鄕歌의 근대 1-金澤庄三郞와 鮎貝房之進의 향가 해석이 이루어지기까지-

Abstract

In this study I discussed rediscovery of the Samkukyusa(三國遺事) around the later 19th century at first. Furthermore I showed there were some kinds of discussion about existence of Samkukyusa expecially, and I revealed in the dawning of 20th century what kind of scholastic lighting was given to rediscovered Hyangga(鄕歌) with the interpretation of Kanazawa Shousaburo(金澤庄三郞) and Ayugai Husanoshin(鮎貝房之進). In 1894, the Sino-Japanese War broke out. Relates with this year and putting out the interest which us flies, rightly from that time, the field of history of Japan had an interest in Korea history research and put out the results. From that, Samkukyusa were rediscovered. And through the a bibliographical introduction and preface we can know an unexpected thing. It rightly about the mention about Hyangga which would be a outside work to them as historians. They said the fact they mention Hyangga was a kind of honor, and they called Hyangga a treasure in the world even Hyangga was about 10 works left. Kanazawa researched Hyangga in literarily at first, and he maintained that Korea and Japan's language have in same family line. He tried to make that kind of conclusion because he thought the Hyangga rules of spelling was not different from Japanese Manyo-Kana(萬葉假名). What Kanazawa want to emphasize is that the languages of Korea and Japan is in same family line, and the method of spelling is not different. He clung to this theory because he wanted to answer the periodic logic of colony management. However, Ayugai paid a attention in the ancient Korean language which has the complicated language elements, and emphasized Korean language could not have simple and clear system like Japanese. This means Kanazawa's opinion is not right. That is Korean and Japanese is not in same family and different even both of them lent Chinese character in some way. This Ayugai's opinion is very important in searching the interpretation of Hyangga. That is because whether his intention was there or not, even in linguistic field the ideology of the times which was Korean and Japanese in same family didn't have an affect on him narrowly. Ayugai said that in Chosun period, there were not any prose which express perfect ideas with Korean, and premised it is a miracle some Hyangga was handed down to us today. He decoded 3 works like Dongyo(童謠), Pungyo(風謠) and Choyong(處容), also because he attached a Hangul(Korean alphabet) and notes, it is different from Kanazawa. Okura Shinbei(小倉進平) who buckled to the interpretation of Hyangga seems to accept the position of Ayugai. He commented on him favorably, as Ayugai who read through 3 works among 14 works of them did interpret in linguistic way, not miss the 1 character for 1 phrase style, and use in full exemplified reference. Okura checked all of 3 interpretaion of Ayugai, so we can notice Ayugai was a kind of guide, not a critical object.