|
Of course, it is not the case that only the analysis
and theory of speech sound were scientific and
original. The principles of xiangxing(象形, imitation
or representing) and adding stroke(加劃) adapted
to determining the graphic shapes could also be
equally estimated. If this is so, where in the
world did the scientific nature and originality
originate? So far many scholars have been anxious
for it, and the author thinks that its investigation
is the most significant work.
In relation to the scientific principles of making
graphemes, especially the analysis and theory
of speech sound in the 15th century, never inferior
to that of modern linguistics, it was the Chinese
phonology(聲韻學) that had attracted many scholars
in the past. They thought that only the Chinese
phonology could be referred to at that time, and
they actually found the terms of the Chinese phonology
in ?Hunmin-Jeongeum?. Thus the general idea that
the theory of Hunmin-Jeongeum was developed by
introducing and originally improving the Chinese
phonology for Chinese speech sounds, had been
widely spread. Later it often became the presupposition
of other discussions.13)
It must have been an opinion of common sense
in consideration of the background at that time.
However, just as the common idea that all writing
systems were derived from existing ones fails
to be true only of Hangeul, so a seemingly natural
thing could be not true in some special cases.
It seems that as there were many difficult terms
of the Chinese phonology and philosophy, the
founding principles of Hangeul were supposed
to be highly abstract and very difficult. But
the making principles of Hangeul are never abstract
or difficult. The concrete principles such as
the basic idea that they wholly reflect the
phonetic distinctions on graphemes, xiangxing,
and adding stroke, etc. cannot be said to be
a high-level theory. In other other words, it
was only a kind of common sense, rather than
the specialized and distinguished knowledge
that made them possible. Thus, it is necessary
for the analysis of the making principles to
be made on an easy level first. It often happens
that many problems, easily solved by an easy
approach, could not be solved by a difficult
and complex approach.
It is very difficult accept and understand correctly
a foreign academic theory. Just as modern scholars
find it difficult to accept and practice various
Western theories, so the Chinese phonology was
hard to learn for Korean scholars in the 15th
century. If this is so, it must be hard work
to import a foreign theory and to improve it,
and finally to develop an independent theory
like a trichotomy of a syllable. It might be
an astonishing achievement, but the problem
lies in its verification.
The attempt to look for the background of a
syllable- trichotomy only in the Chinese phonology,
is an example of people making a difficult problem
more difficult. It is necessary to change the
existing viewpoint or to review the validity
of its presupposition when a right solution
cannot be easily found. The author thinks that
this flexible attitude is needed also in the
case of the origin of a syllable-trichotomy,
which was the core of the founding principles.
In relation to the theory of speech sound including
a syllable-trichotomy, it is necessary to present
a more fundamental question before we investigate
the origin of such a theory: Why they started
to study speech sound in inventing new graphemes.
This question has an answer. We cannot but think
that they studied speech sound and adapted the
result to inventing graphemes with a view to
making a writing system representing sound(=a
phonetic alphabet) and reflecting sound features
on the shapes of graphemes. Further, it is necessary
to investigate the source of two conclusions.
As was mentioned, it is an almost common and
ordinary idea to invent a new writing system
based on sound symbolism and to reflect various
distinctions proper to sound in graphic shapes,
rather than a highly elaborated theory. Yet
no one can hit upon the idea without effort.
The conclusion that a writing system with sound
symbolism is needed for the complete writing
of Korean could only be brought about from practical
experience, rather than from a high-level theory.
Therefore, seen from a viewpoint of an experienced
man, these conclusions become ordinary only,
but seen from a viewpoint of an unexperienced
man they become insoluble enigmas.
|
