Zhuan Li Wan Xiang Ming Yi’s “Gujinzi” is a typical sample outside the region, and it stores a wealth of thematic corpus. This paper sorts out more than 300 groups of “Gujinzi”, and through the analysis and summary of the style of these materials, it is found that there are not only typical terms marked by the words “Gu” and “Jin”, but also terms such as “Tongshang.” “Shangwen” and “Mouzi” mixed with the typical terms. The collection and identification of its expression style is the premise for further research on the materials of “Gujinzi”, and as an exotic sample of the development of “Gujinzi”, the comparative research on Chinese “Gujinzi” can provide some circumstantial evidence for solving the long-debated problems in the academic history of “Gujinzi”; As an exotic eye, it also provides us with a new perspective to understand the connotation of the traditional term “Gujinzi” and the relationship between words.
As a bilingual dictionary, Danan Guoyu reflects the difference and integration of Chinese and Vietnamese besides double characters. It adopts a clustering mode to classify the vocabulary. It consists of three types: the same function with the same form; different functions with the same form; new words constructions by conversion. On interpretation, it takes the form of semantic associations, translations from Chinese, and quotations from Chinese classics. The bilingual dictionary records the appearance of Chinese vocabulary in Vietnam and the creation of Vietnamese. It presents the differences and collisions between the two cultures and has multiple academic and practical significances such as lexicology, lexicography and philology.
The article indicates that usually there exists no correspondence between the term and its conception illustrated by the case of loangraph and its related term orthograph. Different conceptions of contemporary Loangraph, namely, “diachronic usage relation”, “relation of form and meaning”, “prevailing usage in an era”, have inherited some views produced in the academic history, which includes Xu Shen’s loangraph of “benwuqizi”, Wang Yun’s “shengjie”, Duan Yucai’s “three changes” of loangraph, and Zhu Junsheng’s “three sources” of loangraph. By listing examples of misunderstanding and obscure caused by the different comprehension of the loangraph term, the article analyzes its objective linguistic foundation, stating that in the use of the term, the same conceptual meaning of the term should be taken as the criterion, otherwise it will constitute exchange barriers and cause unnecessary contradictions and arguments.
오랜 기간 동안 한국어는 한자를 빌려 자신의 민족 언어를 기록하였기 때문에, 한자어는 한국어 중 결코 적지 않은 중요한 부분을 차지하고 있다. 본문은 중국과 한국의 동의이형 한자어의 유형을 구분하는 기초 위에서, 어소의 의미 복합어의 결합 원리, 민족감정이 단어의 의미에 끼치는 영향 등의 각도 아래 형성의 차이가 생기게 된 원인을 분석하고, 그 언어학 연구의 의의와 가치를 탐구해 보고자 한다.