Inscriptional Repertoires and the Problem of Intra- versus Interlingual Translation in Traditional Korea
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This article brings together a series of examples demonstrating the wide range of inscriptional practices in premodern Korea and the ways in which they force us to reconsider modern and Eurocentric notions of translation. The premodern inscriptional spectrum in Chosŏn Korea was not a simple binary of cosmopolitan orthodox Literary Sinitic versus vernacular Korean in the form of ŏnhae exegeses but was a range of inscriptional styles that included idu and kugyŏl. The ways in which texts were inscribed, reinscribed, and transliterated between these different inscriptional styles, as well as the ways in which Chosŏn literati themselves understood the notion of yŏk (譯, “translation”) challenge modern-day notions of translation, on the one hand, but also invite an understanding of them as rather more intralingual than interlingual. They also force us to ask whether LS was conceived as a “foreign” language for literate Koreans in Chosŏn. The premodern Korean cases forces us to add script and inscriptional repertoire (including notions of orthography, notational system, munch'e 文體, etc.) to the list of the main factors that influence intralingual translation.
Abstract
This article brings together a series of examples demonstrating the wide range of inscriptional practices in premodern Korea and the ways in which they force us to reconsider modern and Eurocentric notions of translation. The premodern inscriptional spectrum in Chosŏn Korea was not a simple binary of cosmopolitan orthodox Literary Sinitic versus vernacular Korean in the form of ŏnhae exegeses but was a range of inscriptional styles that included idu and kugyŏl. The ways in which texts were inscribed, reinscribed, and transliterated between these different inscriptional styles, as well as the ways in which Chosŏn literati themselves understood the notion of yŏk (譯, “translation”) challenge modern-day notions of translation, on the one hand, but also invite an understanding of them as rather more intralingual than interlingual. They also force us to ask whether LS was conceived as a “foreign” language for literate Koreans in Chosŏn. The premodern Korean cases forces us to add script and inscriptional repertoire (including notions of orthography, notational system, munch'e 文體, etc.) to the list of the main factors that influence intralingual translation.
참고문헌 (60)
- "Chindan hakpo", 1976, 143~162
- Baker, Mona, "Introduction to Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies", pp.13~18 (2001), Routledge
- Behr, Wolfgang, "Mapping Meanings: The Field of New Learning in Late Qing China", pp.173~209 (2004), Brill
- Bellos, David, "Is That a Fish in Your Ear? Translation and the Meaning of Everything" (2011), Faber and Faber
- Berk Albachten, Özlem, "A Companion to Translation Studies", pp.573~585 (2014), John Wiley and Sons
- "Minjok munhwa", 2005, 191~224
- Cheung, Martha, "‘To Translate’ Means ‘to Exchange’? A New Interpretation of the Earliest Chinese Attempts to Define Translation (‘fanyi’)", Target, 17(1), pp.27~48 (2005)
- "Paper presented at the meeting of the Han’guk Pŏnyŏk Pip’yŏnghakhoe, “Ŏnhae wa Pŏnyŏk,” jointly sponsored by Korea University’s Pŏnyŏk kwa Ret’orik Yŏn’guso and the Han’guk Pip’yŏng Hakhoe", 2010, 1~22
- Davis, Kathleen, "A Companion to Translation Studies", pp.586~598 (2014), Wiley
- Denecke, Wiebke, "Studying Transcultural Literary History", pp.278~288 (2006), de Gruyter
- Denecke, Wiebke, "A Companion to Translation Studies", pp.204~216 (2014), John Wiley and Sons
- Derrida, Jacques, "Difference in Translation", pp.165~207 (1985), Cornell University Press
- "PhD", Universität Hamburg, 1997
- Harris, Roy, "The Language Myth" (1981), St. Martin’s
- Harris, Roy, "Introduction to Integrational Linguistics" (1998), Elsevier Science
- Harris, Roy, "The Linguistics of History" (2004), Edinburgh University Press
