No one guessed that a short paper by an experienced
scholar would have such great influence. It is
noteworthy for Hangeul to appear in chapters on
writing, of the introductory book of linguistics
after this review.4)
However, what is more, the world's history of
letters and graphemics took on quite a new aspect
due to a new location of Hangeul. Writing Systems(1985)
by Geoffrey Sampson can be counted as a representative
book of this trend. This book, after discussing
the earliest human writing systems in chapterr
three, syllabic writing in chapter four, consonantal
writing in chapter five, and phonemic writing(Greek
and Roman alphabets), deals with Hangeul as a
featural system. ‘A featural system’ is a new
term coined by the author of the book. As no existing
classification could successfully reveal the distinction
of Hangeul, after much thought he established
a new system. Just as a phoneme has been defined
as a bundle of some features in recent phonological
theory, so the letters of Hangeul stand for the
very features. He took a hint in this analogy.
Sampson's theory was a big lesson to our Korean
scholars. They had tried to introduce the framework
of Western theory and to fit linguistic facts
on it. As this kind of project was almost beyond
their ability, they dreamt little that they could
free themselves from the borrowed framework. Though
they were certainly aware of Hangeul’s differences
from other alphabets, they failed to theorize
this awareness. On the contrary Sampson, when
he came to know the system of Hangeul to some
extent, realized that the existing theoretical
framework could not explain it satisfactorily,
and finally transformed the framework itself.
And then is it optimal for Sampson's theory of
a featural system to explain Hangeul? It certainly
captures one characteristic side of Hangeul, but
it cannot be said to explain all the characteristics
of Hangeul exhaustively. The present author sincerely
thinks that the future research will steadily
dig it out.
In the past, from the late 18th century to the
early 19th century, Western scholars had insistently
believed that Hangeul had inherited another lineage
of letter. This was no more than a far-fetched
interpretation in which they adapted their own
viewpoint obtained from their history of letters
even to Hangeul. As modern Korean scholars had
consistently insisted on the originality of Hangeul,
they were once dishonorably branded as narrow-minded
nationalists. With the opening of the 1960’s a
long cherished desire was at last answered at
the same time when Western scholars recognized
the originality of Hangeul. However, while Korean
scholars were idling away their time without any
fruit, a new theory of the distinctions of Hangeul
showed up outside Korea. It compelled Korean scholars
to reflect upon their attitudes towards study.
|
