Reading Söktok Kugyöl materials based on Onhae
MATERIALS
Satoshi JOHO
University of Toyama j oho@hmt.u-toyama.ac.j p
Abstract
In this paper, we discussed some advantages of and points of attempt to research how to read Hancha	with Kugyöl (P^) markings based on the premise, that the tradition of
Hanmun Hundok (^^^M) in Söktok Kugyöl (^MP^) materials has been succeeded to Önhae (WM) materials since the mid-15th century, the promulgation of Hunmin Chyöngüm (^KE^), and based on Önhae (WM) system in these Önhae (WM) materials. As a result, Hundok (^M) systems of Söktok Kugyöl (^mP^) materials had much resemblance to the Non-Buddhist (Confucian) Önhae (WM) materials since the end of 15th century. Therefore, Non-Buddhist (Confucian) Önhae (WM) materials occupy an important position to consider the reading methods of Söktok Kugyöl (^M P^) materials.
Keywords: reading method; Söktok Kugyöl (^M P^) materials; Önhae (WM) materials; Hanmun Hundok (^^^M); Kakikudashibun	^); Non-Buddhist (Confucian)
group; Korean language
Povzetek
In this paper, we discussed some advantages of and points of attempt to research how to read Hancha	with Kugyöl (P^) markings based on the premise, that the tradition of
Hanmun Hundok (^^^M) in Söktok Kugyöl (^MP^) materials has been succeeded to Önhae (WM) materials since the mid-15th century, the promulgation of Hunmin Chyöngüm (^KE^), and based on Önhae(WM) system in these Önhae(WM) materials. As a result, Hundok (^M) systems of Söktok Kugyöl (^MP^) materials had much resemblance to the Non-Buddhist (Confucian) Önhae (WM) materials since the end of 15th century. Therefore, Non-Buddhist (Confucian) Önhae (WM) materials occupy an important position to consider the reading methods of Söktok Kugyöl (^M P^) materials.
Ključne besede: metode branja; Söktok Kugyöl (^MP^) gradiva; Önhae (WM) gradiva; Hanmun Hundok (^^^M); Kakikudashibun	^); ne-budistična (konfucijanska)
group; korejski jezik
Acta Linguistica Asiatica, 4(1), 2014. ISSN: 2232-3317, http://revije.ff.uni-lj.si/ala/ DOI: 10.4312/ala.4.1.43-68
1. Introduction
There are a lot of various researches to define how to read individual Chinese characters, Hancha	with Kugyol (P^) markings in Koryo-era (MM^^)
Soktok Kugyol (SM P^) materials, that is, to refer to other materials (e.g, ®Ch 'acha P'yogi	materials such as Hyangga	Idu (ŽM), ®Hancha
dictionaries published since the 16th century, ©Interpretation of Hancha	which
is written in the additional annotation of Önhae (tšM) texts, etc.). However, it seems that these researches tend to treat these multifarious materials arbitrarily, and only few researches treat the materials systematically on the consistent policy.
In this paper, we will discuss some advantages and points of attempt to research how to read Hancha	with Kugyol (P^) markings based on the premise, that
the tradition of Hanmun Hundok (^^^M) in Soktok Kugyol (SMP^) materials has been succeeded to Önhae (M0) materials since the mid-15th century, the promulgation of Hunmin Chyöngüm (^^^W), and based on Önhae (tšM) system in these Önhae	materials.
2. Procedure for discussions
In this chapter, we will discuss the following points as the procedure for discussions.
® Hanmun Hundok (^^^M) is a linguistic activity in wide East Asian region where Chinese characters are used.
@ Both Ümdok (WM) and Hundok (^M) had been used to read Hanmun (^ ^) texts since ancient times in Korea
© In Korea, both Ümdok (WM) and Hundok (^M) were prerequisites to learn Hanmun(M'X) texts.
@ The order of reading was always consistent, that is to read Ümdok (WM) first, and after that to read Hundok (^M).
© Han'gül Kugyolmun	P^^) and Önhaemun	of Önhae (B
0) materials are respectably projections from the Ümdok (WM) and Hundok (^M) of Hanmun	texts' readings since ancient times.
© Önhaemun (of Önhae (B0) materials can be regarded as Kakikudashibun (^ ŽTL ^), as the results of Hanmun Hundok (^^^M).
2.1
There is no need to dwell on the subject no longer1 that Hanmun Hundok ) is a linguistic psychology not only in Japan but also in wide East Asian region
1 Kosukegawa	(2009, 2010) named Hanmun Hundok(M'XW\m.) in wide East
Asian region where Chinese characters are used, 'East asian version of globalization'.
where Chinese characters are used. Korea is not an exception, and it has been cleared both in name and in reality. The fact that Hanmun Hundok (^^^M) had once existed in Korea is proved by both the historical sources and existing Söktok Kugyöl ( ^Mn^) materials such as Jiuyi Renwangjing (Wwt^M).
(1) ^m^ ii^m mm.\%m s^^tt X	m^m^mw^ x^^^r^^m
^ (SamgukSagi [H®^^] #46 MÜ ^®)
^»AMX^	(Samguk Yusa [H
mrnm] #4 mm ^mrs)
These sources of Samguk Sagi (H®^^)[1145] and Samguk Yusa [late 13th century] were quite often referred to in the discussions about the development of Ch 'acha P'yogipöp	in Korea.2
It is, therefore, that both Ümdok (WM) and Hundok (^M) had been used to read Hanmun (^X) texts in the past, but afterward ''Hundok (^M) was renounced" (Yoshida [^ffl^^], Tsukisima	Ishizuka [5SWM], & Tsukimoto [H^
(eds.), 2001, p. 2) in Korea.
2.2
About Ümdok (WM) and Hundok (^M) of Hanmun(MX) texts reading, Nam [S^^] (1988/1999, p. 26) pointed out that Söktok Kugyöl (SMP^) arose first and after that Ümdok Kugyöl (WMD^) advanced in Koryö-era (MM^^). It means that only Ümdok (WM) existed in the past, and Hundok (^M) arose in Koryö-era (MM^ ^). But both Ümdok (WM) and Hundok (^M) had been used since ancient times.
In this context, Ogura	(1934/1975, pp. 363-369) once pointed out
about the reading of Hanmun (^X) texts initiated to Japan by Ajikki (^M^) and Wangin (£t), as below.
(3)
®Ajikki (^M^)
and Wangin	would have read Hanmun (^X) as
Chiktok Hyönt'o (MMMtt), in Paekche pronunciation (H^W) or Wu pronunciation (^W) of Chinese characters.
@ After Chiktok Hyönt'o (MMMtt), Ajikki (^M^) and Wangin
2 For example, Ogura	(1934/1975, p. 364), Chöng	(1957/1997, pp. 120-
122), Nakamura [ + ^ (1976/1995, pp. 38-39), Nam [S^M] (1997/1999, p. 40), An [^ SM] (2001a/2009b, pp. 21-22, 2001b/2009b, pp. 47-48), and so forth.
would have translated into Korean sentences, with original Korean words and Korean pronunciation of Chinese characters.
@ Japanese could not have handed down the method of Chiktok Hyont'o (M
® Japanese would have invented Japanese Kundoku method	on the
model of Korean Hundok method (^MÄ).
Of these, it is important that both Ümdok (WM) and Hundok (^M) had been used in Paekche (H^). Also, it seems important points that he equated the form of Onhaemun	in Onhae	materials with Hanmun Hundok (^^^M),
and that ^'We have to consider that the step Chiktok Hyont'o (MMMtt) is mandatory, at least once to reach the step of Hunsok (^S)" (Ogura	1934/1975, p.
