South Korean Lawmaker Urges Military to Drop Japanese Era Terms

A push to change the words soldiers hear every day

Rep. Hwang Hee, a Democratic Party of Korea member of the National Assembly Defense Committee, is urging the Ministry of National Defense to remove Japanese era terminology from South Korea's armed forces. His appeal covers words used in commands, official paperwork and everyday barracks conversation, linking a change in vocabulary to the dignity of soldiers and the country's national language standards.

Ministry documents list expressions that trace back to the Imperial Japanese Army and entered the culture of the Republic of Korea Armed Forces during their formation in the late 1940s. Among them are kara, meaning fake; penki, used for camouflage or deception; shimai, meaning end or dismissal; and kusari, meaning rebuke.

The campaign also reaches beyond obvious Japanese expressions. Official military language retains Japanese style Sino Korean terms, including tenko for roll call, kuho for double time or fast marching, kosan for senior personnel and zampan for leftover food. These words still appear in training, mess halls and administrative routines decades after independence.

The National Institute of the Korean Language recommends more straightforward alternatives: personnel check, running, senior soldier and leftover rations. For a new recruit, those expressions explain the task or subject more directly than unfamiliar military vocabulary.

Hwang's argument connects life inside the barracks with life outside them. Most young men are drafted for active duty, and the language they learn during service can follow them when they return to civilian society. His proposal places military speech within a wider effort to modernize institutional culture and reduce habits inherited from older eras.

Hwang, speaking as a member of the Assembly's defense committee, explained why he wanted the ministry to act:

Young men who complete their military service return to society, so the purification of military language directly connects to broader improvements in national language culture. The Ministry of National Defense must take steps to organize and eliminate Japanese-style terminology and slang within the military environment.

Which expressions are under scrutiny?

The vocabulary under review falls into three broad groups: field commands and drill terminology, administrative and logistical language, and informal barracks slang. Some expressions were introduced by instructors trained before liberation. Others spread through daily conversation among soldiers, surviving because they were short and familiar.

Kara can describe counterfeit or improvised items. Penki is used in the sense of cosmetic cover, camouflage or deception. Shimai can signal that a task or drill has ended, while kusari refers to a sharp scolding. Reformers want these expressions retired or replaced with standard Korean.

Hwang also drew attention to words that recruits quickly pick up from other soldiers. Their meanings cover clothing, duties and a soldier's place in the service cycle:

• Kalkari describes the itchy inner lining of winter clothing, a familiar complaint in cold weather.
• Tenbo means easy duty or a light shift, which can attract resentment from peers.
• Malnyeon refers to a soldier approaching discharge and is shorthand for a senior conscript.
• Chamchi is a nickname for a new recruit and can feel dismissive.

Some of this vocabulary has Japanese roots. Other expressions are barracks slang that has moved away from formal usage. The reform therefore covers both colonial inheritance and an informal speech culture that can be difficult for outsiders to understand and needlessly rough for conscripts.

For soldiers entering service, learning such words is part of learning how the barracks works. Reformers argue that replacing opaque expressions would reduce confusion and remove language associated with the colonial period. The practical challenge is reaching everyday conversation as well as words printed in official documents.

Plain Korean alternatives for official terminology

The National Institute of the Korean Language has assembled recommended replacements and urged ministries to use standard Korean. Its suggested alternatives address terms that remain in manuals and orders, where familiar institutional wording can carry prestige even when its meaning is unclear to a new soldier.

Sino Korean words are Korean words formed from elements of Chinese origin. The terms targeted here were shaped by Japanese military usage in the early 20th century. Their place in the reform debate concerns that history and the clarity of the language soldiers encounter.

The recommended changes translate routine military activities into more direct wording:

• Tenko, the daily roll call used to verify personnel, becomes personnel check.
• Kuho, a command for double time or fast marching, becomes running.
• Kosan, a term for senior or experienced personnel, becomes senior soldier.
• Zampan, used in mess halls for leftover food, becomes leftover rations.

Commanders could introduce both versions during a transition. For example, a unit could use personnel check alongside tenko until soldiers become familiar with the replacement. That would connect the new expression to a routine they already understand.

