『四聲通解』의 魚語御韻과 模姥暮韻에 인용된 『蒙古韻略』과 『蒙古字韻』의 비교 연구

曲曉雲 ( Qu Xiaoyun ) 한국중국언어학회 2021 중국언어연구 Vol.- No.94

本文對崔世珍在≪四聲通解≫魚語御韻和模姥暮韻標註≪蒙古韻略≫何音的字與≪蒙古字韻≫做的比較分析結果如下: 1) 除了「遽」等字的訓民正音轉寫「:뀨」應改為「·뀨」、「貯」等字的訓民正音轉寫「쥬」應改為「:쥬」、「戍」等字的訓民正音轉寫「슈」應改為「·슈」外, ≪四聲通解≫魚語御韻和模姥暮韻所引≪蒙古韻略≫小韻字讀音與≪蒙古字韻≫完全一致。但≪蒙古韻略≫和≪蒙古字韻≫在收錄字上存在不同。 2) 漢語[-əw]音的≪蒙古字韻≫八思巴字轉寫為/-uw/, ≪蒙古韻略≫的訓民正音轉寫為/-əw/。八思巴字轉寫/-uw/與漢語拼音的/-ou/類似, 訓民正音的轉寫與IPA標記一致。 3) 「醵」在≪蒙古字韻≫裡有平聲 [giu]和入聲 [giεw]二音, 但在≪蒙古韻略≫裡還有去聲[giu]一音;「柱」在≪蒙古字韻≫裡有上聲 [dʒiu]一音, 在≪蒙古韻略≫裡還有上聲 [t∫iu]和去聲 [giu]二音;「紵」在≪蒙古字韻≫裡有上聲 [dʒiu]一音, 在≪蒙古韻略≫裡還有上聲 [t∫iu]一音。「輸」在≪蒙古字韻≫裡有平聲 [∫iu]一音, 在≪蒙古韻略≫裡還有去聲 [∫iu]一音。 4) ≪四聲通解≫的收錄字以≪洪武正韻≫為基準, 在≪洪武正韻≫、≪蒙古韻略≫均收錄並且在二書中的讀音一致的收錄在先, 不標註≪蒙古韻略≫何音;二書讀音不一致的漢字收錄在其後, 并標註≪蒙古韻略≫何音。崔世珍在≪四聲通解≫裡添加了≪洪武正韻≫未收錄的「續添字」, 一些「續添字」也見於≪蒙古字韻≫, 本文推測, 這樣的「續添字」可能也收錄在≪蒙古韻略≫。 5) ≪蒙古字韻≫和≪蒙古韻略≫有魚母一聲紐, 八思巴字轉寫為/’-/, 有別于喩母的/j-/, 但是崔世珍的轉寫均為/ㅇ/, 所以二母的實際音值均為零聲母[ø-]。 6) ≪蒙古字韻≫魚韻(≪蒙古韻略≫魚語御韻) 有[-u]、[-iu]兩個韻母, 但是[-iu]中的[i]受其後圓唇母音u的影響, 實際音值為接近圓唇[y]的一個音, 所以八思巴字轉寫為/ė/, 訓民正音裡無這樣的元音, 並且帶有圓唇性質的[i]與純粹的[i]在音位上不構成對立, 所以訓民正音轉寫為[i]。通過≪蒙古字韻≫魚韻(≪蒙古韻略≫魚語御韻) 的八思巴字和訓民正音的轉寫, 證明漢語的[y]韻母在≪蒙古字韻≫(≪蒙古韻略≫) 成書的時代還未產生。 7) 崔世珍在≪四聲通解≫魚語御韻和模姥暮韻引用的包括「迂」在內的≪古今韻會≫的記錄均與≪古今韻會擧要≫一致。花登正宏(1997:71) 主張從崔世珍的注釋可以證明崔世珍所見「韻會」為≪古今韻會≫, 而非≪古今韻會擧要≫, 這一主張是錯誤的。 Choi Se-Jin makes a comparative analysis of the pronunciation of some words marked “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” in “Sa-Seong-tong-Hae” Yú (魚), Yǔ (語), Yù (御) and Mú (模) Mǔ (姥) Mù (暮) Rhyme. This paper makes a comparative analysis of these words and “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun”, and the results are as follows: 1) The Chinese [-əu] sound is translated into /-uw/ in the Phags-pa character of “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun”. The Hunminjeongeum of “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” is translated into /--əw /. The transliteration of the Phags-pa character /-uw/ is similar to the /-ou/ of Hanyu Pinyin, and the transliteration of the Hunminjeongeum is consistent with the IPA mark. 2) “醵” has 平聲 [giu] and 入聲 [giεw] in “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun”, but there is 平聲 [giu] and 入聲 [giεw] and 去聲 [giu] in “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” ; “柱” has 上聲 [dʒiu] in “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun”,but there is 上聲 [dʒiu] and 上聲 [t∫iu] and 去聲 [giu] in “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” ; “紵” has 上聲 [dʒiu] in “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun”, but there is 上聲 [dʒiu] and 上聲 [t∫iu] in “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” ; “輸” has 平聲 [∫iu] in “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun”, but there is 平聲 [∫iu] and 去聲 [∫iu] in “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” ; 3) The included words of “Sa-Seong-tong-Hae” are based on “Hongwu Zhengyun”. The words with the same pronunciation in Hongwu Zhengyun and “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” are included first, and The words with inconsistent pronunciation in the two books are included later, and marked with he Yin of “Mongolian Rhyme”. Choi Se-Jin added “續添字” which is not included in “Hongwu Zhengyun” in “Sa-Seong-tong-Hae”, some of which can also be found in “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun”. This paper speculates that such “續添字” may also be included in “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe”. 4) “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” and “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun” have 魚母, and the Basiba character is /’- /, which is different from the 喩母’s / j- /, but Choi Se-Jin’s transliteration is /ㅇ/, So the actual sound values of the two initials are both zero consonants [ø-]. 5) The “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun” Rhymes of Yú (魚) (“Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” Rhymes of Yú (魚), Yǔ (語), Yù (御)) has two vowels [-u] and [-iu], but the [i] in [-iu] is affected by the subsequent lip vowel u, and the actual sound value is close to that of the lips [y], so the Phags-pa character is pronounced as /ė/, Hunminjeongeum does not have such a vowel, And there is no phoneme opposition between the lip-sensitive [i] and the essential [i], so the Hunminjeongeum is called [i]. Through the transliteration of the Phags-pa and Hunminjeongeum of the “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun” Rhymes of Yú (魚) (“Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” Rhymes of Yú (魚), Yǔ (語), Yù (御)), Prove that [y] vowels were not generated at the time of “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun” (“Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe”)’s writing. 6) Cui Shizhen’s records of “Gu Jin Yun Hui”, including “迂”, are consistent with the “Gu Jin Yun Hui Ju Yao”. Masahiro Hanato (1997:71) argued that it can be clarified from Cui Shizhen’s notes that the “rhyming meeting” seen by Cui Shizhen is “ancient and modern rhyming meeting” rather than “ancient and modern rhyming meeting”, which is wrong.

