광복기 문학독본과 문학교육(1) : 현대시 제재를 중심으로

이순욱 동남어문학회 2013 동남어문논집 Vol.1 No.36

This study aims at exploring the nature and characteristics of the literary readers during the Independence Period based on the history of the literary circles. The purpose is to shed a light on the relation between literary readers and the middle school Korean textbook system and to explain the realignment of literary canon and the changes in the canon formation. First, fighting against illiteracy was one of the most important tasks in the education policy right after the Independence. The Joseon Language Society took the initiative in the language education at the time. The anti-illiteracy campaign and the national enlightenment campaign, therefore, were led by the Korean Language Culture Dissemination Association, the Korean Language Academy and the Korean Education Research Institute organized by the Joseon Language Society and the Korean linguists from the local society. Against this backdrop, the Joseon Language Society and the Education Management Office of the Military Government took the lead in publishing the Korean textbooks, and various readers for public language education were mass produced and became widespread. Literary readers at the time including the 『Literary Reader』 by Lee Yun-jae and the 『Korean Literary Reader』 by Jeong Yeol-mo went into printing repeatedly in a short period of time. These readers seem to have faithfully played their roles as a temporary textbook or as a supplementary reader for school education and adult education until 『Middle Korean Language Textbook』 was published by the Joseon Language Society and the Education Management Office of the Military Government. This shows that literary readers had a significant influence on students and the public in their learning the Korean language. Second, these literary readers explained the formation procedure and characteristics of the literary canon in the early stage of the Independence Period when the line up of writers was still not reorganized toward the right-wing literary circles. Literary readers of the time mostly showed a balance between left and right-wing writers in the process of the canon formation. Except for the 『Modern Korean Literature Essence』, the line up includes both ideologies, and the fact that many writers and literary works published in the 『Modern Korean Literature Essence』 after the reshuffle of the literary circles were realigned into Korean textbooks explained the ideology and political characteristics of the canon formation during the Independence Period. As realizing the national identity was the first priority of the time, which required Korean education, it seemed that literary and social criteria were not strictly applied when selecting and arranging texts included in literary readers. In other words, rather than forcing the national ideology, the format and contents of readers were decided based on the compiler's personal taste and judgement. It can be concluded, therefore, that the literary canon formation began to have an indispensible relation with ideological requests only after the nation building. Third, as the importance of language education increased, local societies were asked to develop their own textbooks and the 『Middle Korean Reader』 published in Busan was one of the most important local readers. Yu Yeol, who was leading the “Baedal Academhy” realized the need for textbooks for Korean language lessons as there were not enough qualified textbooks except for official bulletins. This reader was very significant in many ways; it utilized the existing canon when forming a canon with writers and literary works; contained the relevance and nationalistic tendency in terms of selecting topics; included many KAPF writers such as Park Tae-won, Lee Ki-younh, Lee Tae-jun, Jo Yeong-chul, Han Seol-ya, Kim Ki-jin, Eom Heung-seop, Park Ah-ji; has a high proportion of novels in addition to the variety in the literary types; and focused on its main function as a textbook for Korean lessons by mostly writing Korean but increassed readability by partially listing Chinese letters together. Fourth, the relationship between Korean textbooks and literary readers showed how the status of writers, who used to have a dominating position during the early Independence Period, gradually disappeared from the literary system or forgotten due to the changes in external political factors. Given that there is no absolute literary canon that never changes, the textbook system transferring from the 『Middle Korean Language Textbook』 and the 『Middle Korean Language』 1-3 into the 『Middle Korean Language』 1-6 was reorganized in accordance with the conversion of left-wing writers and the heightened status of the orthodox writers of the Korean Writiers Association, which resulted in the one-sided canon formation. Backed by the ideological standards of nationalism and anticommunism and the hegemony of the literary circles, a new hierarchy of the canon began to be established within the right-wing literary circles.