364). It is, therefore, the order that Ümdok (WM) arose first and after that Hundok (^ M) advanced, such as Nam [^®^] (1988/1999, p. 26) is not correct, but the opposite order is correct. Ogura's viewpoint was quite appropriate in his days in spite of the lack of existing materials,3 because Soktok Kugyol (^Mn ^) materials had not been found in those days.
2.3
It is said that both Ümdok (WM) and Hundok (^M) were requisites to learn Hanmun	texts. About this, An	(1976/1992a, pp. 299-230) pointed out
in detail the learning method of Hanmun	texts in the educational institution for
the King[Here, King S0n/o(afi)] called Kyöngyön(MM), with Yu Huich 'un (W##) [1513~1577]'s diaries as below. (An [1976/1992a, p. 299, Referred with some expressions changed.)
(4)	5WÄÄ
(Miam Sönsaeng/ip [lÄ^^ft] #15	T^[1567^]11H5 0)
(5)	mMMMA
^^ms (Miam Sönsaeng/ip [lÄ^^ft] #16	^^
However, it does not mean that no foundation is found in his argument that Japanese were initiated into the reading of Hanmun	texts by Ajikki (^S^) and Wangin (it) as
the order (3). Ogura [] (1934/1975, pp. 366-367) gives two kinds of indirect evidences, one is a custom of Onkun Heisho (^^M^) called Monzen Yomi (^S^^), and the other is a characteristic of Okuriji	in Senmyo	and Norito
called Senmyc) Gaki (g^*^). Incidentally, Nakada [^ H^^] (1954/1979, pp. 5-40) argues that Ümdok (WM) reading of Hanmun	texts also would have existed in Japan,
based on the various sources.
[157O^]7H17 0)
This applies to the educational institution for the princes called S^^ön
(6) ^^ xmrnm^M ^^ÄÄW
m^m	[as^m^^wsw] ^MH [±] as
(Sunam Sönsaeng Munjip	#16 iMSÄ0^[1772
¥] 5^280)
The order of reading that to read Ümdok (WM) at first, and after that to read Hundok (^M) in these sources, is common to Ogura's viewpoint that "the step ChiktokHyönt'o(M.%aM\^t) is mandatory, at least once to reach the step of Hunsök (^ S)". (Ogura	1934/1975, p. 368)
The learning style of Hanmun (^X) texts can be seen from the Kugyö l( P^) materials in early Chosön-era ((Nam [& Sim [^ÄÄ], 1976/1999, p. 78).
Of these, (b)~(d) have two kinds of Kugyöl (P^) markings, Ümdok Kugyöl (W aP^) and as a kind of Söktok Kugyöl (SMP^). It is important that Ümdok Kugyöl (Wa P^) markings are always on the right side without exception. Söktok Kugyöl (SaP^) markings are basically on the left side, but exceptionally on the right side if there is any space. And when the both coincide, Kugyöl (P^) markings are only on the right side, because Ümdok Kugyöl (WMP^) marked previously also serves as two kinds of Kugyöl (P^) markings. This is the result of the order that is to read Ümdok (WM) first, and after that to read Hundok (^M), Nam [^®^], & Sim [ y^ÄÄ] (1976/1999, p. 78) noted, and this is consistent with the order of Hanmun (^ X) texts learning as mentioned above.4
4 Incidentally, in example (a), of Wön'gakkyöng Kugyöl (HÄ^P^), there are a lot of Söktok Kugyöl (SaP^) marking on the right side. But we will have to pay attention to that this material have different aspects from another (b)~(d) materials. In this material, Han'gül Kugyöl (^® P^), that corresponded to Umdok (Wa), is already printed in the texts. And according to this, it had been possible to read Umdok (Wa). In other words, it have not necessary to dare to mark Umdok Kugyöl (WaP^), and so there are any spaces both on the right side and the left side. Then, there are a lot of Söktok Kugyöl (Sa P^) markings on the right side. Thus, it seems that this example of Wön'gakkyöng Kugyöl (HÄ MP^), is also the result of the order that is to read Umdok (Wa) at first, and after that to read Hundok (^a), and is the example to support the order of Hanmun (^X) texts learning as mentioned above.
2.4
On the other hand, the typical structure of 0nhae{tMM) materials since the mid-15th century, the promulgation of Hunmin Chyöngüm{ ^^^W), at first used Kugyölmun{Ut^X), HanmuniMX) with Han'gül Kugyöl(^^ P^) and after that used Önhaemun(tMMX).
(8) a. m^i Uttcji ^t^HAi^l
mmmfTjmi iLf^ii ^MSI wmziti^ i JJ- itb^n
b. m^l	^Jl	If CO) rrc^ a^üj	XlÄ
W ^ P^l	jl^tfl I	I I o.^	^^^^
xj^ Ej^l^ 0] I	2: II
^ P^ ö] ^ {Nüngömgyöng Önhae [Wlä^&tMM] 5: la-lb_Ä?)
Picture 1: Relevant parts in (8) (Owned by Tongguk University
In these materials, Kugyolmun (P^^), Hanmun	attached with Han 'gul
Kugyol	P^), corresponds to Ümdok Kugyöl (WMP^) which is used before
the promulgation of Hunmin ChyöngUm (^^^W). On the other hand, it seems that Önhaemun (tšM^) also correspond to the result of Hundok (^M) reading, so to say, it resembles to Kundokubun ( P ^ ^ ), Yomikudashibun ( ^ ^ T L ^ ), or Kakikudashibun	of Japanese Kanbun Kundoku (^^P^). Therefore, it
seems that Kugyölmun (P and Önhaemun (tšM^) of Önhae	materials
are each projections from the Ümdok (WM) and Hundok (^M) of Hanmun texts reading. It is thought that the order that Kugyölmun (P^^) were written at first and after that Önhaemun (tšM^) were written, was not unrelated to the order of Hanmun	text's reading since ancient times.5
In addition, the order of Hanmun (texts reading corresponds with the process of completing Önhaemun	as follows.
(9) a.	M«
^^ wrn^rn ffi^p^ ^Ä^M	^
^^ffi^ßß nmtmm^m ^TS*« ^^^^
(Nungömgyöng Önhae [UMMtŠ
M]
b.^ES ^M^m'^^m^M ^^rt^^WHtett
Kin [^^ä] (2010:99-105) pointed out that Kugyöcha (P^^) marked in Nungömgyöng (®mM) (Owned by Tan'guk University (ttH^^^), Tongyanghak Yön'guso
matches the relevant part of Nungömgyöng Önhae (WmMtMM), and that it would be the result of either that Önhae (WM) was created based on Hundok (^M), or that Hundok ( ^M) reading was done based on Önhae (WM). In this case the possibility of latter is higher, he said. However, he added, "Considering the fact that Hundok (^M) reading had existed prior to the promulgation of Hunmin Chyöngum (^KEW), it seems that Han'gul Önhae (^® WM) was, as a whole, created based on Hundok (^M) reading which had existed since before.". (pp. 104-105). On the other hand, Hong [J^^^] (1994/in press, pp. 171-175) mentioned the manuscript Li Täibäi	poetry collection, seems to be written by
posterity, in his possession. It consists of the following three volumes, ©Original Hanmun ( text of Li Täibäi	poetry, @Hanmun	text with Kugyöl (P^) and
interpretation markings with thin brush, @Önhae (WM) text. He said that these materials are in the same person's handwriting, and purchased at the same store. Of the three volumes, Kugyöl (P^) and interpretation markings of @ are similar to the Kugyöl (P^) markings of (7). Hong [J^^^] (1994/in press, pp. 171-175) insisted that the volume of ® shows the preliminary stage of completing Önhae (WM) text such as @ volume. Even if these materials are in the same person's handwriting, it is not certain that these are copied in the order of	If it is true, it would be one of the materials supporting the insistence
of this paper, that Önhaemun (WM^) can be regarded as Kakikudashibun	the
results of Hanmun Hundok (^^^M) reading.