『번역박통사(飜譯朴通事)』 편찬자에 대한 재고(再考)

장향실 ( Hyang Sil Jang ) 민족어문학회 2008 어문논집 Vol.- No.57

본고는 1510년경에 최세진에 의해 편찬되었다고 알려진 『飜譯朴通事』가 최세진의 편찬으로 볼 때 야기되는 여러 문제점을 살폈다. 이를 바탕으로 현존 『飜譯朴通事』가 최세진이 언해한 것이 아닐 가능성을 제기하였다. 현존하는 『飜譯朴通事』에는 책의 간행 연대나 저자를 추정할 수 있는 어떤 기록도 없다. 『飜譯朴通事』가 최세진의 것이라고 단언할 근거가 없음에도 불구하고 그간 학계에서는 오랫동안 최세진의 것으로 믿어 의심치 않았다. 하지만 『飜譯朴通事』 6葉에 나오는 『老朴凡例』에 대한 내용, 『飜譯朴通事』의 번역과 『老朴集覽』 풀이의 불일치, 『四聲通解』에 실린 飜譯老乞大朴通事凡例의 설명과 맞지 않는 『飜譯朴通事』의 형식 및 書名, 『飜譯朴通事』의 서지적 정보 등을 고려해보면 최세진 편찬설을 준신하기 어렵다. 오히려 『飜譯朴通事』를 최세진이 편찬한 것이 아니라고 보았을 때 이러한 문제들은 적절히 이해될 수 있다. 현전하는 『飜譯朴通事』는 최세진의 것이 아닐 수 있다. 물론 본고에서 제기한 문제들이 『飜譯朴通事』가 최세진이 편찬한 것이 아님을 확증케 하는 결정적 증거가 될 수 있는가라고 의문을 제기할 수도 있다. 하지만 적어도 본고에서 제기한 문제들이 해결되지 않는 한 최세진 편찬설 또한 설득력을 가질 수 없는 것도 사실이다. This thesis studied on the Beonnyeok-Baktongsa which edited in 1510 or thereabouts. The editor of Beonnyeok-Baktongsa widely known as Choi, Se-jin. But it also raised several severe questions. So this researched questions and presented the possibility that the editor of Beonnyeok-Baktongsa existing is not Choi, Sejin. There is no proof which the Beonnyeok-Baktongsa existing edited by Choi, Se-jin. Even though this fact the editor of Beonnyeok-Baktongsa widely and firmly known as Choi. This thesis presented several questions concerning the editor of Beonnyeok-Baktongsa. These are the record of 6th page about Nobak-beomnye in Beonnyeok-Baktongsa and contradictions of explanations between Beonnyeok-Baktongsa and Nobakjimnam. And also there are some disconcord between the Beonnyeok-Baktongsa existing and records in Beonnyeok-nogeoldae -baktongsa-beomnye, especially the title and construction of the Beonnyeok-Baktongsa. These problems make it impossible that believe Choi as the editor of the Beonnyeok-Baktongsa. The editor of the Beonnyeok-Baktongsa existing is possibly not Choi. Of course, up to now it in not clear who is the editor of the Beonnyeok-Baktongsa existing. But at least, we have to wait until some questions this thesis presented are solved.

