지적학술용어의 체계화에 관한 연구 = A Study on the Systematization of Cadastral Terms

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study aims to research, compare, and analyze the usage of the cadastral terms of the domestic and international societies of cadastre and suggest the systematization of the science terms of the cadastre.
Therefore, for effective achievement of the aims, we limited the study object only to the cadastral science terms and set the time scope from 1976, the year The Korean Society of Cadastre was established, to the present. The geological scope was limited to Korea, Japan and Thailand, which have the similar cadastral environment with Korea. In addition, the study direction was confined only to the systematization of the cadastral science terms.
Within the set study objective and scope, we utilized the study method described below for the research and analysis of the cadastral science terms. As the research approach, the historical approach was opted, and the descriptive data analysis based on the literature review was used in data analysis.
Below is the summary of the study results conducted with the study objective, scope and method described above.
First, we found the formal characteristics of the cadastral scientific terms. Many scientific terms utilize the multi-word unit, which combines more than two words in expressing one concept. Thus, in analysis of the cadastral scientific terms, the efficiency of the formal analysis should be considered by utilizing the appropriate word unit.
Second, the definitions of the cadastral scientific terms vary by the academic society. For example, for the one term of "cadastre", the Journal of the Korean Society of Cadastre and the journal Cadastre (地籍) broadly interpret it as the 'broad concept that comprehensively indicates the physical, jurisdictional, valuational ,and regulational concept'; whereas in the Journal of the Korean Society of Cadastral Information interprets it as the 'records on the land'. The example represents the differences in the interpretation of the terms by academic societies and researchers.
Third, each academic society and/or researcher uses different English notational method. When the new culture enters the society, the new word emerges in the system of the society, and the loan-words are used to satisfy such needs. However, in the cadastral field, the same scientific term is interpreted and pronounced differently based on the different perspective of the academic society or researcher and/or based on the different route that the term entered into the society.
Forth, there is a lack of the pure scientific term in the field of the cadastre. For the most of the research in the academic society of the cadastre, the terms from the applied sciences and the foundational sciences like cadastrology, cadastral law, cadastral education, and the science of cadastral public administration, or the hands-on terms from the related science field like the real estate, survey science and the public administration are adopted and used.

Fifth, there is also the lack of the popular systematized cadastral theoretical text. For one term, several interpretations in English notations exist and are transferred to the students and the researchers. Ultimately, this is the result of the lack of the popular systematizes cadastral theoretical text, as well as the cadastral scholars' individualistic research tendency.
Sixth, the recognition on the foundational research and the funding for such research are also insufficient. Such recognition and funding should occur around the academic societies which have the condition to promote scholars' creative research activity. Also, academic societies should not forget the importance of the foundational research and funding for it and its education, as well as the impending issues, in development of the cadastral science and the communication with the society and the future.
Based on the research, comparison, and analysis results shown above, here are our suggestion for the systematization of the cadastral terms.
First, the reconsideration for the systematization of the cadastral scientific terms is necessary. As the academy works as the foundation of the development of the field, the academic development of the cadastral field is also represented by the improvement in the concepts and terms of the field. Also, the quantitative and qualitative improvement of the concept and term shows the level of the field. Therefore, the transformation of the cadastral scholars' recognition in systematization of the cadastral terms is sought for.
Second, the communication through the cadastral academic societies are also needed. Although the academic societies should share ultimate goal of promoting the improvement of the cadastral science and its academic value, interpretations of the terms usually occur based on the convenience of the academic society, scholar or the institution, which results in the communication problem within the field. Therefore, the specialized organization for the cadastre should be established and the reference by the organization's experts should be freely occurred around each country's academic societies to build the cooperative relationship for the systematization of the terms. Also, the standard for the cadastral scientific terms should be established to found perfect system within which the systematized terms can survive.
Third, the popular theoretical text on cadastrology based on the systematized cadastrology should be issued. Dreaming of the development of the cadastrology based on the un-systematized field cannot be free of the criticism of the academic backwardness. Therefore, the systematization of the cadastrology should be done with the communication and collaboration of the scholars and experts around the academic society. And based on that, the popular cadastral theoretical text should be issued as the introductory text for the unified usage of the terms, internationally and domestically.
Forth, the expert in cadastrology should be nurtured based on the systematized educational system. Although there are several colleges and universities that have some cadastrology courses, each institutions vary in the standard of the credit and the importance of the foundational theory. Also, the unified popular theoretical text is hard to find, which results in the un-systematized education. In addition, the core of the cadastrology is sometimes soiled by the education of the cadastrology by the related majors, rather than the cadastrology majored instructors. Therefore, the writing of the text through the systematized curriculum and the undergraduate and graduate education based on such text should be done to nurture pure expert of the cadastrology. Further, such experts should contribute in systematization of the cadastrology, and to prevent confusion from the cadastral education by the non-majors.

Fifth, the environment for the cadastral foundational study should be improved. The the cadastral research has relatively inferior environment compared to other cademic field like engineering. The cadastrology is the foundation of the communication with the society and the future, and it is expected to have an important role in building the global village hoping for the mutual improvement. Therefore, governmental support and the cadastral industry's support should go side by side for the investment for the future of the field.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목 차
• 목 차 ⅰ
• 표 목차 ⅳ
• 그림목차 ⅴ
• Ⅰ. 서 론 1
• 1. 연구의 목적 1
• 2. 연구의 범위 및 방법 3
• 1) 연구의 범위 3
• 2) 연구의 방법 4
• 3. 선행 연구의 검토 7
• Ⅱ. 지적학술용어의 일반적 고찰 11
• 1. 지적학술용어의 의의 11
• 1) 지적의 개념 11
• 2) 지적학술용어의 개념 13
• 2. 지적학술용어의 특성 15
• 1) 학술용어의 보편적 특성 15
• 2) 학술용어의 용어적 특성 18
• 3) 지적학술용어의 일반적 특성 18
• 3 지적학술용어의 중요성 20
• 4. 지적학술용어의 필요성 21
• 1) 지적학문의 발전 21
• 2) 지적계의 혼란 방지 22
• Ⅲ. 지적학술용어의 실태 분석 24
• 1. 분석의 기준 24
• 2. 지적학술용어의 실태 26
• 1) 지적학술용어의 형태 26
• 2) 지적학술기관의 연구실태 분석 27
• (1) 지적학술단체의 주요어 현황 27
• (2) 지적학술단체의 용어 해설 29
• (3) 외국의 지적학술단체의 실태 31
• 3. 지적학술단체의 학술용어 평가 33
• 1) 지적학술용어의 질적 평가 33
• 2) 지적학술용어의 연구지원 평가 34
• Ⅳ. 지적학술용어의 체계화 방향 37
• 1. 지적학술용어 체계화의 인식 제고 37
• 2. 지적학술용어 체계화를 위한 협력체계 구축 38
• 3. 지적학술용어 체계화를 위한 이론서 개발 39
• 1) 지적학문의 체계화 39
• 2) 체계화 된 이론서 발간 41
• 4. 지적학술용어의 교육 강화 43
• 1) 지적전문가 양성 43
• 2) 체계화 된 교육과정 구축 44
• 5. 지적학술용어 체계화를 위한 연구환경 개선 46
• 1) 연구기관 설립 46
• 2) 연구비 지원 47
• Ⅴ. 결 론 49
• 1. 요약 및 결론 49
• 2. 연구의 한계성 및 과제 52
• 참고문헌 54
• ABSTRACT 58
• 부록 63