<<御製詩經>>과 <<御製翻譯詩經>>의 한자 반복 구성에 대한 만주어 번역 양상 비교 연구
A comparative study on Manchu translation of Chinese repetition in "The book of odes"
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study typifies and examines Han i araha ši ging ni bithe(御製詩經) and Irgebun i nomun(御製翻譯詩經). The purpose is to make clear the differences between translation policies Han i araha ši ging ni bithe and Irgebun i nomun through this. In order to compare the Manchu translations on the repetition of Chinese characters in Han i araha ši ging ni bithe and Irgebun i nomun, we made a database of Han i araha ši ging ni bithe and Irgebun i nomun, and searched for Manchu expressions corresponding to the repeated expressions of Chinese characters in them. Most repetitions were 4-letter expressions, and the forms of ABCC, ABAC, AABC, ABCB, ABAB, AABB were more than 95% of the total. On the other hand, if the Manchu translations of Han i araha ši ging ni bithe and Irgebun i nomun for the repetitive composition match perfectly, we classified it as ‘complete match’, and if partially match, we classified it as ‘partial match’. And then, we classified the rest of them as ‘mismatch’, ‘mismatch’ form has 4-subtypes. As a result, we verified differences in translation policies. First, compared to Irgebun i nomun, Han i araha ši ging ni bithe showed a significantly lower rate as a whole when applying Chinese character repetition to Manchu translation. Second, in Han i araha ši ging ni bithe, the phonetic symbol components were modified and repeated, but in Irgebun i nomun, the same phonetic symbol components were repeated. Third, in Irgebun i nomun, particles that can reveal emotions such as ni or kai were used a lot in order to make good use of the emotions in poems. Fourth, Irgebun i nomun was translated more faithfully in the meaning of Chinese characters than Han i araha ši ging ni bithe, and if the translation of Han i araha ši ging ni bithe was incorrect, it was corrected and translated. Fifth, Irgebun i nomun is frequently translated using Chinese characters to the extent that grammatical morphemes are transliterated.
Abstract
This study typifies and examines Han i araha ši ging ni bithe(御製詩經) and Irgebun i nomun(御製翻譯詩經). The purpose is to make clear the differences between translation policies Han i araha ši ging ni bithe and Irgebun i nomun through this. In order to compare the Manchu translations on the repetition of Chinese characters in Han i araha ši ging ni bithe and Irgebun i nomun, we made a database of Han i araha ši ging ni bithe and Irgebun i nomun, and searched for Manchu expressions corresponding to the repeated expressions of Chinese characters in them. Most repetitions were 4-letter expressions, and the forms of ABCC, ABAC, AABC, ABCB, ABAB, AABB were more than 95% of the total. On the other hand, if the Manchu translations of Han i araha ši ging ni bithe and Irgebun i nomun for the repetitive composition match perfectly, we classified it as ‘complete match’, and if partially match, we classified it as ‘partial match’. And then, we classified the rest of them as ‘mismatch’, ‘mismatch’ form has 4-subtypes. As a result, we verified differences in translation policies. First, compared to Irgebun i nomun, Han i araha ši ging ni bithe showed a significantly lower rate as a whole when applying Chinese character repetition to Manchu translation. Second, in Han i araha ši ging ni bithe, the phonetic symbol components were modified and repeated, but in Irgebun i nomun, the same phonetic symbol components were repeated. Third, in Irgebun i nomun, particles that can reveal emotions such as ni or kai were used a lot in order to make good use of the emotions in poems. Fourth, Irgebun i nomun was translated more faithfully in the meaning of Chinese characters than Han i araha ši ging ni bithe, and if the translation of Han i araha ši ging ni bithe was incorrect, it was corrected and translated. Fifth, Irgebun i nomun is frequently translated using Chinese characters to the extent that grammatical morphemes are transliterated.
참고문헌 (11)
- 고동호, "만주어 음성상징 성분의 구성 특징", 알타이학보, (12), pp.1~34 (2002), 한국알타이학회
- 김주원, "滿文 詩經의 飜譯 樣相 硏究", 알타이학보, (19), pp.1~30 (2009), 한국알타이학회[DOI]
- 도정업, "만주어 대등 접속문 구성에서 분사 어미의 분포와 특성 — 滿文老檔의 용례를 중심으로 —", 언어학, (82), pp.165~190 (2018), 사단법인 한국언어학회[DOI]
- 성백인, "초기 만주어 사전들에 대한 언어학적 연구", 알타이학보, 2, pp.27~69 (1990)
- 이훈, "만주족 이야기" (2018), 너머북스
- 최계영, "《御製增訂淸文鑑》 신규 표제어 연구", 알타이학보, (27), pp.25~50 (2017), 한국알타이학회[DOI]
- 葉高樹, "『詩經』滿文譯本比較硏究—以<周南>, <召南>爲例", 歷史學報, 20, pp.219~234 (1992)
- 趙志忠, "從『淸文啓蒙』看淸代前期滿族人的雙語使用", 滿語硏究, 1, pp.26~31 (2000)
- 宮崎市定, "宮崎市定全集 14", pp.282~337 (1991), 岩波書店
- Chase, Hanson, "The Status of the Manchu Language in the Early Ch’ing", Ph.D, pp.1979
- 도정업, "Influence of Analogy on Innovation of an Interrogative Particle in Manchu", 언어학, (85), pp.3~27 (2019), 사단법인 한국언어학회[DOI]