IM ^IK^ö] pB^pnojzn lili 13111« jtl^E
{Nüngömgyöng Önhae [^M^&tŠM] C. ±0] or^^ □□A], mmw^j
x^m^i E mmm tu^^/ti^* e
l^h® mm E	tti^^^ E JtSÄ SWIilP
7tmm E »c m -JE^JL ^it^^ E i ffitt I mm WMW^ im amsi?
m^] mmi -jg^i^i I Äs WK I tatiföii ii
{Nüngömgyöng Önhae [^^ImMWM] '^Wk)
E
IM
rm, j
-'S' ö - ^ ^
E

I iE
These sources, referred to frequently (Kim	1960, pp. 73-74), Shibu
1983, pp. 7-9, An	1997/2009, pp. 272-276, etc.), show the process
of the completing metal movable-type prints Nüngömgyöng Önhae (WM^SŠM) [1461] published by Kyosögwan (in advance of the wood block prints Nüngömgyöng Önhae (WÄM®^) [1462] publishing. In short, it means that "King Sejo (^fi) punctuated sentences with Kugyöl (P^) markings at first, and after that, it was translated to Korean along these Kugyöl (P^) markings " (An [ 1985/2009, p. 39).6
6 As for the process of completing Önhaemun ($MM^), there are similar mentions in another Buddhist Önhae (tšM) materials published by Kan'gyöngdogam (^M^^). Following are some examples. (An [^^®], 1976/1992a, p. 289, Referred with some expressions changed.)
(1)	L^^fj^fif«^	mmws.	jj^
igeppi^nAiji	=^jnSlfirö> fiJ^j^linAiq
(Sönjong Yönggajip	^)
(2)


Jlti±»®rA>
=|
önhae [^iJMUII] (3) ^
^mmm
^lJl (Kümganggyöng
SEr
BP
m)
t^^^Ä^T mwMU swmm
^mm^m msm^^m ^^n^^rn m^p
Ä^^^TÄ (Wön'gakkyöng Önhae	^^E ^X)
Furthermore, in Kümganggyöng Önhae (-^MMtMM), there are also mentions in Han Kyehüi	afterword (mX) and in the additional annotation, that is similar to the
process of completing Nüngömgyöng Önhae (WÄMtMM) and the participants.
(4) ^'^^mrn^ ^^m^pm [^mm^
.....#
mm	...
E



(Kümganggyöng Önhae	^lÄ m)
Shibu	(1983, p. 22) pointed out that the process of completing Kümganggyöng
Önhae(^fflm®M) in this source is remarkably similar to Nüngömgyöng Önhae (WÄM®
As stated above, we discussed in detail that Önhaemun (WM^) of Önhae(WM) materials can be regarded as Kakikudashibun	the results of Hanmun
Hundok (^^^M) reading,7 and these can be regarded as a kind of Hanmun Hundok (^^^M) materials.8
In this paper, we will discuss some of the advantages and points of the attempt to research how to read Söktok Kugyöl (SMP^) materials based on the Önhae (WM) system of Hanmun	texts in Önhae (WM) materials.
M), and that the difference from Nüngömgyöng Önhae (ß®^WM) is only in the printing office, Kyosögwan	and Kan'gyöngdogam (^M^^).
Kosukegawa [^^^ÄÄ] (2009:42) pointed out, that such as Shomono (^'^) in Japan, Önhae (WM) in Korea, and Kunten	materials in Vietnam, the method to write the
results of Hundok (^M) reading in various languages exists, instead of the marking to original Hanmun (texts. That is to say, that Önhaemun (WM^) is the results of Hanmun Hundok (^^^M). However, he also pointed out that these have been often transmitted with original Hanmun	texts together.
In addition, there have been a few mentions that Önhaemun (WM^) of Önhae (WM) materials "corresponds to Japanese Kanbun Yomikudashibun (^^^T L^)" (Kanno ^E], 1996, p. 108), "has a similar characteristics with Kakikudashibun (# ^TL (O [ 2004, p. 33), and so forth. However, we can not find the researches to reconstruct the systems of Hanmun Hundok (^^^M) in these days from such perspectives.
Tsukishima [^ft (1963:101-102) gave the five materials to research the language use reality and situation of Hanmun Hundok (^^^M) in Heian-era Kunten materials.
Kakikudashibun (#TL^), the results of Hanmun Hundok (^^^M). The sentences that would be written in the order of Hanmun Hundok (^^^M), even though original Hanmun	texts are unknown. The kinds of Wakan Konkobun (ff^i^S
M^) in a broad sens, the sentence written in a mixture of Japanese and Chinese.
The kinds of Ongi (^Ä), dictionary.
The materials to show the social background of Hundok
Of these, he pointed out, that there are various materials of @ Kakikudashibun (#TL ^), the results of Hanmun Hundok (^^^M), such as Kanagaki Hokekyo Bussetsu Amidakyo (^^^^KM), Kan Muryojukyo (^^S^M), Kanagaki Rongo (^ (These are Hiragana (^^^) books), and Shakanyorai Nenjuno Shidai (^ ^^^^^^^^ (This is Katakana(^®^) book owned by Tenri Library and so forth, and that "we can use these materials usefully if only the way of the usage is valid." (p. 102)
It seems that Önhaemun (WM^) in Korea nearly corresponds to @ materials, and so, these would be valuable materials to research the systems of Hanmun Hundok (^^^M) in these days.
7
8
3. The relation of Söktok Kugyöl materials and Önhae materials
This chapter will deal some examples, and we will discuss some advantages and points. In this paper, incidentally, Önhae (B0) materials of the 15th century, such as Nüngömgyöng Önhae ()[1462], Pöphwagyöng Önhae () [1463], Naehun (rt^)[1475], Tusi Önhae	[1481], and so forth, will be
treated as main sources. We will refer to Hancha	dictionaries published in the
16th century or other materials when necessary.
3.1 'W
is written as "Ä^.Ä, TM^o J M^^ttMM®, ^^W^o " in Zhuzi Bianlue (Ä^^^). And "As 'W' is originally Eftfe (Guängyün(Ä^.)), the sentences including ' W' have the structure that is comparing the sentence above with the sentence below" (Kasuga	1938/1984, p. 346). It is also said that 'W'
in auxiliary word usage, is used as conjunction	or adverb.9
The examples of Söktok Kugyöl (SM P^) materials are as follows.
(1)	® i{:t} Ml	II «SI ii I ^I I ^ ii Hi ii ^
□	□□C S3C3 ML^jÄc S Sc Ä ÄC ÄSc	Iž
□	Ijjg^ C □ C □ (XlnyiHuäyänjmg [frli^^SM] 14:9_5-6>
(1) is marked '^ÄC. It seems to transcribe 'CCi^' in the 15th century, because ' r is probably Marüm Ch'ömgi (^W^^) of Hun (^) of character 'W'. In this example, the other hand, original Hanmun (J'M^) text is '{51 ^Ä', and Kugyöl (Pl^) marking there is '{rI^C	There are various theories about the reading '{bIDD',
but that correspond to ' ^il I 1' of the 15th century, in any way. 10
In Önhae (tŠM) materials from the 15th century, it is common read as adverb ' • • ' among the materials, except verbal reading '7} •
(2)	a. aMS^l	ttMll^ «Mlfl
b.	te]-	vil □□ '^l^ll	öj^i] I^^^DC^
^ tälf Jts^ll o]^u] I Li {Nüngömgyöng Önhae [UM&tŠM] 9:44a-44b_;^)
9
However, it is difficult to distinguish between these two. In addition, Kasuga [# 0 (1938/1984) called ' ^^A^ ', of Japanese Kanbun Kundoku (materials, 'conjunctive adverb (i^ljtÖtli'JM)'.
