7세기 초 신라의 對隋 군사외교에 대한 재검토 : 圓光 乞師表의 사실성 검증을 중심으로

윤경진(Yoon, Kyeong Jin) 동국역사문화연구소 2021 동국사학 Vol.71 No.-

이 논문은 圓光의 乞師表 사적이 후대에 가공된 것이며, 신라의 對隋 請兵 또한 실재하지 않았음을 확인한 것이다. 이는 걸사표를 출발점으로 하는 7세기 신라의 대중국 군사외교에 대한 전면적 재검토의 첫걸음이 된다. 신라의 대수 청병은 『隋書』에는 보이지 않으며, 당시 고구려와 신라의 관계도 청병을 필요로 하는 상황이 아니었다. 원광의 걸사표는 본래 그의 儒學 이해를 보여주기 위해 對唐 청병과 强首의 사적을 모티브로 가공한 것이며, 그의 활동 시기에 맞추어 對隋 청병으로 정리되었다. 그 원전인 신라의 『殊異傳』은 고려에서 金陟明, 朴寅亮 등에 의해 改作 내지 潤 文되었으며, 이 과정에서 불교 계율보다 국가를 우선하는 그의 답변 내용이 생성되어 추가되었다. 『삼국사기』는 백제의 청병 사적에 맞추어 청병과 수 양제의 허락을 608년과 611년에 나누어 넣었는데, 608년은 607년의 편집 오류로 파악된다. Confirmed in this article is the fact that the story of “Weon’ gwang(圓光)’s Geolsa-pyo(乞師表, the Appeal for a Military Relief)” is actually a false one, fabricated during later periods, and that Shilla never asked the Chinese Su(隋) dynasty for military troops and aid. This new confirmation requires us to reexamine the Shilla dynasty’s history of military diplomacy with the Chinese dynasties in the early 7th century, which has been believed to have initiated with Shilla’s said ask for a Chinese military relief. The supposed fact of Shilla asking the Su dynasty to dispatch military troops cannot be found from Suseo(隋書, The Official History of the Su Dynasty), and considering the relationship between Goguryeo and Shilla at the time, it does not seem likely that Shilla was in need of a foreign military aid. The story of Weon’gwang’s Geolsa-pyo appeal was apparently modeled after the story of Gang Su(强首) who had earlier asked troops from the Chinese Dang(唐) dynasty, and set during his lifetime, in an effort to emphasize Weon’gwang’s expertise in Confucianism. The original text, Shilla’s Su’i-jeon(殊異傳), was rewritten(or supplemented) by Kim Cheok-myeong(金陟明) and Park In-ryang(朴寅亮) during the Goryeo period, and in the process Weon’gwang’s “response” -of a nature prioritizing the state’s welfare than Buddhist teachings- was newly created, and added to the original text. Then, based on this fabricated story, Samguk Sagi documented Shilla’s supposed request for troops as well as Su Emperor Yangje’s authorization of dispatching them, in the entries(years) of 608 and 611 respectively, of which the former seems to be an error of 607.