The Defense Ministry can incorporate the recommendations into drill instructions, training materials and administrative forms. Routine roll calls, inspections and safety briefings would provide opportunities for units to test the revised wording before it becomes the sole standard.

How colonial vocabulary survived liberation

Korea was under Japanese colonial rule from 1910 to 1945. The colonial administration promoted assimilation and restricted Korean in public life. Many Koreans learned Japanese at school, while military and police units used Japanese doctrine and terminology.

Liberation in 1945 ended colonial rule, but the habits of people trained under the empire remained within institutions. After liberation and the division of the peninsula, South Korea built its armed forces while facing threats to its survival. Some early instructors and police veterans had begun their careers during the colonial period.

Training materials and procedures drew on what was available before American doctrine and equipment became dominant. The Korean War then accelerated military growth, leaving little time to revise inherited vocabulary. Words carried through instruction and routine could become familiar to successive groups of soldiers.

The main stages of that history explain why the language issue extends beyond replacing a few expressions:

• 1910 to 1945: Japanese colonial rule promoted assimilation, restricted Korean in public life and spread Japanese institutional vocabulary.
• After liberation in 1945: South Korea began building a military that included instructors and police veterans with experience from the colonial years.
• Late 1940s: Expressions associated with the Imperial Japanese Army entered the developing culture of South Korea's armed forces.
• During the Korean War: Rapid military expansion left little time for language reform.
• After the war: Civilian governments pursued language purification campaigns, while military usage changed more slowly.

The military's closed environment and focus on missions helped familiar expressions endure. Short, punchy words remained useful on parade grounds and in barracks, even when official documents were revised. That helps explain why an administrative change alone would leave much of the vocabulary untouched.

Where the ministry would need to make changes

The Ministry of National Defense has cataloged problematic terms and faces pressure from lawmakers and language authorities to act. A reform would need to identify each place where the vocabulary appears, including commands, signs, forms, databases and instruction.

A practical plan could begin with a central list of legacy terms and approved replacements. Manuals and applications on smart devices could display both versions for a fixed transition period, followed by a ministry deadline for ending the old terminology in official use.

Officer schools and academies for noncommissioned officers would also need revised lesson plans. These institutions train the leaders who give orders and teach recruits. Evaluating commanders on accurate usage would help make the new vocabulary part of instruction, rather than simply a change on paper.

Conscripts would then hear a consistent standard from their first day. A central index of approved terms, searchable on mobile devices, could allow busy leaders to check unfamiliar wording quickly. The aim would be to make the preferred expression easy to find at the moment it is needed.

These steps are proposals for implementation. The appeal gives no adopted ministry deadline for completing the change. Decisions about timing, training and the scope of official revisions would be needed to turn the recommendations into a uniform practice across the armed forces.

Why supporters connect language with respect and safety

Advocates describe the reform as a way to update military culture at relatively low cost and make communication more precise. Their argument is practical as well as historical: clear wording can reduce ambiguity, support safety and affirm respect for the people carrying out orders.

Recruits and reservists may be unfamiliar with older jargon. Short commands in plain Korean could make an instruction easier to understand without requiring someone to learn an additional layer of institutional vocabulary. A term that names the activity directly can help soldiers connect the words they hear with the action expected.

Hwang's appeal also places the reform within broader military modernization, including joint exercises and digital tools. The language used to organize training, record work and communicate instructions is part of the daily operation of those changes.

Conscription gives the debate a wider social reach. Many soldiers complete their service and soon return to civilian life, carrying habits learned in the ranks. Hwang argues that improving military language can therefore contribute to improvements in the country's wider language culture.

The dignity argument reaches informal speech too. A dismissive nickname for a recruit or a rough expression used in a rebuke can shape how service feels to the person receiving it. Reformers see the vocabulary issue as part of reducing inherited habits that sit awkwardly beside the plain Korean used across government.

Why a sudden switch could cause friction

Critics caution that changing familiar commands abruptly could disrupt training. Drill instructions become part of muscle memory, meaning soldiers learn to respond almost automatically through repetition. A different word in a marching cadence or an emergency call could cause confusion during the transition.

Instructors also work within tight training calendars and already manage many updates each year. Teaching revised terminology would take time, especially where old expressions are deeply established in routine commands.