『四聲通解』에 인용된 『蒙古韻略』과 『蒙古字韻』의 비교 연구 ― 齊薺霽韻을 중심으로

曲曉雲 ( Qu¸ Xiaoyun ) 한국중국언어학회 2020 중국언어연구 Vol.0 No.91

本文首先對寧忌浮(1997)的兩個主張提出質疑, 之後用≪四聲通解≫中的記錄反駁了寧先生的主張:崔世珍所見≪蒙古韻略≫和大英博物館所藏朱宗文手抄本≪蒙古字韻≫在體例上存在著很大的不同;≪蒙古字韻≫有簡單注釋的108個韻字均見於≪蒙古韻略≫, 所以≪蒙古字韻≫和≪蒙古字韻≫原刊本亦收錄這108個韻字, 並非朱宗文所加。 接著之前的研究, 本文對≪四聲通解≫齊薺霽韻所引≪蒙古韻略≫和大英博物館所藏≪蒙古字韻≫作了收錄字和讀音上的比較, 結果是:相同韻字在≪蒙古韻略≫、≪蒙古字韻≫中的讀音完全一致, 但是兩書在收錄字上呈現不小的差異。 依據崔世珍的訓民正音轉寫和≪蒙古字韻≫、碑文、≪百家姓≫等資料中的八思巴字轉寫, 本文認為≪蒙古韻略≫支韻紙韻寘韻、≪蒙古字韻≫支韻「鷄 稽 筓 枅」、「計 係 繫 薊髻 繼」的音為[kiei];「規 □ 摫 圭 珪 邽 閨 袿 窐」、「癸」、「季 桂」的音為[kiuei]。據≪四聲通解≫, [-iuei]音≪蒙古韻略≫八思巴字轉寫為/-ioi/、/-iui/、/-ioei/、/-iuei/四種, 本文對同一韻母的不同轉寫現象作了解釋。 依據≪四聲通解≫支紙寘韻、齊薺霽韻、灰賄隊韻所引≪蒙古韻略≫的記錄和≪蒙古字韻≫等資料的八思巴字轉寫可以得出≪蒙古韻略≫支紙寘韻、≪蒙古字韻≫支韻有[-i]、 [-ɿ]、[-ʅ]、[-iei]、[-uei]、[-iuei]六個韻母的結論。 崔世珍在≪四聲通解≫裡只提及了≪千字文≫的八思巴字注音文獻≪千字蒙音≫兩次, 但是這兩次都很有分量, 體現了他重視現實音的正音觀和對語音的正確認識。 This paper first questions the two propositions of Ning Ji Fu(寧忌浮) (1997), and refutes Prof. Ning’s propositions with the records in “Sa-Seong-tong-Hae”. There is a great difference in style between the “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” seen by Choi Se-Jin and the “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun” in the British Museum; the 108 Chinese characters with simple notes are not added by Zhu Zongwen, but are included in the original editions of “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” and “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun”. This paper makes a comparison between “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” in “Sa-Seong-tong-Hae” and the “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun” in the British Museum. The result is that the The pronunciation of recorded Chinese characters in “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” and “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun” is exactly the same, but there is a big difference in the Chinese characters included in the two books. According to Choi Se-Jin’s correct transliteration of Hun-min-Jeong-Eum and the transliteration of Basiba in the materials of “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun”, inscription and surname, this paper holds that the pronunciation of the Chinese character, “鷄 稽 筓 枅, 計 係 繫 薊 髻 繼” in “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” and “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun” is [kiei], and the pronunciation of the Chinese character “規 □ 摫 圭 珪 邽 閨 袿 窐, 癸, 季 桂” is [kiuei]. According to “Sa-Seong-tong-Hae”, the [-iuei] sound “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” is translated into four kinds of characters: /-ioi/, /-iui/, /-ioei/ and /-iuei/. This paper explains the different transliteration phenomena of the same vowel. According to the records of “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” quoted by “zhī(支) zhǐ(紙) zhì(寘)” Rhyme, “Qī(齊)Jǐ(薺)Jì(霽)” Rhyme and “huī(灰) huǐ(賄) duì(隊)” Rhyme in “Sa-Seong-tong-Hae” and the rewriting of “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” and other materials such as “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun”, we can draw the conclusion that the “zhī(支) zhǐ(紙) zhì(寘)” Rhyme of “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” and the “zhī(支)” rhyme of “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun” have six yunmu(韻母): [-i], [-ɿ], [-ʅ], [-iei], [-uei] and [-iuei]. In “Sa-Seong-tong-Hae”, Choi Se-Jin only mentioned “Qian Zi Meng Yin” twice, but these two times carry great weight, which shows that he attaches importance to the correct view of realistic pronunciation and the correct understanding of phonetics.

