한자 병용의 어문정책적 의미 고찰 = The meaning of joint use of Hanja as language and literal policy

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

For long times I, the author, wanted to find the materials of language and literal policy during the American military administrative era, but it would not go easy. Then in 1999 Mr. Son, WonIl, my acquaintance found and send me 『Report of the United States Educational Mission to Japans』. This working is written for analyzing our country's language policy right after Liberation, and its background, focusing on 『Report of the United States Educational Mission to Japan』, and for trying to find out alternative policy.
Now over half a century have passed since the Liberation, but where we stand on the great wave of world history?
Our language & literal policy have repeated twisted walking tending to the emotional surroundings that based on Hangul-only ism since the enactment of Hangul-only-law in October, 9, 1948. Language & literal policy does not, reveal visible result to our eyes immediately as industrial one. But the result of language policy make enormous influence enough to tremble the identity of a nation. Nevertheless I could not find any traces of policy authorities that took attention on this problem, at any successive governments.
The two voices that proclaim Hanja-education and Hangul-only-education have too acutely confronted, so each have run parallel way with no yielding. The scholars and policy authorities that do not join any of the two sides have disregarded the two voices as obstinate egoistic quarrel of some scholars that have nothing to do with them. The proclamations of scholars whether in Hanja-education or Hangul-only-education also in fact flowed mainly as a matter of course that 'must educate Hanja' or 'must use Hangul-only', not by rational analyzing of the cause and proposal of logical alternatives. But the causeless and emotional matter of course will not be persuasive. There were exceptional excellent work such as $quot;Collection of Lectures on National Language and National Alphabets$quot; of Dr. Nam, GwangWoo and $quot;The Significant Misunderstanding about National Language$quot; of Mr. O, JiHo. But the works that mainly on analyzing and alternatives are very uneasy to find out.
During last several years I, the author, writing works concerning language & literal police become to observe Korean language at linguistic side. The more I investigate Korean language, the more I perceive that Hangul and Hanja are undividable linguistic features. Of course since I am not a linguistics specialist I feel sorry for the specialized scholars. But the books of Mizura Sdomu, who not a scholar of linguistics, that studied linguistic features of Japanese language more deeply than any other and left distinct footsteps on that field, gave me many stimuli. The keen analyze of Mr. Park KyungBeom, a natural scientist graduated the department of computer science and statistics of Seoul National University, also be a great help to compare and analyzing the linguistic features of Korean language and English language.
Recently many people says $quot;The crisis of human sciences$quot;, but few accurately point the cause of that. Boldly I think the cause is at the wrong Hangul-only language & literal policy. Although language & literal policy is a significant and great affair that holds the destiny of national people, it have been disregarded as out of consideration. Hangul-only policy of the character media such as newspapers and editions have made the thinking of readers dull, voluntarily result in shackle themselves in competition with television media.
This rough work is not a pure academic one that comments the linguistic feature of Korean language. Only I will be satisfied if throughout this work, we can reflect the problems of our history of language and literal policy and can find out even a small motive for studying linguistics of Korean language.