한민족의 수난과 구국항쟁

姜性文(강성문) 국방부 군사편찬연구소 1988 군사 Vol.- No.17

丁卯ㆍ丙子胡亂期의 捕虜 送還 硏究

강성문(姜性文) 국방부 군사편찬연구소 2002 군사 Vol.- No.46

『類語仮字格』と『掌中仮字便覧』の関係について

姜盛文(강성문) 한국일본어학회 2021 日本語學硏究 Vol.- No.69

본 연구는 『古言梯』 이후 성립한 가나 표기법서인 『類語仮字格』와 『掌中仮字便覧』에 대해 다루고 있다. 두 자료 모두 『古言梯』로 인해 국학자들 사이에서 널리 퍼진 고전 가나 표기법(소위 역사적 가나 표기법이라고 부르는 표기 방식)을 채용하고 있다. 『類語仮字格』와 『掌中仮字便覧』의 저자가 서로 교류를 한 흔적은 찾을 수 없었다. 그러나 두 자료를 비교조사한 결과 두 자료 사이에 유사점이 많이 있다는 것을 알 수 있었다. 우선 『掌中仮字便覧』의 서문과 범례는 『類語仮字格』에서 인용한 듯한 구절이 보였다. 일부 단어와 문장은 거의 그대로 가져온 수준이었다. 그리고 『掌中仮字便覧』는 음편, 한자음, 속어에 특별한 표시를 하였는데 이 세 종류의 단어에 특별한 표시를 한다는 발상과 표시를 하는 방법이 『類語仮字格』와 동일했다. 단어를 수록하는 방식에도 유사점이 보였다. 두 자료 모두 먼저 『和字便覧』의 대분류를 차용하여 단어를 나열했다. 그 다음, ‘문제가 되는 가나가 단어의 몇 번째에 위치하였는가 → 단어의 길이 → 50음도’ 순서로 정리하여 단어를 배치했다. 즉, 두 자료 모두 4단계의 과정을 거쳐 단어를 배열한 것이다. 또한 『類語仮字格』에 실린 단어는 거의 다 『掌中仮字便覧』에도 실려 있었다. 다만 데이카 가나 표기법이 추가되거나 단어가 수록된 카테고리가 변경되는 등 『掌中仮字便覧』에서 개편된 단어가 일부 존재했다. This paper examines Ruigo Kanazukai and Shochu Kana Benran. Both are which are the kana orthography note published after Kogentei. Both materials employ historical kana orthography, which is widely used among kokugaku scholars. There were no signs of exchanges between the authors of Ruigo Kanazukai and Shochu Kana Benran. However, after the comparative study of this two materials, it is found that there were many similarities between the two materials. First of all, the preface and legend of Shochu Kana Benran seemed to have been quoted from Ruigo Kanazukai. Some words and sentences were almost exactly the same. In addition, Shochu Kana Benran had a special mark on onbin, on’yomi(including Sino-Japanese vocabulary), and slang, which were the same as the idea of making a special mark on these three words in Ruigo Kanazukai. Similarities were also seen in the way words were included. Both materials first list the words, borrowing from the main category of Wajibenran. Then, they arranged the words in order of ‘the location of the problematic kana → the length of words → Gojuon’. In other words, both materials arranged the words through the four-step process. Also, Most of the words in the Ruigo Kanazukai were also included in the Shochu Kana Benran. However, some of the words that were reorganized in Shochu Kana Benran existed, such as the addition of Teika’s kana orthography or the change of categories of some words.

朝鮮初期 六鎭 開拓의 國防史的 意義

姜性文(강성문) 국방부 군사편찬연구소 2001 군사 Vol.- No.42

「尚古仮字用格」と「増補正誤仮名遣」の和語項目に関する一考察

강성문 한국일본어문학회 2022 日本語文學 Vol.95 No.-

This paper investigated the native Japanese words in Shōkokanazukai and Zōhoseigokanazukai. The fact that Zōhoseigokanazukai was produced referring to Shōkokanazukai is presented in 姜盛文(2019). However, it can be stated that the conclusion is incomplete because 姜盛文(2019) only targets the Sino-Japanese vocabulary in each material. The investigation confirmed that most of the words in Shōkokanazukai were also included in Zōhoseigokanazukai. While there were words with the same or similar description, such as notation, Chinese characters, and annotations, there were also modified items such as addition or deletion of the contents. Moreover, Zōhoseigokanazukai added the words that were not included in Shōkokanazukai. some of which were found in Myōmokushō, which is mentioned in the legend of Zōhoseigokanazukai, Kogentei, which greatly influenced the kana orthography note written in historical kana orthography, and Seigokanazukai which is the basis of Zōhoseigokanazukai. However, there are only a few words that could be confirmed, and it is necessary to reveal the material these words were referenced through further investigation. 本稿では『尚古仮字用格』と『増補正誤仮名遣』に収録されている和語項目を比較分析し、両資料の影響関係について考察した。『増補正誤仮名遣』が『尚古仮字用格』を参考にしていることは姜盛文(2019)によって示唆されている。しかし、姜盛文(2019)は漢語項目のみを対象にしており、部分的な研究であると言える。よって、『尚古仮字用格』と『増補正誤仮名遣』の関係をより明らかにするために、各資料における和語項目、そのうちア行の和語項目を調査した。 調査の結果、漢語項目と同様に和語項目においても『増補正誤仮名遣』は『尚古仮字用格』を受け継いだことが指摘できる。『尚古仮字用格』の収録語のほとんどが『増補正誤仮名遣』にも収録され、かつ漢字列や語釈といった記述内容が一致あるいは類似する項目が多い。 しかし、『増補正誤仮名遣』で手が加えられたものも少なくない。見出し項目が追加・削除・変更された箇所もあれば、語釈が追加・削除・変更された箇所もある。特に語釈の場合、修正が誤った項目が見られた。また、『尚古仮字用格』になかった出典注記が施された項目が一部確認された。 『増補正誤仮名遣』には『尚古仮字用格』にない語が追加されているが、そのうちの一部は『増補正誤仮名遣』の凡例に示された『名目抄』、古典仮名遣い系統の仮名遣書に大きな影響を与えた『古言梯』、『増補正誤仮名遣』の基となる『正誤仮名遣』に見られた。しかし、確認できた言葉は少数で、出典がわからないものが多数あった。今後の調査を通じてそれらの出典を明らかにする必要がある。