『四聲通解』 皆解泰韻에 인용된 『蒙古韻略』과 『蒙古字韻』의 비교 연구

곡효운 ( Qu Xiaoyun ) 한국중국언어학회 2022 중국언어연구 Vol.- No.102

本文對崔世珍在《四聲通解》皆解泰韻標註《蒙古韻略》何音的字與《蒙古字韻》做的比較分析結果如下: 1) 除了「罷」等字《蒙古韻略》的訓民正音轉寫「·빼」應改為「:빼」、「嘬」字《蒙古韻略》的訓民正音轉寫「쵀」應改為「쵀」、「聩」字的《蒙古韻略》訓民正音轉寫「왜」應改為「왜」外, 《四聲通解》皆解泰韻所引《蒙古韻略》韻字讀音與《蒙古字韻》完全一致(旁點未標的太多, 不在本稿校正範圍之内)的占絕大多數, 但雨書在收錄字上存在不同。 2) 在《蒙古字韻》裡讀[uei]的平聲「危 桅 巍 桅 嵬」、上聲「隗 嵬 頠」、去聲「魏 僞 磑」在『蒙古韻略』裡讀[ŋuei]。 3) 《蒙古字韻》佳韻崖小韻與《四聲通解》所引《蒙古韻略》在收錄字上完全一致, 但讀音上呈[ai]和[iai]的差異;《蒙古字韻》佳韻娃小韻與《四聲通解》所引《蒙古韻略》在收錄字上除了「噯」這個續添字和幾個異體字外都完全一致, 但平聲、上聲、去聲收錄字在讀音 上呈[ʔai]和[ʔiai]的差異, 入聲收錄字均為[ʔai]。 4) 據《四聲通解》凡例第二條和第三條可知《四聲通解》裡的「續添字」是崔世珍認為很重要的常用字、但《洪武正韻》沒有收錄的字, 即用圓圈圈住的那些字。但僅看這雨條凡例很可能陷入一個陷阱, 即《四聲通解》裡的「續添字」一定沒有收錄在《洪武正韻》。《洪武正韻》收「聩」, 但是《四聲通解》皆解泰韻疑母下收圓圈標註的「聩」。《洪武正韻》的收錄字「聩」僅有[ɦuei]—讀, 這一音也收錄在《四聲通解》的灰賄隊韻。而《四聲通解》皆解泰韻疑母下的「聩」賣[ɦuai], 《洪武正韻》不收讀的「聩」, 所以崔世珍在皆解泰韻疑母下放入「續添字」「聩」。通過「聩」這個例子, 我們可知《四聲通解》裡的「續添字」有雨種類型:一是《洪武正韻》沒有收錄的常用字;二是《洪武正韻》有收錄, 但是作為常用字使用時的讀音不同於《洪武正韻》的話, 崔世珍也會將其歸為「續添字」, 收錄在《四聲通解》。 5) 依據崔世珍的訓民正音轉寫可知, 《蒙古韻略》的魚母為零聲母, 幺母為影母。 6) 「衰」在《四聲通解》裡有[ʃuei]和[tshuei]二音, 這與「衰」在《洪武正韻》的平聲灰韻淸母倉回切、平聲灰韻審母所追切二音一致。「衰」在《洪武正韻》還有平聲歌韻心母桑何切一音, 但《四聲通解》未收錄。《四聲通解》所引《蒙古韻略》裡的「衰」有[tshuei]和[ʃuai]二音, 《蒙古字韻》裡所收「衰」有[tʄuai]和[ʃuai]二音。 7) 《四聲通解》皆解泰韻中聲「ㅒ」([-iai])起始部分有如下說明:「今俗或從ㅐ([-ai]), (蒙韻) 從ㅒ([-iai])。」”依據這個說明我們可知:在《洪武正韻》、《四聲通解》、《蒙古韻略》裡讀[-iai]的字在崔世珍親自聽到的今俗音 (當時的現實北方標準口語音)裡有的字己經從[-iai]變為[-ai]了。 8) 通過《四聲通解》皆解泰韻所引《蒙古韻略》與《蒙古字韻》的比較分析, 我們可知 《蒙古字韻》佳韻的韻母為[-ai] [-iai] [-uai]。 Choi Se-Jin makes a comparative analysis of the pronunciation of some words marked Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe in Sa-Seong-tong-Hae Jiē (皆),Jiě (解),Tài(泰) Rhyme. This paper makes a comparative analysis of these words and Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun, and the results are as follows: 1)There are two types of 續添字 in Sa-Seng-Tong-Hai: one is the frequently used Chinese characters that are not included in HongWuZhengYun, and the other is that HongWuZhengYun is included. But if the pronunciation of the frequently used Chinese characters is different from that of HongWuZhengYun, Choi Se-Jin will also classify it as 續添字. 2)According to Choi Se-Jin's Phonetic accent of Hunminjeongeum, the 魚母 of Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe are zero consonants [ø-] and 幺母 are shadow initials. 3)“jiā(佳)” rhyme of “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun” have six yunmu(韻母): [-ai], [-iai] and [-uai].

