Earticle

이 연구는 한국어에서 사용되는 국가명을 비판지명학의 관점으로 관찰하고 이해하기 위한 목적을 갖는다. 언어권 간 국가명의 소통은 언어적 과정과 더불어 국가 간 관계의 역사에서 탄생하는 정치적 결과이며 국가명에 담긴 이데올로기와 정체성의 재현 과정이다. 역사 자료와 문헌, 현대 사용 관례 조사를 통하여, 한국어의 국가명 사용은 한자 외래지명의 도입, 영어 외래지명의 확산, 자국어 토착지명의 한국어 표기 등으로 확대해갔음을 알 수 있다. 기부언어 사용국가가 외래지명에 대하여 문제를 제기한 경우는 적으나, 정체성의 함축과 재현을 위한 자국어 국가명 사용을 요청하는 경우가 발생한다. 한국은 매우 신속한 긍정적 대응을 취해왔는데, 이것은 옛 명칭 배제 및 자국어 정체성 확보의 가치에 대한 동의, 중앙집중식 행정체계, 한국어의 외국어 표기 능력 등이 작용한 것으로 해석된다.

This study aims to observe and understand country names used in the Korean language from the perspective of critical toponymy. Communicating on the country names between language groups is perceived as being a political product resulting from the long history of diplomatic relations, as well as linguistic processes, and thus a representation of ideology and identity contained in those names. Through a review of historical records and academic literature and an observation of the current practices, three phases are found; adoption of exonyms originating from hanja characters, diffusion of English exonyms, and conversion of endonyms into Korean. Few cases have been recorded in which donor language countries raised the issue of being called by exonyms. However, there were requests that their endonyms should be used in order to ensure denotation and representation of their identities. In those case, the Korean government made quick positive responses. It is interpreted that such factors as agreement to the values of excluding old exonyms and preserving endonyms, centralized administrative system, and capacity of the Korean language to convert complicated foreign scripts functioned in this move.

Despite the lack of historical documentation, The Nakhi are believed to be the descendants of the Old Chiang, moving to the Lijiang area from their nothern home in The Middle Western China. But even after the official recognition by the government in 1954, the Nakhi have kept suffering from two problems: the lack legitimacy in the tribal name as their endonym among the whole tribe, and the unclear interpretation ('na'='black', 'khi'/'xi'='people') of the tribal name. They can be properly treated by the fact that the Moso are not a tribe distinct from the Nakhi. Especially for the meaning of the tribal name, it needs to consider the adjective modification in the Nakhi language. In the name the first one is regarded as a modifier before the second letter whose grammatical category is a noun. For this reason the disputable meaning('na'='black', 'khi'/'xi'='people') can not hold out no longer, and a different syntactic relation has to be considered. Through the semantic analysis of the Moso as their exonym, a better semantic interpretation of the tribal name is proposed that 'na' and 'xi' refer to 'heaven' and 'people' respectively, and the tribal name has a compound noun structure, 'Noun1+Noun2'. In this papen, I will claimthat the tribal name has to be reanalyred as an exonym stracture (Noun1+Noun2) instead of endonym stractare (Adj+Noun).

이 연구에서는 한국과 일본 사이의 바다 이름을 일본해로부터 동해로 복원하기 위하여 최근 개발된 다양한 논리와 이러한 목적을 달성하기 위한 활동 중에서 바다 이름에 관한 국제세미나의 내용을 검토하고, 그 논리를 강화하고 풍성하게 하기 위한 향후 연구과 제를 제안하고자 한다. 동해/일본해 논의의 새로운 국면에 대응하기 위한 여섯 가지 연구과제가 제안된다. 동해와 일본해에 대한 각국 문화에서의 인식과 사용, 근대사회에서 일본해 명칭의 확산과정, 역사적 배경의 특성에 따른 세계 바다이름 분석, 동해 명칭과 연결된 외래지명과 토착지명 논의의 발전, 명칭 병기의 기술적 문제를 해결하기 위한 전자지도의 사용방안, 그리고 정치문화에 관한 정치학적, 심리학적 연구의 도입방안 등이 그것이다.

This paper reviews the gamut of logic currently developed for restoring the name East Sea from Sea of Japan and recent progress going on for activities for this purpose, especially focusing on international seminars on naming seas, and attempts to propose future research agenda for strengthening and enriching the logic. Confronting with a new phase of East Sea/ Sea of Japan issue and looking ahead in the future, some research topics are suggested, including how East Sea has been perceived and used in the Korean culture in comparison with Sea of Japan, how the name Sea of Japan diffused in the modern history, how world sea names are categorized with what characteristics of historical background, how exonym and endonym issue should be elaborated for the East Sea issue, how digital cartography can be utilized to solve the technical problem of dual naming, and how political and psychological studies on political culture should be involved.

The Caspian sea, bounded by Siberia on the north, by Bocara on the east, by Persia on the south, and by Georgia on the west. The Corean sea, lying between Corea and the islands of Japan. The Yellow sea, situated between China and the japan islands. The Gulf of Cochin China, washing the shores of Tonquin and Cochin China. The Bay of Siam, formed by the countries of Siam and Malacca. The Bay of Bengal, contained between the two parts of India, on both sides the Ganges. Also, sea boundaries and names of the world were standardized by this case. Based on the investigation results of case studies, these cases are demonstrated historically because marine boundaries and names were globally standardized by theses cases.