지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The history of Korean translation involves various obstacles that have made cultural heritage very poor. First, Chinese characters had many defects as a means of translation of Korean language. Chinese characters were too many in number and too complicated to learn, mainly because Chinese characters were not phonetic symbols. And Korean grammar were quite different from those of China. Second, Korean alphabet Hangeul was created relatively recently. Until then Chinese characters were the only true and unique writing system. All intellectual achievements was done via those means. Hangeul could have changed the history of Korean translation. But Neo-confucianism taught that using Korean alphabet is harmful for studying Chinese classics. Hangeul was regarded as secondary means. "Eon-mun", which was traditional name of Korean alphabet, suggests that it was made for writing vernacular language.
"Eon-hae", which originally meant interpretation and comment on Chinese classics, is incomplete as translation in modem sense. Many factors made Korean history of translation very poor compared with that of other East Asian countries. Recent attitudes towards English still show negative legacy of Korean history of translation. Academic Support as well as Economic Support of Translation are urgent. Our conception of translation should be radically changed. The history of Korean translation involves various obstacles that have made cultural heritage very poor. First, Chinese characters had many defects as a means of translation of Korean language. Chinese characters were too many in number and too complicated to learn, mainly because Chinese characters were not phonetic symbols. And Korean grammar were quite different from those of China. Second, Korean alphabet Hangeul was created relatively recently. Until then Chinese characters were the only true and unique writing system. All intellectual achievements was done via those means. Hangeul could have changed the history of Korean translation. But Neo-confucianism taught that using Korean alphabet is harmful for studying Chinese classics. Hangeul was regarded as secondary means. "Eon-mun", which was traditional name of Korean alphabet, suggests that it was made for writing vernacular language.
"Eon-hae", which originally meant interpretation and comment on Chinese classics, is incomplete as translation in modem sense. Many factors made Korean history of translation very poor compared with that of other East Asian countries. Recent attitudes towards English still show negative legacy of Korean history of translation. Academic Support as well as Economic Support of Translation are urgent. Our conception of translation should be radically changed.
"Eon-hae", which originally meant interpretation and comment on Chinese classics, is incomplete as translation in modem sense. Many factors made Korean history of translation very poor compared with that of other East Asian countries. Recent attitudes towards English still show negative legacy of Korean history of translation. Academic Support as well as Economic Support of Translation are urgent. Our conception of translation should be radically changed. The history of Korean translation involves various obstacles that have made cultural heritage very poor. First, Chinese characters had many defects as a means of translation of Korean language. Chinese characters were too many in number and too complicated to learn, mainly because Chinese characters were not phonetic symbols. And Korean grammar were quite different from those of China. Second, Korean alphabet Hangeul was created relatively recently. Until then Chinese characters were the only true and unique writing system. All intellectual achievements was done via those means. Hangeul could have changed the history of Korean translation. But Neo-confucianism taught that using Korean alphabet is harmful for studying Chinese classics. Hangeul was regarded as secondary means. "Eon-mun", which was traditional name of Korean alphabet, suggests that it was made for writing vernacular language.
"Eon-hae", which originally meant interpretation and comment on Chinese classics, is incomplete as translation in modem sense. Many factors made Korean history of translation very poor compared with that of other East Asian countries. Recent attitudes towards English still show negative legacy of Korean history of translation. Academic Support as well as Economic Support of Translation are urgent. Our conception of translation should be radically changed.
목차
1. 가난한 번역 문화의 전통-매체의 측면에서
2. 유학이 우리말글 의식에 끼친 영향 -내용의 측면에서
3. 번역 경시와 미국말 숭배에 대한 몇 가지 반성
4. 번역 정책을 위한 몇 가지 제안
참고문헌
[Abstract]
참고문헌 (14)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
한중간 음식명 번역양태 비교
통역과 번역
2012 .01
-
번역된 정전 ― 《人啊，人！》과 《사람아, 아 사람아!》 비교 고찰
중국소설논총
2013 .01
-
한국 번역사의 시대 구분
번역학연구
2008 .03
-
英祖 御製書의 頒布 대상과 간행 방식
한국사연구
2018 .09
-
中国古代的中韩翻译活动研究
중국어문논역총간
2013 .07
-
On Translation Again
Korea Journal
1970 .08
-
한국어 교재의 중국어 번역 방법 연구
이중언어학
2015 .01
-
대조분석을 통한 중한번역 기법에 대한 연구
동아문화
2015 .12
-
한국 번역학 연구의 현황과 전망
번역학연구
2005 .09
-
중국의 번역연구 동향
번역학연구
2012 .09
-
한국고전번역학 연구의 현황과 과제 : 『고전번역연구』와 『민족문화』 분석을 중심으로
민족문화
2017 .12
-
Translation Errors Caused by Lexical Transfer
번역학연구
2012 .12
-
지식 교류의 차원에서 본 근대 한국의 번역 문제 연구 ―번역 개념과 번역 정책을 중심으로―
日本學硏究
2019 .01
-
번역강의실에서의 의사소통
번역학연구
2012 .06
-
한국의 공공기관, 출판업계, 번역학계의 번역언어 연구
번역학연구
2015 .03
-
The Importance of Vocabulary and Grammar in Translation from English into Korean
번역학연구
2012 .08
-
한문고전번역서 평가시스템 구축 및 평가모델
민족문화
2007 .12
-
탐구번역론 - 하나의 인문학 번역론
번역학연구
2009 .06
-
한중번역에 나타나는 부사어 번역유형 고찰–황석영의 <삼포 가는 길> 중역본을 중심으로
외국학연구
2019 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2012-701-004326559