四聲通解』 灰賄隊韻에 인용된 『蒙古韻略』과 『蒙古字韻』의 비교 연구

곡효운 한국중국언어학회 2022 중국언어연구 Vol.- No.103

Choi Se-Jin makes a comparative analysis of the pronunciation of some words marked "Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe" in "Sa-Seong-tong-Hae" Huī(灰), Huǐ(賄), Duì (隊) Rhyme. This paper makes a comparative analysis of these words and "Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun", and the results are as follows: 1)The explanation of the pronunciation of the word "䂓" in "Sa-Seong-tong-Hae"-"韻會ᄀᆈ,千字ᄀᆔ" should be changed to "韻會蒙韻ᄀᆈ,千字ᄀᆔ,下至 摫同。". 2)The word "麾" on the word "hui" in Zhi Rhyme(支韻)in "Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun" is "ꡛꡦꡟꡠ". "ꡛ" is the transliteration of the 心 consonant, but the words 麾 under are all the words of the 曉 consonant in the literature such as "Guang-Yun", so the transliteration of the 心 consonant "Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun" here should be a clerical error. In "Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun", the words "麾" and "嘒" should be combined together, and the transliteration of the Pashiba character should be "ꡜꡦꡟꡠ". 3)Most of the rhyming words in "Sa-Seong-tong-Hae" Huī(灰), Huǐ(賄), Duì (隊) Rhyme are included in "Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun" Zhi Rhyme(支韻), read [-uei] [-iuei]; very few numbers are included in "Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun" Jia Rhyme(佳韻), read [-ai].

『訓蒙字會』의 시대 - 위로부터의 사회 更張 및 상호 문물을 향한 손짓 -

신동훈 진단학회 2023 진단학보 Vol.- No.140

Although Yeonsangun was dethroned and King Jungjong ascended the throne due to the rebellion, the social atmosphere that prioritized protection was not easily improved during the reign of Yeonsangun. To overcome this situation, the expansion of primary education and the improvement of the education system focusing on 『So-hak(小學)』 education were discussed. However, the plan to expand elementary education was withdrawn due to the bizarre socialization, and social ethics education centered on campaigns was implemented. Choi Se-jin's 『Hunmongjahoe』 was published along with other books he translated and compiled as an extension of social ethics education. On the other hand, the relationship between Chosun and Ming in the 16th century developed into a comprehensive partnership with military cooperation and cultural exchange. The development of economic ties between the two countries has led to an increase in people-to-people contacts. These changes appeared socially as an increase in Chinese demand centered on practical conversation and a decrease in Chinese learning among high official politically. The contact between the people of the two countries was accompanied by the exchange of cultures between the two countries, especially in the Liaodong[遼東] area, the people of Joseon and the culture of Joseon were having an impact. The inclusion of content for learning Chinese in Choi Se-jin's 『Hunmongjahoe』 was a response to the demand for Chinese. 반정으로 연산군이 폐위되고 중종이 즉위했지만, 연산군 대에 조성된 보신 우선의 사회 분위기는 쉽게 개선되지 되지 않았다. 이러한 상황을 타개하기 위해, 동몽까지의 교육 대상 확대 및 『소학』 교육을 중점으로 하는 교육 체계 개선이 논의되었다. 그러나 기묘사화로 인하여 동몽 교육 확대안은 철회되었고, 홍보(campaign) 위주의 사회 윤리 교육이 시행되었다. 최세진의 『훈몽자회』는 그가 번역⋅편찬한 다른 책들과 함께 사회 윤리 교육의 연장선에서 간행되었다. 한편, 16세기 조⋅명 관계는 군사 협력 및 문물 교류를 함께하는 포괄적 동반자 관계로 나아갔다. 양국 간 경제적 관계의 발달은 민간 접촉의 증가로 이어졌다. 이러한 변화는 사회적으로는 실용 회화 중심의 한어 수요 증가와 정치적으론 조신들의 한어 학습 감소 현상으로 나타났다. 양국 백성들의 접촉은 양국 문화 교류를 수반했는데, 특히 요동 지역을 중심으로 조선인과 조선 문화가 영향을 끼치고 있었다. 최세진의 『훈몽자회』에 한어 학습을 위한 내용이 포함된 것은 한어 수요에 대한 대응이었다.

