• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.56 no.4
• /
• pp.288-318
• /
• 2023

This work began with the aim of examining the history of the concept "cultural property" that is expected to disappear, and the main subject of research was the history that preceded the spread of this notion throughout society. The phrase "cultural property" first appeared in the 1920s, and was used in various fields such as literature, history, music, and philosophy in the context of cultural resources. Until immediately following liberation from the Japanese colonial era, the meaning of cultural assets was widely applied in the range of "cultural resources," and during this period, it was often used to help supplant the reality and history of Japanese occupation. Immediately after the Korean War, it was also employed for the purpose of 'restoration of cultural resources through war'. Recognition of cultural property directly influenced by Japan's Cultural Heritage Protection Act has occurred since 1950s. In the early 1960s, the enactment of various laws related to cultural properties and the establishment of the Cultural Heritage Administration caused the meaning of cultural property to be limited to 'cultural heritage'. In this way, the definition of state-led cultural property has continued to apply to this day. It has not been clearly confirmed whether the concept of cultural properties was imported from Japan through means such as the Cultural Heritage Protection Act. Cases in which several Japanese students endorsed the concept of cultural property within Korea serve to increase the likelihood that the concept was indeed imported from Japan. However, "coined language using multiple Chinese characters," "the phenomenon of cultural complex words in the 1920s,", and "cases of non-Japanese international students using the concept of cultural property" also open up the possibility of their own occurrence. Apart from the general importance of the concept of cultural property, intellectuals at the time used this concept to promote internal development and the overcoming of colonial Joseon. In this research, it was confirmed that the conceptual word cultural property was older and had a wider history than the general perception had indicated previously. The history of the conceptual term "cultural property" may appear to be more than 60 years old based on the enactment of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act, but in fact it is nearly 100 years old when traced back to on 1925, as established here. In general, the creation and disappearance of terms may proceed naturally with social change, but such terms may alternatively be created or erased through national policy. Identifying the origins of a phrase that is about to disappear represents a significant task for purposes of establishing its historical meaning.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.57
• /
• pp.467-505
• /
• 2014

I am working on a series of Korean linguistic studies targeting Ganchal(old typed letters in Korea) for many years and this study is for the typology of the [Safety Expression] as the part. For this purpose, [Safety Expression] were divided into a formal types and semantic types, targeting the Chinese Ganchal and Hangul Ganchal of modern Korean Language time(16th century-19th century). Formal types can be divided based on whether Normal position or not, whether Omission or not, whether the Sending letter or not, whether the relationship of the high and the low or not. Normal position form and completion were made the first type which reveal well the typicality of the [Safety Expression]. Original position while [Own Safety] omitted as the second type, while Original position while [Opposite Safety] omitted as the third type, Original position while [Safety Expression] omitted as the fourth type. Inversion type were made as the fifth type which is the most severe solecism in [Safety Expression]. The first type is refers to Original position type that [Opposite Safety] precede the [Own Safety] and the completion type that is full of semantic element. This type can be referred to most typical and normative in that it equipped all components of [Safety Expression]. A second type is that [Safety Expression] is composed of only the [Opposite Safety]. This type is inferior to the first type in terms of set pattern, it is never outdone when it comes to the appearance frequency. Because asking [Opposite Safety] faithfully, omitting [Own Safety] dose not greatly deviate politeness and easy to write Ganchal, it is utilized. The third type is the Original position type showing the configuration of the [Opposite Safety]+Own Safety], but [Opposite Safety] is omitted. The fourth type is a Original position type showing configuration of the [Opposite Safety+Own Safety], but [Safety Expression] is omitted. This type is divided into A ; [Safety Expression] is entirely omitted and B ; such as 'saving trouble', the conventional expression, replace [Safety Expression]. The fifth type is inversion type that shown to structure of the [Own Safety+Opposite Safety], unlike the Original position type. This type is the most severe solecism type and real example is very rare. It is because let leading [Own Safety] and ask later [Opposite Safety] for face save is offend against common decency. In addition, it can be divided into the direct type that [Opposite Safety] and [Own Safety] is directly connected and indirect type that separate into the [story]. The semantic types of [Safety Expression] can be classified based on whether Sending letter or not, fast or slow, whether intimate or not, and isolation or not. For Sending letter, [Safety Expression] consists [Opposite Safety(Climate+Inquiry after health+Mental state)+Own safety(status+Inquiry after health+Mental state)]. At [Opposite safety], [Climate] could be subdivided as [Season] information and [Climate(weather)] information. Also, [Mental state] is divided as receiver's [Family Safety Mental state] and [Individual Safety Mental state]. In [Own Safety], [Status] is divided as receiver's traditional situation; [Recent condition] and receiver's ongoing situation; [Present condition]. [Inquiry after health] is also subdivided as receiver's [Family Safety] and [Individual Safety], [Safety] is as [Family Safety] and [Individual Safety]. Likewise, [Inquiry after health] or [Safety] is usually used as pairs, in dimension of [Family] and [Individual]. This phenomenon seems to have occurred from a big family system, which is defined as taking care of one's parents or grand parents. As for the Written Reply, [Safety Expression] consists [Opposite Safety (Reception+Inquiry after health+Mental state)+Own safety(status+Inquiry after health+Mental state)], and only in [Opposite safety], a difference in semantic structure happens with Sending letter. In [Opposite Safety], [Reception] is divided as [Letter] which is Ganchal that is directly received and [Message], which is news that is received indirectly from people. [Safety] is as [Family Safety] and [Individual Safety], [Mental state] also as [Family Safety Mental state] and [Individual Safety Mental state].