신라 景文王의 통합 정책과 皇龍寺九層木塔의 改建

윤경진(Yoon, Kyeong-Jin) 고려사학회 2015 한국사학보 Vol.- No.61

憲安王의 사위로서 그의 지명을 받아 즉위한 景文王은 神武王 즉위와 함께 국왕의 지위를 박탈당한 閔哀王을 복권시킴으로써 元聖王系의 통합을 도모하고 文武王의 원찰인 感恩寺 행차를 통해 武烈王系 까지 포용하는 지향을 보였다. 그리고 唐의 책봉을 받은 것을 계기로 재위 6년 만에 生父 啓明을 대왕으로 追封하고, 祧遷 대상이 되는 원성왕에게 烈祖廟號를 올림으로써 不遷之主로 삼았다. 이는 원성왕의 정통 후손으로 경문왕의 지위를 확립하는 것이었다. 경문왕을 구심점으로 하는 통합의 정책은 이념적인 측면에서도 표현되었는데, 경문왕 11년 皇龍寺九層木塔의 改建은 그 산물이었다. 개건 당시에 작성된 『刹柱本記』에는 선덕여왕 때 탑의 건립이 결국 三韓의 통합으로 귀결되었고, 그것이 현 체제의 기반이 되었다고 평가하였다. 경문왕의 생부 추존은 헌안왕의 ‘아들’로서 왕위를 계승한 명분을 파기한 것이었기 때문에 이를 빌미로 연이은 모반이 발생하였다. 이에 경문왕은 문성왕대 이래 중단되어 있던 황룡사구층목탑의 개건을 재개하면서 신라의 ‘통일’을 ‘一統三韓’으로 평가하고 이를 현 사회의 통합 명분으로 삼고자 하였다. 이 점에서 황룡사구층목탑의 개건은 신라의 삼한일통의식이 체제이념으로서 확립됨을 보여주는 것으로 평가할 수 있다. Examined in this article is how the Shilla people’s notion of “Three Hans becoming one(三韓一統意識)” was developed into a state ideology through king Gyeongmun-wang’s Unifying policy. Gyeongmun-wang was the son-in-law of king Heon’an-wang(憲安王), who actually appointed Gyeongmun to the reign, and after he was enthroned, Gyeongmun reinstated the status and honor of former king Min’ae-wang, in order to unify the descendants of late king Weonseong-wang(元聖王), while also trying to establish a relationship with the Mu’yeol-wang(武烈王) descendants by arranging a trip to the Gam’eun-sa(感恩寺) monastery. Gyeongmun-wang also posthumously entitled his biological father as Grand King(大王), and also presented Weonseong-wang with an ancestral tablet title “Yedl-jo”(烈祖). The action was also part of his effort to establish himself as the legitimate successor of Weonseong-wang. This, however, was a blatant breach of the notion that Gyeongmun had been enthroned as the de-facto ‘son’ of Heon’an-wang, and ensued was a series of insurrections. So, with the renovation of the Nine-storied Wooden pagoda of the Hwang’ryong-sa temple(皇龍寺九層木塔), he propagated Shilla’s unification of the three dynasties as the ‘Unification of the Three Hans(一統三韓),’ in order to use it as a platform for future social unity. This shows us that the very notion was being elevated and thus evolving into a state ideology.

신라 통일기 금석문에 나타난 천하관(天下觀)과 력사의식(歷史意識): 삼한일통의식(三韓一統意識)의 성립 시기 고찰

윤경진 ( Kyeong Jin Yoon ) 수선사학회 2014 史林 Vol.0 No.49

Examined in this article are the people`s perception of the world as well as their historical consciousness, which are well reflected in the epigraph materials of the Unified Shilla period. We can not find any traces revealing the people`s perception of the Sam-Han(三韓) entities, from the “Jungdae(中代)” period epigraph materials such as the ones found at the Mausoleum for King Munmu-wang(“Munmu Wang’reung-bi, 文武王陵碑”) or upon the King Seongdeok`s Holy Bell(“Seongdeok Daewang Shinjong, 聖德大王神鍾”). Suggested in these materials is only an origin story of its own. Also suggested is that the world (for the Shilla people) was formed through the Unification war, but this kind of notion was also based upon the situation in which Shilla was obliged to pay respect(“Sadae, 事大”) to the Chinese Dang(唐) dynasty. The earliest example from which we could see a notion regarding the Sam-Han units is the Memorial tablet for Yi Cha-don`s martyrdom(“Yi Cha-don Sun`gyo-bi, 異次頓殉敎碑”), but there are some clashing theories concerning the time the tablet was erected. Only from the Seongju-sa temple tablet(“Seongju-sa-bi, 聖住寺碑”) erected in the mid-9th century we can see that the Shilla people were finally sharing with each other their own idea of the Sam-Han entities` identity. And there is the “Hwang`ryong-sa Chalju Bon`gi(皇龍寺刹柱本記)” erected in the ending days of the 9th century, from which we could find a more reinforced notion of “Three Hans are One”(三韓一統意識). This mean that the notion itself was a newly invented one, due to the political and societal situations of the mid-9th century.