병원 종사자의 리더십 지각이 조직효과성에 미치는 영향과 개인특성 및 조직특성의 조절효과

강성문,이기효,김원중 보건의료산업학회 2010 보건의료산업학회지 Vol.4 No.2

『古言梯』以降の古典仮名遣い系統の仮名遣書における 非古典仮名遣いの用例について ― 定家仮名遣い系統の仮名遣書と比較して ―

姜盛文 한국일본학회 2020 한국일본학회 학술대회 Vol.2020 No.08

『喪志編』に見られる楫取魚彦の表記意識について

강성문 한국일어일문학회 2022 日語日文學硏究 Vol.120 No.-

Nahiko Katori is famous as the author of Kogentei, and Kogentei is famous for the material that widely spread historical Kana orthography among Kokugakusya(a Japanese classical scholar). Most of the studies on Nahiko Katori are concentrated in Kogentei, and few studies dealing with other materials except Kogentei have been found. To study Katori Nahiko, of course, you should look at other materials as well as Kogentei. This paper is a study that examines the viewpoint of the author's writing in Soushihen, the essay written by Nahiko Katori. Soushihen has not attracted attention from researchers, and some researchers doubt whether this is Nahiko Katori's book. However, considering that the author's name is on the cover and that Nahiko Katori's seal is stamped on the body, there seems to be no doubt. By analyzing this material that has not been noticed so far, you will be able to see the viewpoint of Nahiko Katori's writing. As a result of analysis, unlike Kogentei, many non-historical Kana orthography were seen. This orthography was similar to those of the Teika’s Kana orthography. As a result of comparative analysis with the material employing Teika’s Kana orthography, it was found that it was closer to general orthography in Setsuyoshu than the normative orthography in Kana orthography note. In addition, it was confirmed that shakkun kana was used in Soushihen differently from Kogentei. In conclusion, it can be said that Soushihen is a material that does not care about orthography like Kogentei. Perhaps it was not intended to be shown to others in the first place, so it seems to have been written freely without being bound by orthography.

朝鮮시대 女眞征伐에 관한 연구

姜性文 국방부 군사편찬연구소 1989 군사 Vol.- No.18

楫取魚彦の『古言梯』の編集意識について収録語の配列に注目して

姜盛文 ( Kang Seong-mun ) 고려대학교 글로벌일본연구원 2021 일본연구 Vol.35 No.0

本稿は楫取魚彦の『古言梯』について考察したものである。『古言梯』は古典仮名遣い(いわゆる歴史的仮名遣い)を普及した資料で、仮名遣いの歴史を論じる際に必ず言及されるほどの資料であるが、資料の内容に注目した研究は少ない。そこで本稿では『古言梯』の収録語の配列と、それに関わる『新撰字鏡』との関係に注目した。 『古言梯』の収録語が五十音順と仮名数順で並んでいることは知られている。しかし、緩やかではあるが意味によっても配列されていることが稿者の調査でわかった。『和名類聚抄』と対照して調査した結果、全体的に「天￫人￫動物￫植物￫食べ物￫地面￫道具￫動詞·形容詞など￫官職名·地名」の順番で収録されていることが指摘できる。また、この順番から「より高所からより低所」「生物から無生物へ」という傾向が読み取れる。ただ、五十音順と仮名数順ほど厳密に施されておらず、場合によって順番が異なる。 『古言梯』における意義分類を見ると「天」と「地面」の分類に属する語が距離を離れて示されているが、これは当時として稀なことだった。一方、魚彦が『古言梯』を著す際に参考にした『新撰字鏡』では「天」と「地面」の語が離れて収録されている。おそらく『古言梯』における意義分類は『新撰字鏡』からの影響であると考えられる。 This paper examines Kogentei by Nahiko Katori. Kogentei is a material that spread historical Kana orthography in Japan, and although it is so often mentioned when discussing the historical Kana orthography, few studies have focused on the content of this material. Therefore, this paper paid attention to the relationship between the arrangement of the words contained in Kogentei and the related Shinsen Jikyo. It is known that the words in Kogentei are arranged in the order of Gojuon and the length of the word. However, it is discovered that the words in Kogentei were somewhat arranged according to their meaning. After the investigation in contrast to Wamyoruijusho, it can be pointed out that the order is “Heaven￫Man￫Animals￫Plants￫Food￫Ground￫Tools￫Grammar language(such as verbs, adjectives)￫Government post, Place name.” in general. Also, from this order, the tendency to “from a higher place to a lower place” and “from an organism to an inanimate object” can be read. However, this order is not as strict as the order of Gojuon and the length of the word, and different depending on the situation. Looking at the semantic classification in Kogentei, the words belonging to the classification of ‘heaven’ and ‘ground’ are shown at a distance, which was rare at that time. On the other hand, in Shinsen Jikyo, which Nahiko referred to when writing Kogentei, the words belonging to the classification of ‘heaven’ and ‘ground’ are recorded separately. Perhaps the semantic classification in Kogentei was influenced by Shinsen Jikyo.