“명확성의 원리”로서의 문학어 - 문학의 언어를 둘러싼 임화의 비평적 사유 -

강계숙 ( Kang Gye-sook ) 조선대학교 인문학연구원 2020 인문학연구 Vol.0 No.59

본고는 임화의 언어론 중 문학어와 관련된 내용을 집중적으로 분석한다. 그의 언어론은 복합적인 형성 배경을 바탕에 두고 있다. 첫째 마르크스주의 언어학인 마르주의의 수용, 둘째 형상 개념의 이론적 정립 및 비평적 전유, 셋째 복고주의와 기교주의 문학에 대한 지속적인 비판, 넷째 ‘문학어로서의 조선어의 완미한 개화’에의 요구, 다섯째 기교주의 논쟁의 영향 및 카프시에 대한 자기반성이 그것이다. 임화는 ‘형상의 구체성’을 문학의 예술적 특수성으로 인식하였는바 ‘문학어=형상적 언어’로 정의한다. ‘형상적 언어’는 구체적인 의미전달에 충실한 언어로서 일상생활에서의 인간적인 느낌, 감정, 의식 등을 직접 이야기하는 형식의 언어를 가리킨다. 그는 이러한 언어는 ‘생생한 생활의 말’을 통해 구현된다고 보았다. 그가 일상어를 문학어의 좋은 소재(素材/所在)로 지목한 까닭은 복고주의 문학의 언어적 퇴행 현상을 조선어의 발전에 큰 장애요인으로 보고 이를 ‘조선어의 완미한 문학적 개화’를 통해 극복할 필요가 있다고 판단하였기 때문이다. 한편 기교주의 논쟁을 거치며 임화는 문학어를 대상의 형상화에 정합적으로 일치하는 언어로 재정리하고 이를 ‘명확한 언어’라고 지칭한다. 그리고 이러한 문학어는 ‘언어의 명확성의 원리’에 따라 실현되는 것으로 설명한다. 주목할 것은 이러한 원리가 일상어를 통해서만 실현 된다고 전제하였다는 점이다. 그는 일상어의 합리적 기능과 실행을 가리켜 ‘완전한 현실성의 표상’이라 표현하며, 이를 언어의 기본성질이자 언어의 소박한 상태로 꼽고, 이러한 언어가 바로 예술의 소재가 되는 언어라고 부연한다. 중요한 것은 그가 일상어의 문학적 가치를 중시한 것과는 별개로 문학어와 일상어를 엄밀히 구별하였다는 점이다. 그는 문학어란 일상어가 예술적 구축에 요구되는 ‘선택과 정련의 과정’을 거쳐 미적으로 재탄생한 언어이며, 이는 장르를 불문하고 모든 문학어에 해당하는 것으로 문학어는 그 외형에서만 일상어와 유사할 뿐 실은 별개의 언어임을 분명히 한다. 요컨대 문학어는 예술적 선택과 정련의 과정을 통과한 ‘일상어의 현실성의 에센스’인 것이다. 임화는 이러한 문학어의 특징이 가장 현저하게 구현되는 영역으로 시를 꼽았고, 훌륭한 시적 언어는 시의 고유한 창조 가운데 일상어를 내용상 형태상 재구성하여 전혀 다른 언어로 만들고, 그 과정에서 언어적 미감과 사실적 내용은 잊히지 않는 아름다움이 되어 강한 정신적 충동을 남긴다고 설명한다. This study intensively analyzes the content of a literary language among lm-Hwa's linguistic theories. His linguistic theory was shaped by complex backgrounds. His linguistic theory was influenced by the linguistics of Marxism, closely related to the theory of shape, contained criticism of retroism and mannerism, and called for the completion of the Korean language as a literary language. lm-Hwa defines literary language as 'the shaping language' because he recognizes 'concrete shape' as a speciality of literature. 'The shaping language' is a language that conveys meaning specifically and expresses human feelings, emotions and consciousness directly. He thinks that everyday language performs these verbal functions. The reason why he thinks everyday language is a good source of literature comes from his negative assessment of the literary language of retroism. Meanwhile, lm-Hwa's perception of the language of literature gradually deepens as he goes through mannerism argument. He redefines literary language as 'clear language' and explains that everyday language becomes literary language by 'principle of clarity', which means that language is written entirely to suit the literary expression of the subject. He refers to this basic quality of everyday language as an "expression of complete realism." He regards this as the basic nature of language and explains that a language with these characteristics can become a language of literature. What should be noted is that despite his emphasis on the literary value of everyday language, lm-Hwa has made a strict distinction between literary language and everyday language. The language of literature is a language in which everyday language has been reborn through a special artistic process, namely 'a process of choice and chastity'. The former and the latter are distinct from each other, with only the appearance being similar. In short, literary language is the essence of everyday language that has been honed artistically. He says poetry is the most pronounced area of literary language. A good poetic language reconstructs the everyday language in the unique creative process of poetry and makes it a completely different language. Through the amazing changes of language, the beauty of the literary language and its realistic contents become leaving a strong mental impression.