『언문자모(諺文字母)』 의 작성 주체와 시기에 대하여

강창석 ( Chang Seok Kang ) 서강대학교 언어정보연구소 2014 언어와 정보 사회 Vol.22 No.-

Eonmunjamo is contained in Hunmongjahoe compiled by Choi, Se-Jin. However, it is apparent that Choi was not the author of Eonmunjamo. This makes it an important issue to find out who was the original writer of Eonmunjamo and when it was written. Hunminjeongeum is a commentary on Hunminjeongeum. One thing that should be noted is that this book was compiled three years later after Eonmun had been made public. This article presumes that there was another commentary written before Hunminjeongeum. When Eonmun was made public, King Sejong is argued here to create the commentary as a learning manual and distribute it. On the face of the different sounds of Sino-Korean, he could have a need of adjusting the manual, which prompted him to compile a new book, which is Hunminjeongeum. A careful reading of Eonmunjamo reveals several pieces of evidence for the claim that it was written earlier than Hunminjeongeum: the name of “Eonmun”, the arrangement of the letters, and the sounds of Sino-Korean, etc. It is concluded that the unattested study-manual that was written at the time of making out Eonmun was the source of Eonmunjamo.

신숙주(申叔舟)와 최세진(崔世珍)의 중국어(中國語) 정음관(正音觀)

