About the Japanese description of 『il-eo-yu-hae』 - focused in compared 『wae-eo-yu-hae』 with Japanese - Sung, Hee-Kyung In this research, I've looked for about transition of 『il-eo-yu-hae』 and 『wae-eo-yu-hae』, based on Japanese of 『il-eo-yu-hae』and 『wae-eo-yu-hae』. As a result, I found 2 branches, one is an identical conception between 『wae-eo-yu-hae』 and 『il-eo-yu-hae』, another is not. Details of discord parts between 『wae-eo-yu-hae』 and『il-eo-yu-hae』 , there is many kind of things are different. Because of system of description methods. Among them, it turned out the Japanese about principle of 『wae-eo-yu-hae』 and 『il-eo-yu-hae』were the most discord part. The reason of discord part of noted materials is that the Japanese used 『wae- eo-yu-hae』 is not available when 『il-eo-yu-hae』 is compiled and a new Japanese is used for Chinese character. Also, at the period of 『wae-eo-yu-hae』 compiled, it was reflected with Kamikadago and it compiled, based on Kyo-to. But period of 『il-eo-yu-hae』 compiled, To-Kyo language,based on Edogo, was already settled for common language. So I think such as Kansai dialect, part of Kamikadago system, was corrected because of necessity. The other system, that is discord part in the Japanese, is difference of expression. exception(2), only does description of Chinese character of ha-wi record in 『wae-eo-yu-hae』 where the Japanese must be, is noted Chinese character of san-wi and a new Japanese Hun is noted at place Chinese character of ha-wi. In『il-eo-yu-hae』, noted Japanese's Hun, deleted Japanese from 『wae-eo-yu-hae』. It also have one that a new Hun is made from exception(2). I think, these kind of things were added or deleted while period of 『il-eo-yu-hae』 compiled by common used or not. Including the fact that between the 『wae-eo-yu-hae』 of Chinese character of san-wi and『il-eo-yu-hae』 of Chinese character of san-wi has no difference, there is a system that one of 『il-eo-yu-hae』 was written from Hun which consist of two of Japanese In『wae-eo-yu-hae』. In 『wae-eo-yu-hae』, More than two japanese were written has indicating more than two of Japanese were commonly used and I assume the reason there's only one japanese was used in『il-eo-yu-hae』 with the same title is it has followed by publishing-regulation. The Japanese we can see from both 『wae-eo-yu-hae』 and 『il-eo-yu-hae』 is identical means these commonly used Japanese were the same at the time the each book had published. And the Japanese we can see from both 『wae-eo-yu-hae』 and 『il-eo-yu-hae』 is not
동북아시아문화학회 [The Association of North-east Asian Cultures]
설립연도
2000
분야
복합학>학제간연구
소개
동북아시아 문화의 다양성과 정체성을 연구 토론하고, 지역내 문화 교류의 다양한 모습을 연구하고 문화변동의 큰 틀을 집적함으로써 우리 민족 문화 및 상대 민족의 문화적 터전을 이해하여 문화공동체적 특성을 계발하고 상호 관련성의 강화를 유도하는 학술활동을 통해 동북아시아의 문화발전에 이바지함.