^"However, 'fcJSl,' in original Hanmun(?S^) texts was not always read as ^i] L J^but there are a lot of examples to be read as ' JL^' alone. See (5)~(6). Incidentally, 'MW was written as 'fflM^W^Ä^S^B^MWftSo ' in Hanyü Däc^diän (^^^M:
(3)	a.	M^MWÄ
b. ^^ ^ I I	^^^^ J_^ ^ I I II	^ (Tusi
Onhae [ttltSÄ?] 10:21b)
(4)	a. MJ^^M 10>5L	o^ ^ MEMA^
b. 71-^1 I ITll	4	^^^^ I	1^11 (Naehun
[rtlH] 1:44b)
(5)	a.	imM'k^H -«Ä |ö>5L JjjSo]
MS^S^^ESH 1 I ^ I 71-b. □471- öl 1 0.31 ^^ižlTll -i]] #7-1^ 7-l# ^olr: jJjgol
Hxl'^Tl^ J_^ rabili I	{Pöphwagyöng
Önhae l&^MMMM'] 6-.9a.Jf)
(6)	^m^mn^ MMWH^^^
^^^ ^ m^ ^^^ ^^ III ^ ^^
Ol Al 5l ^ {Pöphwagyöng Önhae [fei^MUÄ?] 1:186b_7(i)
'^Ä' did not exist in Hancha (J'M^) dictionaries of the 16th century, but' I I ' is common in Söktok Kugyöl (SMD^) materials in Koryö-era (M M^^) and Önhae (WM) materials of the 15th century. Accordingly, it seems that 'I 1' had been fixed as Hun (^) of character
3.2
have two kinds of tones, even tone	and going tone	but we will
treat even tone	here. Two kinds also appear in Zhuzi Bianlue	but
there are a lot of mentions, such as "M^, ^fe",	Ä^^fe", "Ä^^fe", and
so forth, for even tone	while only one mention , fe" for going tone
In Söktok Kugyöl (ff 11P l^) materials, "0' is marked ' I ' without exception.
(1)	II \{XmyiHuäyänjmgshü[mM^Wif&W\]?>5-.\^_\l-n)
(2)	ÄC ij^CDC ^ ^PCD ^ + a WC^Ü	s^CZJ .................... [ÜfaB^ÄI^] 20:4_9-10)
(3)	^ II Ä I ^i a I miau II ^ II iMiÄ^i .....
(XinyiHuäyänßngshü [frli^ÄM^L] 35:10_10-11>)
(4)	II I Äl	I 'l^iMI iltt II (Yüqieshidilün [M MmM-^] 20:8_17-18>
In these examples, was treated as adverb, and marking ' 1' was probably Marüm Ch'ömgi (^W^^) of Hun (^) of character Thus it seems to transcribe
'1^1 7l'or'i^ I'.
In Onhae	materials of the 15th century, most of characters are also
read as ' ^I 7]except verbal reading	.
(5)	a. ^p^^^A^i I mmm lei^	leib. öis^c □ i-ii mmm^ ji=ö>
15]- {Pöphwagyöng Önhae MUÄ?] 2:173b_7(i)
(6)	a. mm^]	m bpmi leii
b. mm^]	ttJ:l»g>ti}D7l	nai^ ^
{Nüngömgyöng Önhae [^M^&tŠM] 5:24b_7^)
(7)	a. A^l «-f?:!	a««^]^ M^S-MM
b.	1	M-gfl tij 17]	71-1 |0> ^icl
|0>	l:58b)
(8)	a.	—amw
b. I ^ I ^^^--^ ^	(Tusi Onhae [tt^S^]
17:14a)"
Furthermore, the examples of Hancha	dictionaries in the 16th century are as follows.
(9)	i^C ^ (Kwangju Ch 'onjamun [^^/tl^l^^^] lib)
(10)	^ (Paengnyon Ch 'ohae	12b)
(11)	^ {Paengnyon Ch 'ohae	13b)
(12)	a ^^^ ^ X (Sinjung Yuhap [ffig®^] T:9b)i2
(13)	a ^ (Sökpong Ch 'onjamun	lib)
There are two different kinds of Hun (1111), one is ' as (9)~(11), and the other is
" Incidentally, it is well known that, in Tusi Önhae (ttftUII), not only 7]' as adverb but also '"^Irr^lthe 'n~A' changed form, appears for the first time, and actually, four examples were found. However, all of those are the examples of character's reading such as follows, so that there were no example of character's reading.
(1)	a.ft^^BM
b. L	ÄL Üjq L J	JL ^L^]	# C] (Tusi
Önhae [ttftUII] 24:32a)
(2)	a.^^^^S
b. 91J	an L Sil J ^J^q	7>L ^L^
e| (Tusi önhae [ttftUII] 16:5a-5b)
12 In this example, a circle(HK) is added to the upper right hand side of 'character, meaning the character going tone(i^), and it is written as 'X	under the Hun(^)
' '.
as (12H13). In there, 'i^D' appears mKwangju Ch'önjamun X) which is said to have included the old Hun	especially, and it is the common
to Onhae (materials of the 15th century and Söktok Kugyöl (SMP^) materials.
Thus, it seems to have some difficulties, but at least, 17] (i^i )' had been fixed as Hun (^) of character until the end of the 15th century.
3.3
In Zhuzi Bianlue	is written as	quoted from Guängyün (Ä
^). And of auxiliary word usage, is used as adverb in general, as with several meanings such as "(1)^;fe^o (2)X» (3)^;^o (4)B;BMo (5) (6) ^o " in Hanyu Dacidiän
In Söktok Kugyöl (SMP ^) materials, there were two kinds of Kugyöl (P^) markings in character
(1)	^^^ WM^	tfllc WSC^C fc Sc ÄDC {Xlnyi HuayanjingimU^WiM] 14:15_1)
(2)	Ä II Ä| iÜI te I ^ II Ml	El II (Xinyi Huäyänjmg [frli^^SM] 14:14_14)
(1) is marked 'C. Nam	(2007) treated it with ChonhunchaC^IHI^^) of
particle but it is also possible to treat with Marüm Ch'ömgi(^||-i^|E) of adverb 'I Example (2),of the earlier part, was marked'I 1', and it seems that1' was read as ' □ C'. In any way. there is no doubt that' C' had been considered Hun(^) of character ' ^'.
The examples of Önhae	materials in the 15th century are as follows.
(3)	a. tmm^'']	MtBf^ 1^1^51-
b.	^ o] Htt^ PßUMC	{Pöphwagyöng Önhae
[Ä^^MUÄ?] 6:184a_Ä?)
(4)	a.	^5]-
b.	□□0>tti:r9löW»^l	-i^ö]] uiy]
w I 12]- {Pöphwagyöng Önhae l&^M.tMM] 3:37b-38a_7(i)
(5)	a.	^
b.	□ ft^ (Pöphwagyöng Onhae [Ä^M®^] 2:11b_^)
13 However, in Hanyü Däc^diän(^to^^Ä), character '^' in auxiliary word usage was written as	^S» ', '^M, ^Ä» ', besides the various meanings of adverb.
(3)~(4) were read as adverb ' □' and particle '-5L' each other. And in (5), both two forms were read in concord as	r, which is similar to 'Momata jlT')' of
Japanese Kanbun Kundoku	However, it is more often to be read as only
adverb ' 1' such as (3) without particle '-£'.
The examples of Hancha	dictionaries in the 16th century are as follows.