三韓 인식의 연원과 통일전쟁기 新羅의 天下觀

윤경진 ( Kyeong Jin Yoon ) 연세대학교 국학연구원 2014 동방학지 Vol.167 No.-

이 글은 신라에서 삼한일통의식(三韓一統意識)이 수립되는 전제로서 三韓에 대한 인식의 연원을 살펴보고, 통일전쟁기 주변국에 대한 인식을 검토한 것이다. 三韓은 본래 중국 사서(史書)에서 한반도에 있던 세 韓을 가리키는 것이었으나 이들이 소멸한 후에는 중국 동쪽에 존재한 역사 단위를 총칭하는 개념이 되었다. 이것은 본래 삼한과 구분되었던 고구려(高句麗)와 그 이전에 존재하던 고조선(古朝鮮)까지 포함하는 것이었다. 唐은 외교적 관점에서 삼국의 화해를 도모하면서 三韓을 통해 삼국의 역사적 동질성을 강조했지만, 신라는 이러한 인식을 받아들이지 않았다. 『삼국사기(三國史記)』와 『삼국유사(三國遺事)』에는 자신의 역사를 三韓으로 표현하는 사례가 보이지만, 대체로 후대의 인식이 소급된 것이다. 외침에 시달리던 신라는 이를 이념적으로 타개하기 위해 자신을 천하의 중심으로 자처하였다. 이러한 천하관이 표현된 것이 구한(九韓)으로, 구이(九夷)의 관념을 토대로 만들어낸 것이었다. 九韓은 신라에 내공(來貢)하는 존재로 규정되기 때문에 신라 자신을 포함하는 (三韓一統意識)과 구분된다. Examined in this article is how the recognition of "Sam-Han" (三韓), which was the foundation of a notion (developed by the Shilla people) that suggested "the Three Han entities had been one all along" (三韓一統意識), originated and formed. Also examined is how Shilla viewed the other opponent countries during the Unification war. The term "Sam-Han" (三韓), appearing in Chinese historical texts, originally referred to the three Han entities on the Korean peninsula. Yet later, when all of these entities disappeared, it became a term used to refer to all the historical entities existing in the east of China in a generic sense, including Goguryeo (高句麗), which was not part of the Sam-Han legacy, as well as Joseon (朝鮮), which had existed well before the time of Sam-Han. Diplomatically, the Chinese Dang (唐) dynasty encouraged the three dynasties to get along with each other, and emphasized historical similarities shared by them (supposedly through Sam-Han), but Shilla never accepted or embraced such a notion. There are examples in 『Samguk Yusa (Tales of the Three Dynasties that Remain to be Told)』 or 『Samguk Sagi (History of the Three Dynasties)』, in which the Shilla people are depicted as referring to their own history as the history of "Sam-Han," but in most cases they were rather expressions came from their descendants, the people of Goryeo. Being continuously harassed by all types of foreign invasions, Shilla needed an ideological notion that could enable itself to sustain and endure; hence, the Shilla people came to consider themselves as occupying the center of the universe. One expression revealing this type of view of the world was "Gu-Han" (九韓, nine Han entities), which was based upon the concept of "Nine Types of Yet-to-be Civilized" (``Gu-Ih``, 九夷). In theory, these Gu-Han units paid tribute to Shilla and were therefore conceptual figures essentially different from the Sam-Han units, which included Shilla itself.