The costs would extend beyond lessons. Manuals might need reprinting, software might need reprogramming and signs might need new wording. Some critics argue that expressions such as double time, or their Korean equivalents, are already clear, and that searching for every surviving legacy term would bring diminishing returns.

A phased change with both versions displayed and a long period of overlap would address most of these concerns. It would allow soldiers to connect a familiar term with its replacement before the older word disappears from official use.

The pace could also vary with the task. Routine administrative language can be practiced through forms and repeated daily checks. Emergency instructions require rehearsal until the revised wording produces an automatic response. The central operational concern is that soldiers understand one another throughout the change.

A domestic reform alongside security cooperation

South Korea's proposed language cleanup is an internal military matter. It does not change security cooperation with Japan or the United States. Seoul and Tokyo conduct joint drills and share intelligence as part of efforts to manage threats from North Korea and keep sea lanes open.

Historical memory remains sensitive even as those security ties deepen. Disputes over Koreans enshrined at Yasukuni and statues dedicated to victims of wartime sexual slavery continue to involve civic groups and courts. Many South Koreans also see the Rising Sun flag as a painful symbol of occupation.

The terminology debate sits alongside those issues, with its immediate focus on what South Korean soldiers hear, say and read during service. Removing colonial era vocabulary would change domestic institutional practice while cooperation with security partners continues.

Political turnover in Seoul has not removed the tension between strategic needs and historical memory. The current administration has pledged pragmatic diplomacy with Washington and Tokyo while maintaining a firm stance on North Korea.

Within that balance, retiring the military's inherited terminology is presented as a reform tied to national identity and dignity. Its concrete effects would be felt in training grounds, barracks, offices and mess halls, where familiar expressions would give way to standard Korean.

How new recruits and reservists could learn the replacements

South Korea's conscription system offers a practical route for changing vocabulary over time. New cohorts arrive every few weeks. If they learn the revised language from the first day of training, older expressions could fade as groups of soldiers complete service and leave.

A proposed sequence would combine official direction with changes in instruction and daily routines:

• Publish a Defense Ministry directive listing the legacy terms, approved replacements and a timetable.
• Update drill scripts, checklists and safety cards, and train drill instructors to use the revised commands.
• Revise signs and digital forms in garrisons, ranges, warehouses and mess halls, with quick response codes linking to pronunciations.
• Use both versions for three months in commands for complex drills, then retire the legacy terms.
• Check usage during unit inspections and reward compliance during promotion boards.
• Give soldiers a feedback channel to report confusing wording or suggest clearer expressions.

The three month overlap is a suggested approach, rather than an announced ministry schedule. Its purpose would be to let soldiers practice the connection between old and new commands before relying on the replacements alone.

Reserve forces would need attention too. Veterans returning for training may remember the vocabulary they learned during earlier service. Refresher courses could introduce the new phrasing, while online modules could reach them before they arrive at a drill site.

Emergency services would need repeated practice because rapid responses depend heavily on habit. Rehearsing the updated words until they become automatic would make the language change part of operational preparation.

The proposal ultimately depends on consistency across the places where military language is learned and repeated. A revised manual, an instructor's command and a barracks conversation all influence what a recruit adopts. Hwang's appeal asks the ministry to address that whole environment as it considers how to retire inherited terminology.

Key Points

• Rep. Hwang Hee of the Democratic Party of Korea is urging the Defense Ministry to remove Japanese era terminology and slang from the armed forces.
• The vocabulary includes kara, penki, shimai and kusari, alongside official terms such as tenko and kuho.
• The National Institute of the Korean Language recommends alternatives including personnel check, running, senior soldier and leftover rations.
• The terms survived through instructors, institutional habits and rapid military expansion after liberation.
• Supporters connect clearer language with respect, safety and the wider language culture soldiers return to after service.
• Critics warn about temporary confusion, training demands and the cost of revising manuals, software and signs.
• A proposed rollout includes revised instruction, a transition using both versions, inspections and feedback from soldiers.
• No adopted ministry completion deadline is given; the suggested three month overlap is an implementation proposal.
• The domestic reform leaves security cooperation with Japan and the United States unchanged.