(6)	^ □ {Kwangju Ch 'önjamun [^^/tl^l^^^] 21a)
(7)	\ {SökpongCh'önjamun[^^^'^X\2\2i)
(8)	^ £ {Sinjüng Yuhap [fri^®^] ±: 14b)
Example (8), of Sinjüng Yuhap (m^®^), is written as ^', and so, particle '-f might be treated as Hun (^) of character ' ^ ', unless it is misspelling. Otherwise, adverb ' □' is treated as Hun (sill) of it. Anyway, there is no doubt that Hun (llll) of character was primarily adverb ' • '.
Thus, is also the example that the reading method was common to Söktok Kugyöl (SMn^) materials, Önhae (®m) materials, and Hancha	dictionaries
in the 16th century.
The above three characters are that the reading method was common to Söktok Kugyöl (ffllPl^) materials, Önhae (tšM) materials, and Hancha (J'M^) dictionaries in the 16th century.['' as 'CD^', ' as 'i^C 7] (i^D)', and as '□'.] Therefore, we can verify that Hun (^) of these characters had been fixed and persisted.
In other words, these are good examples that we can research how to read Söktok Kugyöl (SM P^) materials based on Önhae (®m) system of Hanmun (^X) texts in these Önhae (®m) materials.
However, we have to pay attention to the situations that the persistences mentioned above are not always verified with all characters. Below are the examples.
3.4 'm'
have some kinds of tones. Even tone	is used to the end of a sentence
in auxiliary word usage, that means a question, a rhetorical question, or an exclamation. However, we will treat rising tone (i^) here. Auxiliary word as rising tone (i^) can be largely divided into two types, preposition (or conjunction (The meaning of 'is similar to or 'Ä', and in Zhuzi Bianlue (Ä^^^), is written as "m, quoted from Lünyü
See Kasuga [#0 ^tÖ] (1942/1985, p. 279).
14
The examples of Söktok Kugyöl (SM P^) materials are as follows.
(1) Pi Ifti S^ftl II 175 I {ÄT} I ^P II I \{JiüyiRenwängj-mg[m liÜM] ±:11_24)
In (1), was read as adverb, and ' 1' was probably Marüm Ch'ömgi (^lf-)^ IE) of the word. Thus, it seems to transcribe	of Chöngüm (iEIf") materials in
later ages.
In Önhae (WM) materials, on the other hand, the reading method of character shows different trend by each materials.
(2)	a. Itbižtim^ MitbHlf ö]
b. ö] ÄI tJ^jf o] Hlfo]	o] öjT^ tJ^l^ I ÜNüngömgyöng
Önhae [t^ÄMUM] 2:56a-56b_;^)
(3)	a.
b. n I fl^^Hgö]	I I	{Pöphwagyöng Önhae
[Ä^^MSM] l:45a_;^)
(4)	a.
b.	^ ^^ «>l tffö |ö> ti^ (Naehun
[rtlll] 1:16b)
(5)	S^Ä^S
b.^^	^ # I ¥ ^	(Tusi
Önhae [ttltSM] 24:4b)
(2)~(3) were read as particle '-^/4', but (2) was read as connective particle, and (3) as adverbial particle. Most of characters were read as particle '-^/4' in the Buddhist Önhae (WM) materials in the mid-15th century.
Meanwhile, (4)~(5) were read as adverb '4 I', like (1) of Söktok Kugyöl (ff UP l^) materials. The word '4^' as the reading of increases rapidly since the end of the 15th century, more precisely, since Naehun (^^)[1475], Tusi Önhae (^^WM) [1481].
The examples of Hancha	dictionaries in the 16th century are as follows.
(6)	|a 4d (Kwangju Ch'önjamun [^^/tl^l^^^] 11a)
(7)	|a 4 I ^ iSinjung Yuhap [ffig®^] T:63a)
(8)	|a U-ll: {Sökpong Ch 'önjamun	1 la)
(6)~(7) were written adverb ' ^ □', that is common to ' C' of Sölrtok Kugyöl (ff llPli) materials or Naehun (P^ |l|)[1475], Tusi Önhae (ttltSÄ?), except verb such as (8) of Sökpong Ch'önjamun
Thus, character was read as particle '-^/^' in Önhae (WM) materials in the mid-15th century. However around the period adverb ' had been fixed as Hun (1111 ) of the character firmly. Furthermore,	itself is not appear at all in the Chöngüm
(^W) materials since the mid-15th century, the promulgation of Hunmin Chyöngüm (^K^W), to Naehun (rt^)[1475].
3.5 'Ä'
'Ä' is used as verb that means 'reach, arrive', and in auxiliary word usage, it is used as preposition	or conjunction	It seems that the former is written as
'Mte, Ä^', and the latter as '^Ä^fffe' in Zhuzi Bianlue (Ä^^^), quoted from Guängyün (Ä^).
However, we will treat only conjunction	usage here, because it is difficult
to distinguish between verbal usage and preposition	usage.15
The examples of Söktok Kugyöl (SM P^) materials are as follows.
(1)	g|C Wte^MHIfC AA iftte^MHIf□□	{Yüqieshidilün
20:4_20-21)
(2)	ig^ I ^	I SUl	II I ......
(Xinyi Huäyänßng [frli^^SM] 14:9_12)
(3)	ft I	II -II M I ^ Ä| II (Jiüyi Renwängjmg [Wlit
±:15_12)
(4)	^^-pjtm^
...............................................[^tß^^HJ^M] 3:5_6-7)
These examples show different trend by each materials. That is, one is marked ' ' such as (1)~(2) of Yüqieshidilün (iUfllllBtpiifel^) and Xinyi Huayanjing (frlii^SM), and the other is marked 'C such as (3)~(4) of Jiüyi RenwängjTng (Wwtand
15 For example, example (1) can be judged as verbal usage, however, example (2) is difficult to judge whether it is verbal usage or preposition (^M) usage.
(1)	a.	mm^ 1
b.	^l^iJ JL	J	öjiq öI-i^lM öj-q ^p^ öj-q^r]-
(Nüngömgyöng önhae [WImMBM] 2:102b_||)
(2)	a.
b. H ^ Hr	r rn ^l^elM (Nüngömgyöng önhae
l:53a_^)
Hebu Jinguängmingjing (^^^^^M). The reading method of the latter examples is unknown, but the former examples marked 'I 'are probably Marüm Ch'ömgi (^W^ ^) of character 'Ä'. Thus, it seems to transcribe adverb Hun (^) of character '
Ä'.
In Önhae (B0) materials, it is also extremely complicated.
(5)	a.
(Pophwagyong Önhae	6:56a_^)
(6)	a.	Ä^wt^ii	tw^mm^]
b. i47l- ^ /žB^I^M- I Wt^ll I IM-^IM- » ^ ^ ö] I Iiq itifö] ^fll ^fl ojc^	I(Pöphwagyöng Önhae
[Ä^^MUÄ?] 7:173a_Ä?)
(7)	a.	Ä^li^ÄMtÖl 51-
b.	oj:	I felgj]- 5t I 1^0]	{{Nüngömgyöng
Önhae [t^ÄMUÄ?] 9:32a_Ä?)
(8)	a.^«^ ^ÄftÄ^	+	Ät^
b. «öl- □^yl- o] tkÄiäl « S/Ä^
ftÄI n t^ll iM-^lM-MrfHl öj-^i ojAjBi O] itiföl šH o] Ä I ^^ {Nüngömgyöng Önhae [t^ÄMUÄ?] 7:25a_;^)
In (5)~(6), 'Ä' was read as adverb ' I' which is in concord with the preceding auxiliary word such as particle	conjunctive ending	and so forth.