주성일 ( Soung Il Joo ) 韓國中國學會 2008 중국학보 Vol.57 No.-

『四聲通解』 眞軫震質韻에 인용된 『蒙古韻略』과 『蒙古字韻』의 비교 연구

곡효운 ( Qu¸ Xiaoyun ) 한국중국언어학회 2023 중국언어연구 Vol.- No.108

本文對崔世珍在『四聲通解』眞軫震質韻標註『蒙古韻略』何音的字與『蒙古字韻』做的比較分析結果如下: 1) 「緊」收錄在『廣韻』和『集韻』上聲臻韻, 一般構擬為[kjen];也收錄在『中原音韻』真文韻上聲和『洪武正韻』上聲軫韻, 一般構擬為[kiən]。但「緊」的『蒙古韻略』和『蒙古字韻』讀[kiein], 不同於『洪武正韻』。 2) 「拮」在『蒙古韻略』有[kie]和[kiei]二音, 在『蒙古字韻』只有[kie]一音。 3) 「趌」在『洪武正韻』和『蒙古字韻』均有收錄, 但不收錄于『四聲通解』。理由有二:雖收錄于『蒙古韻略』但被崔世珍遺漏掉、或未收錄於『蒙古韻略』。 4) 「斤 筋 釿」等在『蒙古韻略』和『蒙古字韻』讀[kin](或者標為[kiən]), 和「緊」的『蒙古韻略』和『蒙古字韻』[kiein]讀音形成對比。 5) 「欯」未收錄于『中原音韻』, 但收錄在『廣韻』『集韻』『中州音韻』, 均讀曉母。但「欯」在『蒙古韻略』讀曉母的[xiei], 在『蒙古字韻』讀匣母的[ɣiei]。 6) 崔世珍對「贇」的『蒙古韻略』『古今韻會』讀音轉寫為「□」 。若把「□」用羅馬字轉寫, 則為/ʔiuiein/, 但實際上近代漢語不存在這樣的讀音。和「贇」一起收錄在『蒙古字韻』同一八思巴字下的「煴 氲 馧」等韻字收錄在『四聲通解』文吻問物韻[ʔiun]音下。崔世珍對這些字沒有做「『蒙古韻略』音如何」的說明, 所以「煴 氲 馧」等韻字的『蒙古韻略』讀音為([ʔiun]。所以「贇」的『蒙古韻略』音為[ʔiun]。 7) (蒙古字韻(眞韻[-iun]的八思巴字轉寫有如下三種:/-ṷin/(影母)、/-uin/(喩(魚)母)、/-ėin/(影母和喩(魚)母以外的聲母)。 Choi Se-Jin makes a comparative analysis of the pronunciation of some words marked “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” in “Sa-Seong-tong-Hae” zhēn (眞), zhěn (軫), zhèn (震), zhi (質) Rhyme. This paper makes a comparative analysis of these words and “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun”, and the results are as follows: 1) “緊” is included in “Guang-Yun” and “Ji-Yun”, which is generally constructed as [kjen]. “緊” is also included in the true rhyme of “Zhong-Yuan-Yin-Yun” and “Hong-wu-Zheng-Yun”, which is generally constructed as [kiən]. However, “緊” is read in “Meng-Gu-Yun-Lüe” and “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun” [kiein], which is different from “Hong-wu-Zheng-Yun”. 2) There are two Hunminjeongeum transliterations of Chinese [iun] pronunciation: “□” and “□”. 3) There are three kinds of translation of Basiba characters in rhyme of “Meng-Gu-Zi-Yun” zhēn(眞́) [-iun]: /-ṷin/ (影母), /-uin/ (喩(魚)母), and /-ėin/ (consonant other than 影母 and 喩(魚)母).

《四聲通解》所據《中原音韻》考

곡효운 한국중국언어학회 2019 중국언어연구 Vol.0 No.80

Mitsuaki Endo(2001) investigated the compiling process of the Sa-Seng-Tong-Hai and the cited literature in the article "the data and compiling process of the Sa-Seng-Tong-Hai". The article Sa-Seng-Tong-Hai is based on the data and the compilation process of Sa-Seng-Tong-Hai. However, there is also part of the content Mitsuaki Endo(2001) did not do a positive and detailed analysis. For example, the ShiJing in the Sa-Seng-Tong-Hai is actually Zhu Xi's collected Poetry, and the ShuJing is actually Cai Shen's collected Book of songs. In this paper, the contents of ZhongYhouYinyun in 72 articles recorded in Sa-Seng-Tong-Hai are compared with those of ZhongYuanYinYun and ZhongZhouYinyun. the conclusions are as follows: Part of the content of the rhym referred to by Choi Se Jin is the same as that of the ZhongYuanYinYun, part of the content is the same as the ZhongYuanYinYun, part of the content is the same as that of the rhyme of ZhongzhouYinYun, and part of the content is not found in rhyme of the ZhongYuanYinYun and the ZhongYuanYinYun, and there may be some interpretation. Mitsuaki Endo(2001) investigated the compiling process of the SaSengTongHai and the cited literature in the article "the data and compiling process of the SaSengTongHai". The article SaSengTongHai is based on the data and the compilation process of SaSengTongHai. However, there is also part of the content Mitsuaki Endo(2001) did not do a positive and detailed analysis. For example, the ShiJing in the SaSengTongHai is actually Zhu Xi's collected Poetry, and the ShuJing is actually Cai Shen's collected Book of songs. In this paper, the contents of ZhongYuanYinYun in 72 articles recorded in SaSengTongHai are compared with those of ZhongYuanYinYun and ZhongZhouYinYun. the conclusions are as follows: Part of the content of the rhym referred to by Choi Se Jin is the same as that of the ZhongYuanYinYun, part of the content is the same as the ZhongYuanYinYun, part of the content is the same as that of the rhyme of ZhongZhouYinYun, and part of the content is not found in rhyme of the ZhongYuanYinYun and the ZhongYuanYinYun, and there may be some interpretation.