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
Terminologies for ancient textile fabric which were used in the documentary records have a great limitation because the term itself does not display any explanation or characteristic about Korean textile fabric since we have borrowed the terminologies from the Chinese. Until today, these Chinese terminologies have been used for Korean textile fabric without any critique or proper analysis on the structure of the terminologies. So it is considered as if there is no difference between the Korean textile fabric and the Chinese textile fabric.
From the studies on textile fabric, lack of information on the history prior to the Era of The Three Kingdoms made a misconception that studies on ancient Korean textile fabric had started in the Era of The Three Kingdoms. In the Era of The Three Kingdoms, Korea actively had contact with China, the northern regions and Japan. Therefore, there was a presupposition in the traditional studies on textile that the material and the style of textile fabric used in the Era of The Three Kingdoms have been imported from or have been affected by China and the northern regions. Under the above circumstances and without comparing the Korean textile fabric to those of China and the northern regions from the prehistoric age to the Era of The Three Kingdoms, a mistake was made by progressing the studies based on a wrong assumption that Korean textile fabric was affected by China and the northern region. Therefore, the terminologies that we borrowed from the Chinese letters were used without any rejection as if these terminologies were originally from the Korean letters.
The biggest problem was that after the Gochos?n dynasty collapsed, Koreans adopted foreign culture as an ideology for guidance according to the will of the ruling class in the process of introducing foreign culture to Korea at the end of every single era. Thus, as time went by, the culture of textile fabric was disregarded as despicable in traditional Korean culture. As a result, the traditional terminologies used for textile fabric and the traditional produces were substituted for foreign textile terminologies and products.
This cultural structure kept away the opportunity for traditional culture to exchange stimulation and impact with the foreign culture, and it blocked the way of creating new culture. Korean traditional culture did not act as the fundamental ideology and the foreign culture on the supplement but vice versa.
Based on these issues, there is an analysis on traditional leather produces and textile fabric, and a translation of the Chinese terminologies for leather, woolen fabric, hemp cloth, cotton cloth and silk into Korean. The Chinese terminologies were satisfactory and familiar to the Koreans for a long time, therefore simple and accurate Korean terminologies are considered unfamiliar and awkward. Moreover, these Korean terminologies will not easily be adopted as technical terminologies and not widely used as everyday language. However, if there is an academic justification that using Korean terminologies is desirable, then this operation would not be denied. Therefore, we should not stop working on the development of easy and simple Korean terminologies. This is the way to save the subjectivity of our culture and the way to develop Korean education.
From the studies on textile fabric, lack of information on the history prior to the Era of The Three Kingdoms made a misconception that studies on ancient Korean textile fabric had started in the Era of The Three Kingdoms. In the Era of The Three Kingdoms, Korea actively had contact with China, the northern regions and Japan. Therefore, there was a presupposition in the traditional studies on textile that the material and the style of textile fabric used in the Era of The Three Kingdoms have been imported from or have been affected by China and the northern regions. Under the above circumstances and without comparing the Korean textile fabric to those of China and the northern regions from the prehistoric age to the Era of The Three Kingdoms, a mistake was made by progressing the studies based on a wrong assumption that Korean textile fabric was affected by China and the northern region. Therefore, the terminologies that we borrowed from the Chinese letters were used without any rejection as if these terminologies were originally from the Korean letters.
The biggest problem was that after the Gochos?n dynasty collapsed, Koreans adopted foreign culture as an ideology for guidance according to the will of the ruling class in the process of introducing foreign culture to Korea at the end of every single era. Thus, as time went by, the culture of textile fabric was disregarded as despicable in traditional Korean culture. As a result, the traditional terminologies used for textile fabric and the traditional produces were substituted for foreign textile terminologies and products.
This cultural structure kept away the opportunity for traditional culture to exchange stimulation and impact with the foreign culture, and it blocked the way of creating new culture. Korean traditional culture did not act as the fundamental ideology and the foreign culture on the supplement but vice versa.