However, in (7)~(8) were read as only these auxiliary word without adverb 'I ' appearing. In Nüngömgyöng Önhae	there are many examples to read '
as both adverb and the auxiliary words equally, while in Pöphwagyöng Önhae most of examples are read as these auxiliary words alone, except only
suggests that there are differences of Önhae (B0) system between Nüngömgyöng Önhae	and Pöphwagyöng
Önhae
16 As for the details of completing Önhae (S®) of each materials, in Nüngömgyöng Önhae (W SfiS®), there are some descriptions in the afterword (K^) that King Sejo (^ffi) marked Kugyol (P^) directly at first, and after that Kim Suon (^^S) and Han Kyehüi (^^fi) translated. However, in Pophwagyong Önhae (), there are no description as described above, so that it is estimated from several situations, that the same persons would have involved in compiling the materials (An [S^fi], 1998/2009a, pp. 68-69), etc.). And this has been generally accepted. But considering to the subtle difference of Önhae (S®) system between two materials mentioned above, it might be necessary to re-consider the estimate of the persons compiling Pophwagyong Önhae (S^fiS®) more carefully.
(9)	a.	ÄtMWffiS^^^® rn^ a^^
b. I l:]1 ^til	l:]1	I I
la^^o] y]^ S^J oj^m- ^ A>nul 4 DED^ Sj^oj: oj-efl ^o]] (PönyökSohak[mM'\^^]7-A6h-47a)
(10)	a. M&ßT] AMP^ |ö>||M|Cl
b.	^ ö>E0l ^p^o] ^o^	^ižl	(Sohak
Önhae [A^^tMM] 6:80b)
(9)~(10), on the other hand, are examples of Pönyök Sohak	[1518] and
Sohak Önhae	[1588]. These are read as that is common to Söktok
Kugyöl (SMn^) materials. The word ' ^' itself is very few in the 15th century, but in the 16th century, it increase significantly as reading 'Ä' character. In this respect, it is similar to character above.
The examples of Hancha	dictionaries in the 16th century are as follows.
(11)	Ä ^ ^ (Kwangju Ch 'önjamun [^^/tl^l^^^] 7a)
(12)	]k 1 H" {Sökpong Ch 'önjamun	7a)
(13)	Ä # ^ {Sinjung Yuhap [ffig®^] T:42a)
(11) of Kwangju Ch'önjamun (^^^^X), was written that is common to Söktok Kugyöl (SMn^) materials or Önhae (®m) materials in the 16th century such as (9)~(10). In other respects, (12) of Sökpong Ch'önjamun (^^^^X), and (13) of Sinjüng Yuhap (m^®^), was written as verb '
As shown above, reading method of character 'Ä' was extremely complicated. There are examples to be read as adverb ' ^' in Söktok Kugyöl (SM P^) materials, Önhae (®m) materials in the 16th century, and Hancha	dictionaries in the 16th
century, so that, it seems that had been fixed as Hun (^) of character 'Ä'. However, of Önhae itMM) materials in the mid-15th century, it was read as adverb ' • ' or auxiliary word such as particle	conjunctive ending	and so forth.
Not only that, the word ' ^' itself is very few in the 15th century.17
As discussed above, there is a similarity between and 'Ä' each other. That is, the reading methods of these characters are common between Söktok Kugyöl (SMD ^) materials and Önhae (®m) materials since the end of 15th century or the 16th
17 Incidentally, the word ' as adverb is very few in the 15th century, however, the same form in verbal usage ' appears frequently, and it had also been used as the reading of character ' Ä' in verbal usage. Then, we may not be able to assert that ' ^' have disappeared at all in the 15 th century.
century[l^ as	and 'Ä' as	While the other reading method existed in
Önhae (tŠM) materials in the mid-15th century.
It is not easy to provide an explanation for this, but one thing that we would like to stress that, most of materials in the mid-15th century were Buddhist materials, while Non-Buddhist (Confucian) materials had increased since the end of 15th century. In other words, variations in language use, in more detail, the variations in Hanmun Hundok (^^^M) traditions among Buddhist and Non-Buddhist group, appeared in different periods.18
From the above, we will reach a strange conclusion, that the tradition of Hanmun Hundok (^^^M) in Söktok Kugyöl (SMD^) materials had been succeeded to Non-Buddhist(Confucian) group, and another tradition had existed separately among Buddhist group in the mid-15th century. Or it might be better to consider that the tradition of Hanmun Hundok (^^^M) in Korea was basically consistent. However, the tradition among Buddhist group in the mid-15th century were quite peculiar.
Certainly, there are also examples such as	mentioned above, that
the reading methods are common to Buddhist Önhae (tŠM) materials in the mid-15th century. However we cannot overlook the fact that the reading methods of these characters were common among Buddhist Önhae (tšM) materials and Non-Buddhist (Confucian) Önhae (tŠM) materials. Moreover, from a preliminary study, it seems that there are more examples such as or 'Ä'.19 I would like to continue considering these examples.
In any case, it should be stressed that Non-Buddhist (Confucian) Önhae (tšM) materials occupy an important position to consider the reading methods of Söktok Kugyöl (SM P^) materials.
18 For the various forms in the materials written in different days, there is a research such as Ch'oe	(2002) treating past tense suffix formation. He did not regard these forms as
the historical chronically successive, but payed attention to the characteristics of the materials, and concluded that these distinct forms have been used in different regional and social dialects, and have been reflected in written text separately. However, there are few detailed research on his argument, that language use among the groups (Buddhist and Non-Buddhist group) had been different each other, except a verbal evidence by Kwön Odon Chinese scholar, 1901~1984] that language use were different for each alley in P'alp'an-dong (A^M), Chongno-gu (Ä Seoul, in the early 1940s. It seems that there is a gap in his argument, however, for future research about the history of Korean language, such viewpoints might be necessary, in any case.
For example, '^L J, ^L J, ^L JL^^fl-^^?,	':£J'(7>Lö>, 7>L'^),
r^tLj	and so forth.
4. Closing Remarks
As stated above, we have discussed some of the advantages and points of the attempt to research how to read Söktok Kugyöl (SM P^) materials based on Önhae (WM) materials, with each examples. As a result, Hundok (^M) systems of Söktok Kugyöl (SMP ^) materials had much resemblance to the Non-Buddhist (Confucian) Önhae (WM) materials since the end of 15th century.
Recently, as studies of Söktok Kugyöl (SM P^) materials advanced, it has been often pointed out that it is important to classify the group of the materials, such as Huäyänjing (group, Yüqieskidilün (Äft^Ä^) group, and so forth. Furthermore, these classifications have been positively applied to the deciphering of Cypher	materials.
However, as for the groups, it seems that the relation with Önhae (WM) materials should be also considered. In that respect, it seems that Söktok Kugyöl (SM P^) materials and Non-Buddhist (Confucian) Önhae (WM) materials have deep connection. In future study, various examples should be treated in detail. This paper, which treated a few examples, is nothing more than a preface of the future research.
Note
This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 25770145. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2nd Korean International Symposium of the Department of Asia and African Studies, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana "Understanding Chinese Characters and Cultures in East Asia" in June 2014.
References
An, P. [^S®] (1973). Chungse kugö yön'gu charyoüi söngkyöge taehan yön'gu -Pönyök yangsigül chungsimüro hayö- [tttH^	tt^i ^^
Öhakyön'gu [^^W^], IX-1. Söul taehakkyo Öhak Yön'guso ^^^ ^^W^^]. In An, P. [^S®] (1992b, pp. 11-27). An, P. [^S®] (1976). Kugyölgwa hanmun hundoge taehayö [ P^4 ^^^Mi ^^^ ]. Chindan hakpo [Ätt^^], 41. Chindan Hakhoe	In An, P. [^S®] (1992a,
pp. 287-313).
An, P. [^S®] (1984). Han'gugö ch'acha p'yogipöbüi hyöngsönggwa t'ükching [^Hto ^
Che 3 hoe kukche haksul hoeüi nonmunchip [^ 3 0 H^^ Söngnam: Han'guk Chöngsin Munhwa Yön'guwön [^HMtt^^W^ K]. In An, P. [^S®] (1992a, pp. 269-286).