고려 성종-현종초 북방 개척과 州鎭 설치

윤경진(Yoon, Kyeong-Jin) 한국외국어대학교 역사문화연구소 2011 역사문화연구 Vol.38 No.-

이 논문은 성종 13-15년 강동 6주의 설치와 현종초에 이루어진 州鎭의 추가설치를 통해 북방 개척의 추이와 北界 州鎭 편제의 전반적 양상을 구체화한 것이다. 고려는 거란과 1차 전쟁을 치른 후 압록강 동쪽에 대한 영유권을 인정받고 성종 13년부터 15년까지 강동 6주를 설치하였다. 축성 기사에 보이는 長興鎭 · 歸化鎭은 郭州 · 龜州로 비정되며, 安義鎭은 安興鎭(龍州), 孟州는 鐵州(長寧鎭)의 오기로 판단된다. 강동 6주 설치는 광종대 최전선이었던 嘉州 지역을 기점으로 내륙 경로와 해안 경로의 두 방향으로 개척이 이루어진 결과였다. 서희는 먼저 각 방향의 거점으로 귀주와 곽주를 설치한 후, 이듬해에는 여진 지역으로 깊이 들어가 흥화진과 용주를 설치하고, 이듬해에는 곽주와 용주 사이에 통주(선주)와 철주를 설치하였다. 한편 고려는 목종 8년부터 11년까지 곽주, 귀주, 흥화진, 통주를 차례로 증축하였다. 또한 현종 5년과 7년에는 거란의 변경 침공에 대응하여 용주와 철주를 각각 증축하였다. 이것은 당시 국제 정세의 변화에 대응하여 방비를 강화한 조치였다. 한편 고려는 현종초 기존의 변경 지역을 발판으로 각 방향으로 개척을 진행하여 주진을 추가로 설치하였다. 해안 방면에서는 현종 즉위년에 용주에서 압록강 어귀로 올라간 위치에 麟州를 설치하였다. 인주는 덕종 2년 축조된 장성이 출발점으로서 축조 기사에 보이는 寧海鎭은 인주의 전신으로 파악된다. 내륙 방면으로는 龜州, 泰州, 雲州로부터 각각 압록강 방향으로 나아가 安義鎭, 朔州(寧塞鎭), 昌州(長靜鎭)를 설치하였다. 안의진은 현종 8년에 설치되었으며, 본래 위치는 片月城이었으나 후일 郭州 해변에 僑寓하다가 폐합되었다. 삭주는 寧塞鎭에서 출발하였으며, 본래 위치는 조선초기에 大朔州라고 불리던 곳이다. 창주는 현종 원년 長靜鎭으로 출발하였으나 정종 원년 장성 축조에 수반하여 梓田으로 옮겨 축성하고 昌州防禦使라 하였다. 이들은 현종 말부터 압록강 하류 방면에 설치된 주진과 연결되어 고려의 국경을 형성하였으며, 덕종대부터 축조된 장성의 토대가 되었다. In this article, how the campaigns proceeded in the Northern border region of the Korean peninsula, and how the Ju’jin/州鎭 units in this region were established, since the reign of King Seongjong through the early days of Hyeonjong, are examined. After the first war with the Khitan dynasty, Goryeo was granted jurisdiction of the east side of the Abrok-gang river, and started colonizing the regions on both land and sea, to finally establish the “Six Ju units of the Gangdong region(江東6州).” After that, in response to changing foreign situations, they built fortresses and reinforced their defenses. In the early days of King Hyeonjong’s reign, additional Ju’jin units were established, as the Goryeo forces advanced into the Abrok-gang river area. For example, In-ju/麟州 in the coastline, and An’eui-jin/安義鎭, Sak-ju/朔州 and Chang-ju/昌州 on land, were established.

고려 대몽항쟁기 分司南海大藏都監의 운영체계와 설치 배경

윤경진(Yoon, Kyeong-Iin) 역사실학회 2014 역사와실학 Vol.53 No.-

Examined in this study is how the Division of the Grand Sutra Publication office(分司大藏都監) established and operated in the Namhae(南海) area during Goryeo"s defense against the Mongolians was related to the local publication practices overseen by the Gye’su-gwan(界首官) regional authorities, as well as to the Goryeo government’s defensive strategy of establishing new defense posts on distant islands(Hae’do Ipbo/海島入保). In Goryeo, whenever an individual would request for a book to be published, it had to be granted and authorized by the king himself in order for it to be processed by the local Gye’su-gwan authorities. The division office at Namhae was under the jurisdiction of Jinju-mok(晉州牧) authorities. There are some cases in which the Anchal-sa(按察使) magistrates intervened in the affairs of the division office, but they do not seem to have been the authorities in charge. Creation of drafts for carving as well as management of human resources were all handled by the Main office for the Grand Sutra publication(大藏都監) located on the Gang’hwa(江華) island. The Division office(分司都監) was only in charge of the carving process, yet was created as an official function of the state nonetheless, and Jeong An(鄭晏)’s support and donation was in response to that function. The reason the division office was established not in the realm of Jinju-mok but at the NamHhe area was because it had to serve another purpose, which was national defense. Being stationed there had another merit as well, as the place served as an sanctuary for the entire process to unfold. Considering all this, it is hard to believe that other division offices would have been established in several other areas as well, or that all of the tablets were created at Namhae. The division office was only established in Namhae.