러시아표준어의 통시적·공시적 역동성: 언어의 민주화 (III) - 문체체계를 중심으로 -

김용화 한국슬라브어학회 2021 슬라브어연구 Vol.26 No.2

This paper, which focuses on the democratization of Russian literary language in the aspect of the development of the stylistic system, is a subsequent research paper studying the history of graphics and orthography of the Russian literary language and the methods and means of word formation with the material of simple words with the suffix –ka in terms of its democratization. The road to democracy of Russian literary language is characterized by the extension of the linguistic means of neutral style and its scope of use through “de-Church Slavonic”, russification, folk colloquialism, and non-normalization. During the period from the 11th to early 19th century, the development of Russian literary language and its functions can be seen as a history of constant change in the correlation between Church Slavonic and Russian. In the old Russian, Church Slavonic adopted Russian elements, the "Simple Russian" of Peter the Great replaced Church Slavic elements with Russian, and in the system of the three styles of Lomonosov, both Church Slavonic and Russian were accepted within the framework of Russian literary language. In Pushkin's artistic works, genetically and stylistically heterogeneous linguistic elements are used by the principles of proportionality and conformity. In the early and mid-20th century a functional stylistic system was established in Russian literary language, and now there is a tendency to re-integrate it within the media language. During the Soviet period, media stylistic was one of several functional stylistics of literary language, which had a “media stylistics ⊂ literary language ⊂ Russian” relationship. However, in the post- Soviet period, almost all Russian languages appear in the media, and this can be called a media language. If there is an area within the media language that can be defined as a media stylistic, the “media stylistic ⊂ literary language ⊂ media language” relationship can be established. If the media style is fused to the media language and no longer exists, the relationship will be “literary language ⊂ media language.” The language that leads to popular culture at the center of public communication is called the common language (общий язык), and in modern Russia, the media language plays this role. The Russian media language mediates the common language and the literary language, so the development of Russian literary language in the 21st century will be the history of the correlation between literary language ― media language ― common language.

러시아 표준어의 형성과 발전 과정에서 표준어의 주도적 주체와 표준어의 사회적 기반의 상관성 (II): 20세기 말 ― 21세기 초 사회정치적 영역의 차용어를 중심으로

김용화 충북대학교 러시아 • 알타이지역 연구소 2019 러시아학 Vol.- No.18

This paper, which focuses on the mutual influences of the leading personalities and the social base of literary language in the process of borrowing a sociopolitical lexicon for the late-20th century ― early 21st century, is a subsequent research paper studying sociopolitical loanwords in the journalistic style of mid-19th century Russia. The key conclusions of this paper are as follows: ① the “среднелитературный тип речевой культуры” is the social base of modern literary language, and most modern Russians refer to this. ② The leading personalities of literary language differ greatly by loanword type. ③ The influence of the leading personalities of literary language on the social base of literary language is insignificant. Previously, which social class and what kind of ideology-oriented people formed the social base of literary language, and which one of them leads the development of the literary language and presents the direction, were key issues in grasping the characteristics of Russian literary language. However, this has lost significance in modern literary language. Now, the focus of research should shift to what language the social base is oriented toward. At present, mass media language is located in the center of language life, covering the whole of the Russian language. It is enough that the formula “mass media language = Russian” is established. Therefore, the study of modern Russian literary language should start with mass media language. Now is the time to reflect on the typification or stylistic subdivision of mass media language.