- Harris, Roy, "Integrationist Notes and Papers, 2009–2011", pp.85~90 (2011), Bright Pen
- Translation in China: An Analytical Survey, "Hung, Eva", 67~107 (2005)
- Hung, Eva, "Asian Translation Traditions" (2005), St. Jerome
- Hung, Eva, "Introduction to Hung and Wakabayashi", pp.1~15 (2005)
- "Sae kugŏ saenghwal", 2012, 5~22
- Jakobson, Roman, "On Translation", pp.232~239 (1959), Harvard University Press
- "T’ongbŏnyŏk kyoyuk yŏn’gu", 2013, 1~19
- Kim, Kichung, "An Introduction to Classical Korean Literature: From hyangga to p’ansori" (1996), Sharpe
- Kim Uktong, (2010), Somyŏng ch’ulp’an
- Kin Bunkyō, (2010), Iwanami shoten
- 로스 킹, "Ditching 'Diglossia': Describing Ecologies of the Spoken and Inscribed in Pre-modern Korea", Sungkyun Journal of East Asian Studies, 15(1), pp.1~19 (2015), 동아시아학술원[DOI]
- King, Ross, "Ecologies of Translation in East and South East Asia, 1600–1900", pp.175~221 (2022), Amsterdam University Press
- King, Ross, "Cosmopolitan and Vernacular in the World of Wen 文: Reading Sheldon Pollock from the Sinographic Cosmopolis" (2023), Brill
- Kondo, Masaomi, "The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies", pp.485~493 (2001), Routledge
- Kornicki, Peter, "A Note on Sino-Japanese: A Question of Terminology", Sino-Japanese Studies, 17, pp.29~44 (2010)
- Kornicki, Peter, "Languages, Scripts, and Chinese Texts in East Asia" (2018), Oxford University Press
- Lanselle, Rainier, "Diglossia, Intralingual Translation, Rewriting: Towards a New Approach to the Analysis of the Relationship between Ming-Qing Vernacular Stories and Their Classical Sources (1)", Journal of the European Association for Chinese Studies, 3, pp.207~262 (2022)
- Ledyard, Gari Keith, "The Korean Language Reform of 1446: The Origin, Background, and Early History of the Korean Alphabet", PhD, pp.1446
- Ledyard, Gari Keith, "The Correct Sounds for the Instruction of the People", Draft revised translation (March 24). Unpublished typescript, ~ (1997)
- Ledyard, Gari Keith, "The Korean Language Reform of 1446" (1998), Sin’gu munhwasa
- Lurie, David, "Realms of Literacy: Early Japan and the History of Writing" (2011), Harvard University Asia Center
- Mair, Victor H, "A Hypothesis Concerning the Origin of the Term fanqie (‘Countertomy’)", Sino-Platonic Papers, 34, pp.1~13 (1992)
- Martin, Samuel E., "A Reference Grammar of Korean" (1992), Tuttle
- Park, Si Nae, "The Sound of Learning the Confucian Classics in Chosŏn Korea", Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 79(1–2), pp.1~2 (2019)
- Pollock, Sheldon, "Ideology and Status of Sanskrit: Contributions to the History of the Sanskrit Language", pp.197~248 (1996), Brill
- Pollock, Sheldon, "The Language of the Gods in the World of Men: Sanskrit, Culture, and Power in Premodern India" (2006), University of California Press
- Sakai, Naoki, "Translation and the Figure of the Border: Toward the Apprehension of Translation as a Social Action", Profession, 2010, pp.25~34 (2010)
- Schmid, André, "Korea between Empires, 1895–1919" (2002), Columbia University Press
- "K’ogit’o", 2012, 325~344
- Sturrock, John, "Recent Developments in Theory and History: The Semiotic Web 1990", pp.307~321 (1991), Mouton de Gruyter
- Taylor, Keith, "Sino-Vietnamese Translation from Classical to Vernacular", pp.169~194 (2005)
- Toury, Gideon, "Encyclopedic Dictionary of Semiotics, vol. 2", pp.1111~1124 (1986), Mouton de Gruyter
- Wakabayashi, Judy, "Translation in the East Asian Cultural Sphere: Shared Roots, Divergent Paths?", pp.17~65 (2005)
- Whitman, John, "The Ubiquity of the Gloss", Scripta, 3, pp.1~36 (2011)
- "Paper presented at the conference “Han’guk ŏmunhak kwa pŏnhak", 2013, 1~8, pp.Seoul National University
- "Paper presented at the conference “Han’guk ŏmunhak kwa pŏnhak”", 2013, 38~47, pp.Seoul National University
- "T’ongbŏnyŏkhak yŏn’gu", 2011, 129~151
- "Pŏnyŏkhak yŏn’gu", 2012, 167~203
- "Pŏnyŏkhak yŏn’gu", 2004, 69~91
- Zethsen. Karen, "Intralingual Translation: An Attempt at Description", Meta: Journal des traducteurs, 2009, pp.54(4), 795~812