고려의 대후당(對後唐) 외교와 신라 ― ‘존왕론(尊王論)’의 전개와 관련하여 ―

윤경진 ( Yoon Kyeong-jin ) 수선사학회 2018 史林 Vol.0 No.66

Examined in this article is the Goryeo government’s policy in dealing with Chinese Hudang(後唐), based upon a recent study which revealed that an early Goryeo individual formerly known as the “Gangju prefect [知康州事, in this case, more like regent or ‘head’ than prefect] Wang Bong-gyu (王逢規),” which had been understood as some local leader operating in the Jinju region, was actually the Founder king of Goryeo, Taejo Wang Geon(王建) himself. The reason Wang Geon initiated diplomatic talks with China under the name of the ‘Leader of Gangju’ than the ‘Goryeo king’ was to display a certain level of respect for Shilla. He even referred to such notion and attitude as “honoring the legitimate kingdom and its king (‘Jon’wang-ron, 尊王論’).” This was of course to stabilize his(Wang Geon’s) own kingdom and absorb pro-Shilla elements into the Goryeo government. Wang Geon had his emissaries to China tag along the Shilla envoy, and the Hudang court as well considered Wang Geon’s emissary as part of the Shilla delegation. Yet later, when Shilla king Gyeong’ae(景哀王) was killed during Gyeon Hweon’s invasion of Gyeongju and Gyeongsun(敬順王) was subsequently enthroned as the new Shilla king, Wang Geon decided no longer to maintain this notion. After the battle of Gochang-gun(古昌郡), Goryeo was able to annex most of Shilla’s territory, and Wang Geon managed to reverse the nature of its relationship with the Shilla king (from being a vassal or subordinate to now newly a senior partner and superior) when he visited the Shilla capital as a victor. With development of this new dynamic inside the Korean peninsula, Goryeo finally received an entitlement from Hudang, and Wang Geon himself changed his name to “Geon(建, ‘found, erect, establish’),” in order to cut himself loose from the past when he was still a mere vassal of Shilla. This series of events provided Wang Geon with a much needed level of legitimacy which he direly required to become the new king of “Samhan(三韓, the Korean peninsula)”, and with this new authority Wang Geon annexed the rest of Shilla and dominated Hu-Baekje, ultimately achieving the reunification of the Korean peninsula.

매초성(買肖城) 전투와 나당전쟁(羅唐戰爭)의 종결 ― 『삼국사기(三國史記)』 신라본기 675년 2월 기사의 분석 ―

윤경진 ( Kyeong-jin Yoon ) 수선사학회 2017 史林 Vol.0 No.60

Examined in this article are certain issues associated with the ending of the Shilla-Dang war. I tried to reevaluate the issues from a perspective different than before. The February 675 entry of Samguk Sagi(三國史記) portrays how the war ended. This is actually a reedited version of what was written in Shin-Dangseo(新唐書), which neglected to record the Maecho-seong(買肖城) fortress battle and described as if battles continued afterwards. But all the battles recorded here clearly took place before the Maecho-seong battle which broke out in September, and the war itself definitely ended when the status of Shilla king Munmu-wang was reinstated after this particular battle. This Maecho-seong fortress seems to have been the Sugok-seong(水谷城) fortress, which was located upon a strategically important traffic spot leading to the Pyeong`yang area. After Shilla lost region above the Daegok-seong(大谷城) fortress, it tried to secure Maecho-seong but unfortunately failed. As a result, Shilla`s northern borderline was established below the Daegok-seong fortress, and during the reign of King Hyoso-wang, fortresses were built in regions such as Gaeseong(開城) and Wujam(牛岑). Samguk Sagi described the events at the time as if Shilla was able to establish local units right up to “the Southern borderline of Goguryeo(高句麗 南境)” during the war. But such record should be understood as a description of Unified Shilla`s nine Ju units (“九州”) which were established after the war, reflecting the fact that Shilla`s territory under the Daedong-gang river line was authorized by Dang, during Shilla King Seongdeok-wang`s reign.