일반논문 : 문학텍스트에 나타난 문화비교와 영어 학습전략

이일연 ( Il Youn Yi ),김혜진 ( Hye Jin Kim ) 한국비교문학회 2013 比較文學 Vol.0 No.60

This study aims to prove literary texts as an effective tool of language learning and suggests exemplary language learning strategies to maximize the benefit of literary texts in an EFL classroom. Indebted to the previous studies on the use of literary texts in language learning, this study is based on the belief that literature stimulates the students` imagination and critical thinking ability and provides understanding of cultural differences and similarities between the target language and their mother-tongue; thereby it helps students interact with literary texts through language and elicits their interests and participations in the learning process. For this purpose, three literary texts from seventeen high school textbooks that are in current use have been chosen. Each text is learned with different tools and methodologies for twelve weeks: the cultural comparison of the media clips from the given literary text and a Korean soap drama; the cultural analysis using role-plays; and the re-writings of the literary text. The study shows that the comparative cultural aspects of literary texts enable students to actively participate in language learning, thereby enhancing their critical thinking which is the fundamental step of the writing process. This study concludes that language learning with literary texts can and will extend the students` awareness of the target language`s culture and enhance their language proficiency. It is of the upmost urgence to develop effective learning strategies to amplify the benefit of literary texts in language learning.

국어의 재건과 문학자의 임무

송기섭(Ki-seob Song) 어문연구학회 2007 어문연구 Vol.55 No.-

There was strong effort to recover Korean language and Korean letters by the time Korea liberated. Liberation from the enforcement of using Japanese language, Hangeul got a chance to escape from Japanese language. Hangeul had a time to recovering its own communication. But the illiterate people were the biggest problem. Solving this problem was important mission for Korean. The literary men had responsibility to recovering the national language. A crusade against illiteracy and purification of the national language needed literary men"s participation themselves. A process of reconstruction of the national language, the national language ideology occurred. The literary men believed that reconstruction of Korean is Korean"s duty which given to them. Thought about language nationalism was mentality basis of the national language reconstructing. The literary men were deeply related to reconstruction of the national language and creating literature, so it was important that they introspect themselves. Hangeul have ability about the Korean"s communication, but also important medium of forming modern nation-state. Literary men"s national language reconstructing was related to construction of nation. Each of the leftists and rightists announced national literature related to construction of country. To construction of national literature, erasing Japanophilism is essential. Purification of the national language is good example about erasing Japanophilism. Purification of the national language was the purpose of literary men. The left and right of a literary society had same object(construct national state with a unitary language), but they have not been reconciled.

