구급방류 의서의 언해 비교 - 동일 원문을 대상으로 -

Abstract

This study has been written to prove the linguistic traits of Gugeupbang, Gugeupganibang, Eonhaegugeupbang that were published for the common people so that they could easily relieve general diseases. These data are priceless not only as a medical book but also as a documentary record of the Middle Korean. In addition, they are very worthy for the study of translation. since these books were written in Chinese characters with Korean annotation, Chinese characters of the original text and proper terms of the Korean annotation are studied and Korean annotations from the three books are examined. The results of this study are as follows ① The entire catalogues are 164 kinds. But those catalogues that exist in all three books and came down to these days are only sixteen kinds: 墮壓傷, 中風, 舌腫, 吐血, 凍死, 溺死, 自縊死, 卒死, 骨鯁, 失音, 鬼魘, 中寒, 難産, 霍亂, 纏喉風喉閉, 中暑. ② Gugeupbang is generally listed in the order of ‘the names of disease' → ‘the causes of disease' → ‘symptoms' → ‘prescriptions'. Gugeupganibang is generally listed the in order of ‘the names of disease' → ‘professional prescriptions' → ‘simple symptoms' → ‘various emergency formulas' and Eonhaegugeupbang is generally listed in the order of ‘the name of disease' → ‘symptoms' → ‘prescriptions' → ‘acupuncture formulas'. ③ This study has compared the organization of letters from the three books. How the same original Chinese text has been annotated depends on the document and context. The difference is analyzed by the presentation of the original text and annotation (word order, structures of sentences, elements of grammar). The rate of agreement between Gugeupbang and Gugeupganibang is very high and Gugeupbang has more completely annotated the original text than Gugeupganibang.