Structural Challenges in Internationalizing Korean Dress Discourse : Epistemological Foundations, Mistranslation, and Romanization Standardization

This study identifies three structural challenges embedded in the scholarly infrastructure underlying the internationalization of Korean dress research and education and proposes researcher-level measures for each. The inquiry originates from the authors' experience in museum translation and teaching an English-medium course on Korean dress, and extends into a broader critique of Korean dress framed within international academic contexts. Drawing on theories of linguistic coloniality and the methodological shift toward material culture in dress history, the study highlights three interrelated layers of structural issues. Layer 1 involves an epistemological bias, whereby English-language educational and exhibition materials remain confined to a paradigm grounded in textual and iconographic sources, resulting in the underrepresentation of material culture findings. Layer 2 is mistranslation, substantiated by a systematic review of the Korea Heritage Service's English-name database. Out of 65 dress-related entries, 38 contain errors, which are classified into five types: category error, simple error, loss of distinctiveness, loss of material properties, and omission of the native term. Layer 3 is the absence of standardized romanization, illustrated by the hwarot/hwal-ot example, which fragments database indexing and undermines accurate back-transliteration to Hangeul. These three problems share a common root: the lack of institutional channels through which Korean dress researchers can shape international standards. In response, this study proposes three strands of practice that individual researchers can implement. First, it advocates an integrated open archive linking textual, visual, archaeological, and scientific data as a shared foundation for English-language teaching resources on Korean dress. Second, it recommends native-first translation guidelines that preserve Korean terms and add concise structural explanations to support accurate retrieval and citation. Third, it argues that back-transliterability to Hangeul should be the primary criterion for romanization and promotes consistent use of dual forms to support reliable search and cross-referencing.