Based on these issues, there is an analysis on traditional leather produces and textile fabric, and a translation of the Chinese terminologies for leather, woolen fabric, hemp cloth, cotton cloth and silk into Korean. The Chinese terminologies were satisfactory and familiar to the Koreans for a long time, therefore simple and accurate Korean terminologies are considered unfamiliar and awkward. Moreover, these Korean terminologies will not easily be adopted as technical terminologies and not widely used as everyday language. However, if there is an academic justification that using Korean terminologies is desirable, then this operation would not be denied. Therefore, we should not stop working on the development of easy and simple Korean terminologies. This is the way to save the subjectivity of our culture and the way to develop Korean education.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 가죽과 모직물 용어의 우리말
Ⅲ. 마직물 용어의 우리말
Ⅳ. 사직물 용어의 우리말
Ⅴ. 면직물 용어의 우리말
Ⅵ. 결론
참고문헌
참고문헌 (7)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
남북 수학 기초 전문용어의 통합을 위한 제언
한국사전학
2015 .11
-
전문용어 정책의 국제적 흐름과 한국의 정책 방향에 대한 탐색적 연구
언어사실과 관점
2017 .01
-
의학 논문을 통해 본 전문용어 사용 양상
한국사전학
2012 .11
-
寒山詩의 言語特色
漢文古典硏究
2019 .01
-
번역과 전문용어학, 전문용어학과 번역학
통역과 번역
2010 .01
-
경제현상으로서 근대 이행기의 의생활
비교민속학
2004 .08
-
남북 전문용어 연구를 위한 절차적 방법 연구
한국사전학
2020 .05
-
한국역사용어 시소러스의 구축 방법론
사학연구
2004 .03
-
On Terminology Issue in Grammaticalization Studies
담화·인지언어학회 학술대회 발표논문집
2007 .04
-
KOREAN KINSHIP TERMINOLOGY : A SEMANTIC ANALYSIS
어학연구
1967 .04
-
남북 수학 심화 전문용어의 형태적 분석
한국사전학
2016 .11
-
도자공예 용어의 관람객 이해도와 소통력 향상 방안
한국사전학
2014 .11
-
기업 및 시장경제 용어의 사용 양상 분석 - 조어 분석과 코퍼스의 공기 분석을 바탕으로 -
언어사실과 관점
2012 .01
-
개념 조화를 통한 남북 전문용어 통합의 새로운 모색
한글
2019 .09
-
동대문 소재 상권의 패션 트렌드 수용 정도와 소재 기획
복식문화연구
2017 .01
-
한국어 전문용어 조어분석에 대한 통계적 연구 : 물리, 화학, 생물, 의학 용어를 중심으로
한국어학
2004 .11
-
전문용어학의 이론적 토대를 위한 개념 연구
한국사전학
2015 .11
-
A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF LABOR PRODUCTIVITY OF KOREAN TEXTILE INDUSTRY
성곡논총
1981 .10
-
『捷解新語』における状態述語と共起する「を」について
일본문화학보
2003 .02
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
한산이씨 문직물저고리에 나타난 문양과 직물구성 : 단(緞)과 사(紗)를 중심으로
장인우
한국의상디자인학회지
2013
.12
조선전기 직금흉배직물 연구
심연옥
한국의상디자인학회지
2013
.12
우리나라와 중국 명대의 직물 교류 연구Ⅰ : 『조선왕조실록』에 나타난 우리나라에서 중국으로 보낸 직물을 중심으로
심연옥
,
금종숙
한복문화
2013
.08
고려불화 수월관음도의 복식직물과 문양
심연옥
미술사학연구(구 고고미술)
2012
.03
안동 태사묘소장 고려후기 직물의 제직특성
원희정
,
장현주
,
백영미
외 2명
전통복식
2000
.08
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-380-017629332