한자병용정책 이후의 중학교 한자 , 한문교육의 방향 = The Direction for the Chinese Literacy Curriculum at Junior High School Since the Adoption of the Simultaneous Use of Chinese Characters

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In 1999 the Ministry of Culture and Tourism announced that it would first enforce the simultaneous use of Chinese characters, along with Hangul, in official government documents and road signs and thereafter reappraise the existing Chinese literacy curriculum in school.
This announcement may be regarded as a major policy shift by the government, which had been actively pursuing the exclusive use of the Hangul in writing our national language since 1970. The shift may have resulted from the inconveniences encountered in the exclusive use of Hangul and from the need for the simultaneous use in transcribing the borrowed Chinese words in Hangul texts.
This paper will review in broad terms how and to what extent the policy of joint use of Chinese characters in official documents and road signs has been put into practice since its announcement; why the policy is needed; and how consistent is the current state of affairs in school in teaching Chinese characters and classical Chinese with the policy of joint use of Chinese characters. This paper has been prepared on the basis chiefly of this writer's personal experience in teaching in a junior high school.
A survey of three categories of documents legal papers, government (municipal) documents, and road signs--mainly in the area where the writer has resided during the period of one year and six months since the adoption of simultaneous use of Chinese characters shows the following characteristics: First, as for legal terms, all are written exclusively in Hangul while almost all of them are Chinese in etymology and difficult to comprehend for anyone but specialists. Consequently, this has caused a clear division between those who have studied legal terms and those who have not. Second, in official government documents, there is no joint use of Chinese characters with the Hangul; key or important terms are written only in Chinese characters. Consequently, important documents are difficult both to read and to understand except for those who can read Chinese characters. Third, for road signs, regardless of whether they are within or without urban areas, Chinese characters have not yet been added. Within the city of Kyongju--which is one of the major tourist centers in the country--road directories and signboards for important tourist attractions are written in Hangul, Chinese characters, and English. In view of the fact that the number of tourists visiting our country from the Chinese-character culture zone is increasing, in places such as Kyongju, the joint use of Chinese characters in all mad signs and public directories within the city limit should be actively enforced for the convenience of tourists without exception. Another point that should be added is the fact the signboards now in use in which letters or characters are written in white against a brown background are rather inconspicuous and difficult to read so they may be reconsidered for change.
Since the government's decision to use Chinese characters jointly with the Hangul in writing, many Korean-language scholars have endeavored to replace academic and conceptual Sino-Korean terms with indigenous Hangul words. However, even after 30 years, the school textbooks our students use today carry Sino-Korean terms difficult for anyone to understand unless they understand the meanings of Chinese characters, and a vast majority of our students actually learn these terms in Hangul only. As a result, in many cases students either misunderstand or are unable to comprehend the meanings of individual words unless explained. The problem becomes more serious in personal computer and Internet communication, leading to a defective use of language. This is a wrongful use of language in daily life caused perhaps by learning words phonetically by pronunciation alone without understanding their etymology.
However necessary the joint use of Chinese characters may be and however gradually we may expand the practice, its utility and effect will remain limited for those illiterate of Chinese characters. In order to improve the effectiveness of the joint use of Chinese characters, we must institute an attractive system for teaching them at school that will improve our students' reading ability and understanding. We must also teach the students Chinese characters for everyday use in addition to those used in school textbooks. In order to maximize the effectiveness of their learning process, we must constantly teach our students how to write in Chinese characters words used in other studies. At the same time, we must devise teaching materials rich in variety as well as the method by which we can provide them with incentives by offering credit for participation and achievement in study contests. Education based on a national policy is the most effective way to provide incentives for learning. Chinese character/classical Chinese courses must be incorporated into general citizenship courses under a revised general school curriculum. Under a system of teaching that properly coordinates elementary and secondary education, Chinese characters must be taught jointly with the Hangul in all courses. As an individual engaged in the teaching of Chinese characters and classical Chinese at school, the writer's ernest desire and task are how to secure the proper position and role of a classical Chinese curriculum by maintaining a mutually complementary relationship with the national language curriculum, in order to meet the effected and natural demand of the general public. In conclusion, I wish to stress once again that we must reflect deeply upon the fact that the distorted and possibly even destructive abuse of our national language by our younger generation today has been brought about by the fact that even the words of Chinese origin in our language are taught only in phonetical terms. If we really want to restore the proper use of our national language in daily life, I believe we must achieve as soon as possible propriety in the teaching of Chinese characters and classical Chinese in our school.