An, P. [^S®] (1985). Önhaeüi sachök koch'al [WM^	Minjokmunhwa [K^^
11. Minjok Munhwa Ch'ujinhoe	In An, P. [^S®] (2009a, pp.
11-23).
An, P. [^S®] (1987). Kyunyöüi pangönbon chösure taehayö
Kugöhak [H^^], 16. kugö Hakhoe	In An, P. [^S®] (1992a, pp.
314-327).
An, P. [^S®] (1992a). Kugösayön 'gu [H^^ W^]. Seoul: Munhakkwa Chisöngsa
4 Ätttt].
An, P. [^S®] (1992b). Kugösa charyo yön 'gu [H^^ ÄS W^]. Seoul: Munhakkwa Chisöngsa	Ätttt].
An, P. [^S®] (1997). Hwalchabon Nüngömgyöng Önhae haeje -kwön 1-10 ül chungsimüro- [J^^^	M® 1 ' 10 # ^^A^]. In Yönginbon
Taebulchöng Yörae Mirin Sujüng Yoüi Chebosal Manhaeng Sunüngömgyöng pyölch 'aek [ ^^^	^ffl]. Seoul: Munhwajae
Kwalliguk ^^MWäM]. In An, P. [^S®] (2009a, pp. 271-301).
An, P. [^S®] (1998). Kan'gyöngdogamüi önhaebone taehan yön'gu [flM^^^ SM^i ^^ W^]. In Wörun sünim kogi kinyöm nonch'ong kanhaeng wiwönhoe	^
fl^^M^] (Ed.), Wörun sünim kogi kinyömpulgyohaknonch 'ong [^® ^^	Seoul: Tongguk Yökkyöngwön [^H^MK]. In An, P. [^
S®] (2009a, pp. 66-93).
An, P. [^S®] (2001a). Sölch'onggwa kugö [^^4 ^^]. Sae kugö saenghwal
11(3). Kngnip Kugö Yön'guwön	In An, P. [^S®]
(2009b, pp. 13-28).
An, P. [^S®] (2001b). Munchasaesö pon Sölch'ongüi wich'i [^^^i^ ^ ^^^ föS]. In Han'guk munhwawa yöksa inmul t'amgu -Wönhyo ' Sölch'ong ' Iryön-
^^ -^Š • •	Söngnam: Han'guk Chöngsin Munhwa
Yön'guwön	In An, P. [^S®] (2009b, pp. 29-50).
An, P. [^S®] (2009a). Kugösa munhönyön 'gu [H^^ W^]. Seoul: Sin'gu Munhwasa
An, P. [^S®] (2009b). Kugö yön 'guwa kugö chöngch 'aek [HtoW^4 Hto^^]. Seoul: Tosöch'ulp'an Wörin
Chöng, C.	(1993). Önhaemunüi hanmun hösa pönyöge kwanhan yön'gu -'Nonö
Önhae'rül chungsimüro- [SM^^ ^^ Ä^i W^ ^^A^-]. Kugö yön 'gu [H^W^], 113. Söul Taehakkyo Taehagwön Kugö Yön'guhoe
Chöng, I.	(1957). Idu kiwönüi chae koch'al [^M^M^	In Ilsök Yi
Hüisüng sönsaeng hwan'gap kinyöm saöp wiwönhoe [—^	^^	^^
^M^] (Ed.), Ilsök Yi Hüisüng sönsaeng songsu kinyöm nonch 'ong
Seoul: Ilchogak [—^K]. In Chöng, I.	(1997, pp. 116-124).
Chöng, I.	(1997). Könjae Chöng insüng chönjip 3 [4^	4^ 3]. Seoul:
Tosöch'ulp'an Pagijöng [^4 #4
Ch'oe, H. [^M^] (1961). Koch 'in han 'gülgal (Kaejöng chöngümhak) [^4 4s4(&E E W^)]. Seoul: Chöngümsa [^44].
Ch'oe, M.	(2002). Kwagö sije ömiüi hyöngsönggwa pyönhwa [Mi^^	^
^4 Chindan hakpo [Ätt^^], 94, 135-165. Chindan Hakhoe [Ätt^#].
Endo, Y. [äB^Ä] (1953/1981). Kunten shiryö to kuntengo no kenkyü (Rev.ed) [p^g^^
Kyoto: Rinsen Shoten
Fujimoto, Y.	(1992). Richö kundoku kö sono ichi -"Bokugyüshi Shüshinketsu" o
chüshin ni shite- [^^P^Ä - r^^^^^^J^^^^LT-]. Chösen gakuhö 143, 109-218. Chösen Gakkai
Fujimoto, Y. [B^^^] (1993). Han'gugüi hundoge taehayö	^Äi	In
Söul Taehakkyo Taehagwön Kugö Yön'guhoe	(Ed.),
An Pyöngüi sönsaeng hoegap kinyöm nonch 'ong kugösa charyowa kugöhagüi yön 'gu [^ H^^ ÄS4 H^^^ W^], 642-649. Seoul: Munhakkwa Chisöngsa	Ätttt].
Hong, Y. [JÄÄ^] (1994/in press). Kündae kugö yön 'gu (I) [ffi^H^ 1)]. Unpublished manuscript.
Joho, S. [ifö Ä] (2012). Kanbun kundoku no kanten kara mita chüki chösengo genkai shiryö ni kansuru kenkyü
(Doctral thesis, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan). Kanaoka, S.	(1978). Bukkyö kanbun noyomikata	Tokyo:
Shunjüsha
Kanno, H.	E] (1996). Chösen no gengo to moji	t^'^]. In Takeda, Y [
ÄH^^] (Ed.), Chösen no rekishi to bunka	Xft], 99-112. Tokyo:
Zaidan Höjin Hösö Daigaku Kyöiku Shinkökai [Mffl^A^^^^^WSÄ^].
Kasuga, M. [#	(1938). Koten no kyö ji o megutte [^^©Ä'^fcCoT]. Kokugo
to kokubungaku [SMtSX^], 10(1). In Kasuga, M. [# 0 m^] (1984, pp. 341-364). Kasuga, M. [# Hmfo] (1942/1985). Saidaiji bon Konkömyö Saishöökyö koten no kokugogakuteki kenkyü (Kasuga Masaji chosakushü - Bekkan-)
Tokyo: Benseisha [M^ft]. Kasuga, M. [# Hmfo] (1984). Kokunten no kenkyü (KasugaMasaji chosakushü -Dai 6 satsu-
mf^^Ä	Tokyo: Benseisha [M^ft].
Kim, M.	], & Kim, C. [^^Š] (2003). Chosönüi wangseja kyoyuk [S^^ ^^ ^
a^]. Seoul: Kimyöngsa [^^4]. Kim, W.	(1960). "Nüngömgyöng Önhae"e kwanhan myöt kaji kwaje
^^ ^ 4^]. Han 'gül [^g], 127, 70-83. Han'gül Hakhoe
Kim, Y.	(1952a). Önhaewa pönyök	Kugö kungmunhak [H^HX^],
1, 15-16. Kugö Kungmun Hakhoe [H^HX^#]. Kim, Y.	(1952b). Önhaewa pönyök (2)	(2)]. Kugö kungmunhak [H^
HX^], 2, 10-14. Kugö Kungmun Hakhoe [H^HX^#]. Kim, Y.	(1953). Önhaewa pönyök (wan)	(^)]. Kugö kungmunhak [H
^HX^], 3, 13-14. Kugö Kungmun Hakhoe [H^HX^#]. Kin, B. [^Xä] (2010). Kanbun to higashi Ajia -Kundoku no bunkaken- [MXt^T^T -Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten(lwanami Shinsho)
Kosukegawa, T.	(2009). Higashi Ajia gakujutsu köryü to shite no kanbun
kundoku [^T^T^^^^t	Toyama daigakujinbungakubu kiyö [
51, 33-44. Toyama Daigaku Jinbungakubu [S^A^AX^^
].