7세기 초 신라 당항성(党項城)의 위치 재론(再論) - ‘당성(唐城)’설 비판과 ‘한강(漢江)’설 제기 -

윤경진(Yoon, Kyeong Jin) 역사실학회 2021 역사와실학 Vol.76 No.-

이 연구는 7세기 초 신라의 사행로였던 당항성(党項城)을 당성(唐城:현 화성시)으로 비정하던 그동안의 통설이 명확한 실증적 근거를 갖추지 못했음을 지적하고, 대중국 사행로의 역사성과 지명에 나타난 지형적 특성 등을 통해 현 한강 삼전도 지역에 새롭게 비정한 것이다. 당항성의 ‘당(党)’은 지형의 속성을 반영한 것이고 당성의 ‘당(唐)’은 당나라를 가리키는 것으로서 맥락이 다르다. 신라후기에 사용된 당은포가 삼국시기에도 사용되었다고 볼 근거가 없다. 의상(義湘)이 유학을 위해 당주(唐州)에서 배를 타려다가 실패한 사적은 신라후기 이후의 내용이 투영된 것으로서 실제로는 육로로 고구려를 경유하여 갔다. 당항진(党項津)은 당항성과 같은 지역으로, 포구와 나루를 겸한 특성에서 그 위치는 한강으로 파악된다. 역대 왕조는 강에 인접하며 이곳에는 조운과 사행을 위한 포구가 마련되었다. 고려의 전포(錢浦) 내지 벽란도(碧瀾渡), 고구려의 남포(南浦)가 대표적이다. 한성 백제도 왕성 인근에 포구를 가지고 있었을 것인데, 한성을 점령한 신라가 이를 그대로 활용한 것이 바로 당항진이다. 이곳은 조선시기 삼전도 일원으로 파악되는데, 인근의 학여울[鶴灘]은 형태적 특징에서 ‘닭의 목’에서 유래한 당항과 상통하여 이러한 이해를 뒷받침한다. This study points out that the conventional wisdom considering Danghang castle which was the road used by envoys of Silla in the early 7th century as Dangseong(currently Hwaseong city) doesn"t have clear and empirical basis. And it also newly defines Danghang castle as area of current Han river Samjeondo by utilizing the historical characteristics of the road toward China which was used by envoys, and the topographical characteristics in the name of palaces. . "Dang(党)" of Danghang Castle reflected the properties of the terrain. On the other hand, "Dang(唐)" of Dangseong means Tang dynasty. Therefore, the two are in different contexts. There is no basis to say that Dangunpo which was used in the late period of united Silla, was also used during the Three kingdoms period. There was a historical record that Uisang(義湘) tried to take a boat in Dangju(唐州) for studying abroad but he failed. However, in fact, he used land route that passed through Goguryeo. The historical record projected contents after the late Silla period. Danghangjin(党項津) seems to be the same area as Danghang castle, and was a place that combined a port and a ferry. The location is figured out as the Han river. All-time Korean dynasties were adjacent to the river, where ports for envoys and tax transportation were set up here. Jeonpo(錢浦) and Byeokrando of Goryeo and Nampo(南浦) of Goguryeo are typical examples. Hanseong Baekjae also had ports near the capital. It was Danghangjin that Silla used as it stood after Silla occupied Hanseong. This place was figured out as Samjeondo(三田渡) area of Joseon period. The fact that Hangnyeoul[鶴灘] nearby this place is in line with Danghang in terms of its morphological characteristics supports this understanding.

초등학교 영어교육에서 파닉스 지도에 관한 교사 인식 조사와 개선 방향

윤경진(Yoon, KyoungJin),이재근(Lee, Jaekeun) 학습자중심교과교육학회 2017 학습자중심교과교육연구 Vol.17 No.9

본 연구의 목적은 초등학교에서 영어 파닉스(phonics) 지도에 관한 교사의 인식도 조사를 통해 파닉스 지도를 개선하는 방향을 제시하고, 효율적인 읽기 지도방법을 마련하는 것이다. 이를 해결하기 위한 방법으로 교사 설문조사와 교과서를 분석하 였다. 설문조사(2016.9.1-11.31)를 분석한 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 초등 영어 교과서 상의 파닉스 비중을 늘려야 한다 . 둘째, 상당수의 교사들이 파닉스를 지도할 때 교과서의 내용을 보충하거나 재구성한다는 응답은 초등 영어 교과서의 파닉스 내용의 재정비가 필요하다는 것을 시사한다. 셋째, 초등영어 교과서의 파닉스 지도를 위한 교수·학습 모형을 구안, 보급할 필요가 있다. 이를 바탕으로 한 제언은 다음과 같다. 첫째, 실제 현장 초등 영어수업에서 사용할 수 있는 교재에 대한 연구가 필요하다. 둘째, 파닉스 수업 시수증대를 위한 영어 및 타교과와의 연계방안 연구가 필요하다. 셋째, 학년군별에 맞는 파닉스 교수학습모형이 필요하다. The purpose of this study is to analyze the survey of elementary English teacher s recognition on the phonics for improving phonics in elementary English education. The results of the survey of Elementary English teachers on the phonics and the analysis of the elementary English text books are as follows: First, we should place greater importance on the phonics. Second, the greater part of teachers answer-they need supplement or reconstruction on the teaching phonics-shows that elementary English textbooks should be reorganized on the phonics. Finally, the teaching-learning model for phonics teaching of elementary English textbooks should be designed and propagated.