1930년대 어휘의 장과 문학어의 계발 - 어문운동의 맥락과 『문장강화』의 지향

문혜윤 상허학회 2006 상허학보 Vol.17 No.-

이 논문은 이태준의 『문장강화』를 중심에 두고, 1930년대 사회 언어의 장과 문학 언어의 장이 상호 교섭하는 양상을 살펴보았다. 1930년대는 근대계몽기로부터 이어져온 어문운동이 조선어문의 '근대화'를 알리는 중요한 결과물들을 속속 산출하던 시기였다. '조선어 사전'을 편찬해야 한다는 시대적인 당위에 따라, 사전 편찬의 선결 과제로서 맞춤법이 통일되고(1933), 표준어 사정(査定)이 이루어졌으며(1936), 외래어 표기 규정이 마련되었다(1940). '조선어'로 글을 쓰는 잎을 직업으로 삼았던 문학자들은, 전사회적인 관심의 대상이었던 어문운동에 직접 참여하거나 그것에 대한 의견을 빈번히 표명하면서 '조선어 사용'에 대한 예민한 의식을 유지하고 있었다. 이런 점에서 1930년대에 이루어진 문학적인 표현의 진전은, 이와 같은 시기에 나타난 사회어의 재편 문제와 관련지어 논의될 필요가 있다. 이태준의『문장강화』는 어문운동의 다양한 맥락들을 삽입하여 언어가 태생적으로 지니는 사회성을 고려하면서, 작가 개성의 표출로서의 문학 언어가 분화되는 지점을 예시하고 있는 텍스트이다. 이 논문은 특히, 어휘의 측면을 고려하였다. 『문장강화』가 드러내고 있는, 1930년대 조선어의 양상을 다음과 같이 살펴보았다. 먼저, 당시는 신어(新語)의 수입과 창조가 매우 활발하면서도, 상당히 과도하게 이루어지고 있었다. 서양에서 수입된 어휘와 일본을 거친 새로운 한자 조어(造語)들이 유포되고 있었으며, 이와 동시에 기존의 한자어를 순 우리말로 바꾸거나 고어(古語)를 발굴하여 다시 사용하려는 시도가 공존하였다. 이태준은 조선어학회 인사들이 중심이 된, 신어 창조 활동이 '현대의' 조선 생활과는 맞지 않는다고 반대하면서, 수입된 어휘들에 대해서는 상당히 관대한 입장을 보이고 있다. 이는, 어휘가 생성, 성장, 소멸을 거치는 '생활품'이라는 점을 인식하고 있기 때문인데, 조선어 어휘의 인공적인 조정보다 자연스러운 유입을 인정하는 태도가 때로 과도한 외국어 취향까지를 용인하기도 하였다. 물론 이태준은 외국어의 남발은 안 되며, 생활을 적실하게 반영하는 '유일어'를 선택하기에 고심해야 한다고 말하지만, 조선의 '현대'가 가진 복합성이 이태준의 어휘관에도 반영되어 있다고 할 수밖에 없는 부분이다. 또한, 1930년대는 조선어문의 표준화에 대한 열망이 강했던 시대인데, 이태준은 표준어 사용을 어휘 선택의 중요한 기준으로 삼고 있다.『문장강화』에는, 서울말이 표준어가 되어야 하며 작가가 문장을 쓸 때는 반드시 표준어를 사용해야 한다고 주장하는 구절이 나온다. 그러나 표준어만으로 글을 써야 한다는 주장은 오히려 문학어의 가능성을 축소하는 것이었으므로, 표준어에 대한 자신의 강조와는 배치되지 않는 방법으로 '지문과 대화의 분리'를 시도하였다. 즉, 작가의 목소리인 지문에서는 표준어를 사용하지만, 인물들이 내뱉는 대화에서는 방언을 사용해도 된다는 것이다. 이것이 가능한 이유는 방언을 '의음(擬音)'으로 다루고 있기 때문이다. 인물의 리얼리티를 살리기 위해 그의 말을 그대로 '베껴 적는' 것이지, 방언을 살리기 위한 의도는 아니라고 말하는 것이다. 이를 통해 표준어를 사용해야 한다는 시대적인, 그리고 그 스스로가 부여한 당위에 거스르지 않으면서 문학적인 표현의 현실감을 살리는 방식을 고안한다. 이러한 방향은 어학적인 연구와 그 맥을 같이하... Focusing on Lee Tae-Joon's Mun-Jang-Kang-Hw(Lectures on Writing), this paper examines the ways in which the fields of social language and literary language interplay in the 1930's. The 1930's is characterized by the conspicuous results of Uh-Mun movements(Joseon language refinement movements) since the modern enlightenment age that show the 'modernization' of Joseon language. Specifically, the day is marked by the unification of Hangul spelling systems(l933) as a prerequisite for the compilation of a 'Joseon language dictionary', the establishment of the standard language(l936), and the formulation of rules for the transcription of loan words(1940), on purpose to publish a 'Joseon language dictionary.' Writing in 'Joseon language', many literati actively participated in Uh-Mun movements and presented their opinions on Joseon language refinement. In this context, the improvement of literary expressions in the 1930's can be related to the reorganization of social language as the outcome of contemporary Uh-Mun movements. Lee TaeJoon's Mun-Jang-Kang-Hwa investigated the social nature of language in the various contexts of Uh-Mun movements while showing how literary language, an expression of a writer's personality, branches from social language. Paying attention to vocabularies, this paper explores the interplay of social language and literary language in the 1930's. In his book, Mun-Jang-Kang-Hwa, Lee Tae-Joon analyzed the trends of the 1930's Joseon language as follows: To begin with, the import and invention of new words were prevalent in the 1930's. Words of Western origin and Japanized Chinese characters were current while trials for the Hangul-ization of existing Chinese characters and the reuse of archaic words coexisted. Lee Tae-Joon objected to activities for the creation of new words lead by the scholars of Jo-Seon-Uh-Hak-Wei(Joseon Language Society), in the sense that the new words are discrepant with 'modern' Joseon lifestyles. However, he was very lenient about imported words since he thought of a vocabulary as a 'product of life' in the process of creation, development, and extinction. In other words, he preferred the natural influx of foreign words to the artificial adjustment of Joseon words even though he criticized on the overuse of foreign words and suggested that writers choose a 'unitary word' to exactly reflect life world when employing a foreign word. As such, Lee Tae-Joon attempted to consider the complex aspects of 'modern' Joseon in his perspective on foreign words. Next, aspirations of standardized Joseon language distinguish the 1930's. In this context, Lee Tae-Joon underlined the use of the standard language. He proposed that Seoul language be considered as the standard language and writers use the standard language. Yet, he also understood that standard language-centered writing could reduce the functions of literary language. Therefore, he tried to divide 'conversational vs. nonconversational parts' for the purpose of harmonizing literary language with the standard language. Specifically, he asserted that personae's words, conversational parts, could include dialects whereas writers' voices, nonconversational parts, should be written in the standard language. Despite the division of 'conversational vs. nonconversational parts', however, he insisted on the priority of the standard language. In his view, dialects are considered as 'mimic sounds' copying personae's words in order to rescue their reality. That way, he thought out how to save the reality of literary expressions, in admitting the priority of the standard language. As mentioned above, Lee Tae-Joon tried to improve Joseon language literarily as well as linguistically, by analyzing the two trends of the 1930's Joseon language. He didn't distinguish the improvement of literary expressions from the refinement of vocabularies in general. In this respect, his perspective on vocabularies can be understood as a sort of the modern viewpoint o...