Kosukegawa, T.	(2010). Dejitaru jidai ni taiöshita kanbun kundoku kenkyü no
shakaiteki kyöyü shisutemu no köchiku
^Ä^^^X^®^^]. Toyama daigaku jinbungakubu kiyo 52, 87-102. Toyama Daigaku Jinbungakubu
Nakada, N. [^H^^] (1954/1979). Kotenbon no kokugogakuteki kenkyu soron hen (Rev.ed) [ ^^^»SM^^W^	Tokyo: Benseisha [M^ft].
Nakamura, T.	(1976). Shiteki meiji 'rito' no gainen to teigi ni tsuite
Chosen gakuho	7S. Chosen Gakkai
In Nakamura, T.	(1995, pp. 35-55).
Nakamura, T.	(1995). Ronbun senshü Kunmin Seion no sekai [^^S^
Sendai: Söei Shuppan [^^ffi®].
Nam, P. [S^M] (1988). Söktok kugyörüi kiwöne taehayö [SaP^^
Kugö kungmunhak [HTOHX^], 100. Kugö Kungmun Hakhoe [HTOHX^#]. In Nam, P. [S^M] (1999, pp. 25-34).
Nam, P. [S^M] (1993). Koryöbon Yugasajironüi söktok kugyöre taehayö [^M^
^^ SaP^i	Tongbanghakchi	81, 115-170. Yönse Taehakkyo
Kukhak Yön'guwön	H^W^K].
Nam, P. [S^M] (1994). 'Sinyök Hwaömgyöng' kwön 14üi koryö sidae söktok kugyöl [ FW 14 ^ ^M^^ SaP^]. Kungmunhaknonjip [HX^^Ä], 14. Tan'guk Taehakkyo Kugö Kungmun Hakkwa [ttHA^^ HTOHX^^]. In Nam, P. [ S^M] (1999, pp. 167-199).
Nam, P. [S^M] (1997). Han'guge isösöüi kugyöl yön'guüi hoegowa chönmang [^Hi ^^^^ P^W^^	MM]. Kuntengo to kunten shiryo [P^M^P^g^],
100. Kuntengo Gakkai [P^M^^]. In Nam, P. [S^M] (1999, pp. 35-63).
Nam, P. [S^M] (1999). Kugösarülwihan kugyölyön'gu [HTO^i ^^ P^W^]. Seoul: T'aehaksa [^^tt].
Nam, P. [S^M], & Sim, C. [^ÄÄ] (1976). Kuyök Inwanggyöngüi kugyöl yön'gu (il) tiM^ P^W^ (—)]. Tongyangak	6. Tan'guk Taehakkyo Tongyanghak
Yön'guso [ttHA^^	In Nam, P. [S^M] (1999, pp. 67-137).
O, M.	(2004). 16 segi hanil yanggugüi Nonö ihae [16 ^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^
Irö ilmunhakyön 'gu [	50(1), 29-49. Han'guk Irö Ilmun Hakhoe [^H
Ogura, S.	(1920). Kokugo oyobi chosengo no tame	Keijo:
Utsuboya Shosekiten	In Ogura, S.	(1975, pp. 1-314).
Ogura, S.	(1934). Chosengo to nihongo (Kokugo kagaku koza -W- Kokugogaku) [
H^MOM^^^ffi -W- SM^)]. Tokyo: Meiji Shoin	In
Ogura, S.	(1975, pp. 315-378).
Ogura, S.	(1975). Ogura Shinpei hakase chosakushü 4	4].
Tokyo: Heibonsha
Ogura, S.	editted by Kono, R. [MSA^] (1964). Zotei hochü chosen gogakushi
[^rM^ ^^M^^]. Tokyo: Tökö Shoin
Osada, N. [ÄHE^] (1980). Nitchö ryökoku kanbun kundoku tangen (jo) [ H^MBMXP Chösen gakuho	P7, 13-24. Chosen Gakkai
Osada, N. [ÄHE^] (1981). Nitchö ryökoku kanbun kundoku tangen (ge) [ H^MBM^P Chösengakuhö	99 ■ 100, 91-108. Chosen Gakkai
Pak, C. [^®^] (2009). Kankoku no tento kuketsu no dokuhö ni tsuite -Kasuga Masaji "Saidaiji bon Konkömyö Saishöökyö koten no kokugogakuteki kenkyü" tono taihi o tsüjite-
®	Kuntengo to kunten siryö [P^M^P^g^],
123, 10-19. Kuntengo Gakkai [P^M^^].
Shibu, S.	(1983). Otsugaiji bon Ryögonkyö Genkai ni tsuite [^^'^^WMBWM
^o^T]. Chosen gakuhö	106, 1-24. Chösen Gakkai
Sin, K. [^Äft] (1993). Kugö chasökyön 'gu [S^ W^]. Seoul: T'aehaksa [^^tt]. Tsukishima, H. [M^ (1963). Heian jidai no kanbun kundokugo ni tsukite no kenkyü
Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai.
Ushijima, T. [^MW^X] (1956). Joji kö -Södai izen-	-^^^M-]. Tokyo kyöiku
daigaku bungakubu kiyö kokubungaku kanbungaku ronsö [^Ä^W^^^^^/IHMB ^^'M^^tmM], 7, 1-69. Tokyo Kyöiku Daigaku Bungakubu
Yi, K.	(1972). Hanchaüi söge kwanhan yön'gu	Si W^]. Tonga
munhwa	11. Seoul: Söul Taehakkyo Tonga Munhwa Yön'guso
^^^^W^^]. In Yi, K.	(1991, pp. 255-288).
Yi, K.	(1991). Kugö öhwisayön 'gu [g^	W^]. Seoul: Tonga Ch'ulp'ansa [
Yi, S.	(2009). Pusa 'hamulmyö'üi üimi	In Söul taehakkyo
kugö kungmun hakkwa	(ed.), Kugöhak nonchip
6, 209-222. Seoul: Tosöch'ulp'an Yöngnak
Reference Tools
Hwang, S.	Yi, C.	Ha, K.	Yi, Y.	Pak, C. [^^Š], Kim,
S.	... Sö, H.	(2009). Söktok kugyöl sajön	Seoul:
Pangmunsa [^^4].
Lu6 Z. [^^M] (Ed. in chief.), Hanyü däc^diän biänj^ weiyuanhui. [S^^WÄ^^^W^], & Hänyü däc^diän bianzuänchü. [S^^WÄ^ÄÄ] (Eds.) (1986-1994/2008). Hänyü däc^diän [S^^^Ä]. Shanghai: Shänghäi C^shü Chübänshe [i^^^^fett]. Morohashi, T. [^^^X] (1966-1968). Dai kanwa jiten (shukusha ban) )]. Tokyo: Taishukan Shoten
Pak, C. [tt^^] (2002). Chungjo taesajön [^^^ffÄ]. Asan: Chunghan Pönyök Munhön Yön'guso • Sönmun Taehakkyo Ch'ulp'anbu [t^^^^EW^^ •	^fe
Yoshida, K. [^H^^], Tsukisima, H. [MM Ishizuka, H. [5«^®], & Tsukimoto, M. [^^S^] (eds.) (2001). Kuntengo jiten [P^M^Ä]. Tokyo: Tökyödö Shuppan[^Ä
Äffi®].
Zhang, X.	(Ed.) (1954/2004). Zhuzi bianlue (Paiyinben)
Beijing: Zhönghua Shüjü [ +