms of unresolved underlying issues.

 

Even in the same country of USA, some southerners still use the term Battle of Manassas to refer to what is more widely referred to as Battle of Bull Run.

 

Some things like these may not have a resolution.

 

That may be true, but the situation is little more complex in the sea between Korea and Japan. France and England will not go into conflict (As if they need any more conflicts) just for English Channel. But the fishing industries in East Sea is becoming increasingly competitive, especially due to the popularity of sea-food like sushi. Government of Japan and South Korea are debating over the sovereign rights over the sea even more intensely, especially when the geologists have a small suspecion that East Sea may have some oil reserves. The border issue is becoming complicated as well, especially due to potential threat and kidnappings from North Korea. As a matter of fact, Japan addressed this issue to UN some time ago. I bet British and French didn't do that. I believe French adn British killed enough people to solve the English Channel issue long before WWI began.

 

As for sovereignity, or maritime territorial limit, it doesn't depend on the naming of the body of water.

Nobody would think that the whole Indian Ocean belongs to India!

 

 

Anyway, the name of the Sea is not really an important issue. It's just part of Korea's national inferiority complex which has developed after spending all those centuries being overshadowed by powerful neighbors. Korea never got revenge for the Japanese Pirate raids, The Imjin War, or the Japanese Colonization Period, and Korea will never fully get out from China's shadow, so this is sort of nationalism is a key part of Korea's culture.

 

 

 

The name is not important, the important is the division. Solve the confflict and you will not have the problem of the name, Gulf of M�xico is a good example.

 

In the same way, why should have the sea one and only one name? The English Channel is english for a group of countries, french and spanish call it Channel of La Manche and anybody worry about this.

Well, considering the Japanese name for Japan is not Japan. This is even less of a useful discussion. Maybe the Islands were named after the sea?

no that is not true, the so call "japanese sea" was called the eastern sea from the very beginning.
The original name of Japan was Fusang or Dongyeng(literally means eastern sea) or sometimes called Woguo, the name of Japan was possibly derived from a Chinese poem(the origin is unknown) says: "the sun rise from Fusang"(a poetic way of saying east). At the beginning of seventh century,in a letter from Prince Shōtoku to Prince of Jin(the future Emperor Yangdi of Sui dynasty), Prince Shōtoku addressed himself as the prince of where sun rise. The name Japan was not used until the late seventh century, in year 670a.d, Japan sent envoys to Tang emperor to be properly recognized as the sate of Japan.
 the name japan literally means "the place where sun rise", this is reflected on their national flag.

 

Asides from that different peoples also have different names for other things.  It isn't just limited to geography.  Things like animals and trees.  Many of them have people's names in English.  Buffon's Macaw, Spix's Macaw, and Joshua Tree just to name a few.  Should people also take issue with that as well?

 

Different people also have different names for the same things.  It's just a fact of life.  Germans call their country Deutschland.  In English it's Germany.  Several of Germany's neighbors still call it by the name of Prussia or its derivations.  It would seem silly to turn it into a big issue.

the sun ,the moon, the star, the earth, the ocean, the river, the chinese culture the japanese culture, the east asian culture, the Buddhism and the Confucianism.....all the thing

 

don't you believe it ???  i believe it, our history book has recorded it.

 

we have about 10000 years history, if you don't believe it ,you are fool

 

lol.........

 

I believe that after one more message like this you wil LOL somewhere outside of this forum.

 

Consider this an official warning after the second warning you will be banned.

 

 

Japan was not a real threat until its importation of Western technology.

China has been the only major power to influence Korea for the majority of its history and launched numerious invasions against Korea and failed and the only time where they were successful was during the Han dynasty. Eventually establishing a "big-brother" relationship with China during Joseon. The only reason I see Japan being recognized on its claim for dispute, is because it wields more influence and not because they are right. 

 

I tell you what, you go by the consensus of Chinese records. You ignore the (biased) Western PoV. I'm going to keep calling it the Sea of Japan, because in my language (English) that's what it's called! It's like everyone's said about The English Channel/La Manche: different names are fine in different languages.

 

It doesn't matter if Korea has used the word 'Donghae' for 2000 years.

It doesn't matter if Matteo Ricci used 'Sea of Japan' in 1602: he was an Italian using Chinese on his map.

It doesn't matter if it was called 'Mar Coria' in 1615 in Portuguese by Manoel Godinho De Eredia.

 

The fact is: in English it's called 'The Sea of Japan'. If the Koreans want to change their name for it in their language to the English 'Sea of Korea' or 'East Sea', they're more than welcome.

 

OK, so I appreciate looking at this from a historical perspective, this comes off as insufferably imperialistic, but I'm not coming at it from that perspective at all. Whatever the arguments against imperialism of all sorts may be, and however valid they are (I agree with a lot of them of course), it's simply a fact that the English language is the official language of the UN and the IHO, which are the two major international organisations that deal with maritime matters (as well as English being used in 85% of international organisations, 99% of European-based international organisations, 28% of all books published, over 66% of all scientific articles published in France by French scientists, over 95% ditto for Germany, Mexico's national scientific journal, 95% of the International Scientific Citation Index etc etc). It would be just another form of imperialism to try and force the English language to change its name for the sea into a direct translation from another language.

 

The Sea of Japan is on 97% of English language maps, and while it seems reasonable to add 'The East Sea' as a secondary name if the publisher agrees (also the UN's guideline) there's no reason to change the name altogether.

 

Even then there is the matter of statues quo and convenience like not having to changing every map and textbook, so I'm even willing to give in for the sake of convenience as long as it doesn't change actual territory like Dokdo/Takesima.

That makes sense.

I would be a lot more happier with renegotiating the reparation deal Japan struck with South Korean military dictator Park Jung Hee back in 1965...

Quite probably valid points, but irrelevant to this argument. 

 

Nae Jaji Wahng Jaji!!!!!

But I think you'll find that that's actually mine!