이광수의 언어공동체 인식과 『조선문단』의 에크리튀르

조은애(Cho Eun-ae) 韓國批評文學會 2009 批評文學 Vol.- No.34

Gwang-Su Lee assumed language community as a place where translation is possible through the medium of modern literature acquired by the experience of studying in Japan. In the process, the image of Chosun language as a literary language was established. In this study, I will address the logic by which literary circle's intention to exclusively possess 'Chosun Language' in the privileged literary discourse of 1920s was concluded. The absence of the concept that “literary language is Chosun language” was caused by his yearning for japanese literature during his studying years in japan. Japanese language was the pre-condition for japanese literature at the time and, more importantly, japanese was a language that can translate modern literature. For the intelligentsia including Gwang-su Lee who studied modernity and modern literature by studying in japan in the early 1920s, it was considered that the concept that Literary language is Chosun language depended upon the possibility of equal replacement with japanese language. The reality of national representation that Gwang-su Lee asked to new writers in 『Chosunmundan』 was closely related with the problem of 'language community' and the 'possibility of translation', which was recognized by Gwang-su Lee. The first novel of 『Chosunmundan』, Gwang-su Lee's short story, Writing in Blood[Hyeol-seo] is very symbolic in this regard. The status of Chosun language as literary language in Writing in Blood is deducted from the problem that the main character, a foreign student should establish new social relationship through language journey and from the problem of how to represent this new relationship. The possibility that Chosun language is literary language suggested in Writing in Blood was also the possibility of changing the relationship between the two languages, which is the relationship between empire and colony, to the relationship of class, gender or something else. Chosun language that he thought as an ideal language was a language that can capture the natural conversation with japanese person in japanese. The reality that he asked to 『Chosunmundan』 started from his own ecriture but the status of the concept that literary language is Chosun language, as requisite for the reality suggested in Writing in Blood, implies contradicted intention from the ideal of 'national representation'.

이광수의 언어공동체 인식과 『조선문단』의 에크리튀르

조은애 한국비평문학회 2009 批評文學 Vol.- No.34

Gwang-Su Lee assumed language community as a place where translation is possible through the medium of modern literature acquired by the experience of studying in Japan. In the process, the image of Chosun language as a literary language was established. In this study, I will address the logic by which literary circle’s intention to exclusively possess ‘Chosun Language’ in the privileged literary discourse of 1920s was concluded. The absence of the concept that “literary language is Chosun language” was caused by his yearning for japanese literature during his studying years in japan. Japanese language was the pre-condition for japanese literature at the time and, more importantly, japanese was a language that can translate modern literature. For the intelligentsia including Gwang-su Lee who studied modernity and modern literature by studying in japan in the early 1920s, it was considered that the concept that Literary language is Chosun language depended upon the possibility of equal replacement with japanese language. The reality of national representation that Gwang-su Lee asked to new writers in 『Chosunmundan』 was closely related with the problem of ‘language community’ and the ‘possibility of translation’, which was recognized by Gwang-su Lee. The first novel of 『Chosunmundan』, Gwang-su Lee’s short story, Writing in Blood[Hyeol-seo] is very symbolic in this regard. The status of Chosun language as literary language in Writing in Blood is deducted from the problem that the main character, a foreign student should establish new social relationship through language journey and from the problem of how to represent this new relationship. The possibility that Chosun language is literary language suggested in Writing in Blood was also the possibility of changing the relationship between the two languages, which is the relationship between empire and colony, to the relationship of class, gender or something else. Chosun language that he thought as an ideal language was a language that can capture the natural conversation with japanese person in japanese. The reality that he asked to 『Chosunmundan』 started from his own ecriture but the status of the concept that literary language is Chosun language, as requisite for the reality suggested in Writing in Blood, implies contradicted intention from the ideal of ‘national representation’.

러시아 ‘литературный язык’에 관한 통시적 고찰: 우리말 ‘표준어’ 및 ‘문학어’와 관련하여

김용화 충북대학교 러시아 • 알타이지역 연구소 2022 러시아학 Vol.- No.24

After the establishment of diplomatic relations between Korea and Russia in the 1990s, departments of Russian studies were founded at many universities, and Russian studies research was expanded and subdivided into various fields, and the quality of research rose to a considerable level. However, the scope of research in the history of the Russian literary language field is not wide and the research results and achievements are insignificant compared to other fields of Russian studies. Nevertheless, I think that it is time to organize the research results for the next generation of academics, and as a first step, I would like to address the problem of the Korean translation of the Russian term ‘литературный язык(ЛЯ, literary language)’. This paper, which focuses on the process of the development and the historical background of the formation of the relationships “signified-signifier” of the Russian ‘ЛЯ’ and the Korean “standard language” in the aspect of the Korean translation, asserts the following: First, in the history of Russian language, “Simple Russian” of the Peter the Great period in the 18th century is the embryo of the modern linguistic concept literary language. Second, through the 18th, the early and mid-19th century, “Simple Russian” came to form the characteristics of the nation’s literary language. Third, we cannot apply the concept of literary language to any of the language types of old Russian. Fourth, the signifier for the term literary language, which appeared in the mid-19th century with the meaning “language of literature”, gradually expanded, and deviated from the signified-signifier relationship at the beginning of its formation, but the signified does not change even in the present when the first signifier is not recognized. Fifth, for the translation of the term ЛЯ, the signified of the individual language closest to the signifier of ЛЯ should be selected. The Korean equivalent of the ЛЯ is a standard language, so it is reasonable to transfer ЛЯ to a standard language. Sixth, “history” is considered from a retrospective point of view from the point of origin or roots of the present to the present. Therefore, even if the ИРЛЯ begins in the 10th century when the ЛЯ did not exist, it is reasonable to translate it into the history of the Russian standard language.