Pei Songzhi (Year 372-451)’s annotations on The History of the Three Kingdoms have greatly revised, improved and enriched the original content of The History of the Three Kingdoms written by Chen Shou. The linguistics and philology value of Pei’s annotations are remarkable, which are reflected in the following three aspects. Firstly, in terms of phonetics, there are 99 phonetic notations (for 96 Chinese characters) in The History of the Three Kingdoms, and the methods are mainly Zhiyin (including "Yinru") and Fanqie, moreover they reflect the phonetic characteristics from the Later Han Dynasty to the Eastern Jin Dynasty. Secondly, there are 98 lexical annotations in total, producing new words and new meanings, and most of them are still used by later generations. Lastly, there are 39 philology annotations. Pei Songzhi annotated the rare and incomprehensible characters in the text, and also listed many opinions for reference. Additionally, Pei Songzhi attached importance to the influence of glyphs on the meanings of Chinese characters, and focused on analyzing words and textual meanings from the perspective of philology. Pei Songzhi’s annotations are concise and clear, meticulous and rigorous, and also express his own views and opinions, with distinct personal characteristics. Pei’s annotations on The History of the Three Kingdoms have profound research value and significance in linguistics and philology, which are worthy to be carefully explored, and the results will play an important role in enriching the research content of the history of Chinese language.

본문은 『小學文獻序跋彙編』에 수록된 역대 소학 관련서의 서와 발 중 학자들의 “정자”와 관련된 이론적 견해를 발췌하여 학술사의 관점에서 정자관을 정리하고, 역대 학자들의 정자관을 객관적으로 평가하였다. 또한, 오늘날 진행 중인 한자의 표준화 작업이 지니는 실제적 의미도 고찰해 보았다. 역대 학자들의 정자관은 각각 차이점이 존재하지만, 본 연구를 통해 과학적 정자관은 한자 발전의 객관적 법칙을 따르고, 한자의 구성 원리에 맞는 정자 표준을 지키고 있다는 사실을 알게 되었다. 우리는 이러한 역사적 사실을 토대로 역대 학자들의 과학적 정자 방법 및 경험을 수용하고 현대 사회의 실제 문자사용 양상과 부합하는 올바른 정자관을 견지하며 효과적인 한자 표준화 방안을 세워야 할 것이다.

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.

Yang Shen (1488-1559) was born in Si Chuan Xin Dou. 《Ming Shi》 said that Yang Shen is the most famous for the extensive memorization and abundant writings. Yang Shen also contributed to the philology researches. According to Wang Wen Cai’s 《Yang Shen Xue Pu》, Yang Shen had many kinds of writings, such as 《Shuo Wen Xian Xun》, 《Liu Shu Lian Zheng》, 《Liu Shu Bo Zheng》 etc., but most of them are disappeared. 《Liu Shu Suo Yin》was thought that it’s disappeared, it can be found in the library of RENMIN UNIVERSITY of CHINA. It was included in 《Si Ku Quan Shu Cun Mu Cong Shu》. From Yang Shen’s 《Liu Shu Suo Yin-Introduction》, we knows that Yang Shen was based on abundant philology researches to appear his research system. Yang Shen had different academic judgements for each text researchers’s theories to appear Yang Shen’s conceptions of “Zhuan Zhu Gu Yin”. 《Qin Ding Si Ku Quan Shu Zong Mu》 was based on the the text textual content to comment Yang Shen’s 《Liu Shu Suo Yin》 negative. We can discuss the comment is appropriate or not? 《Liu Shu Suo Yin》 is distinguished into rhyme, so it had its own system. These researches are related to Yang Shen’s other research works in Xiao Xue. In philology researches, we can investigate Yang Shen’s contribution to philology researches with 《Liu Shu Suo Yin》 to clarify and analyze.

A Ming Dynasty Book, YuTang LiZheng ZiYi YunLv HaiPianXinJing (玉堂釐正字義韻律海篇心鏡, Vol. 20s), is collected in National Library of Korea. The author Zhu ZhiFan (朱之蕃, 1548-1624) is a minister of the Ming Dynasty, also a famous calligraphist. In 1606, he has been to Korea, left lots of influent poetry and calligraphy works. According to the preliminary investigation, this book is re-adjusted and re-edited, basing on HanLin ChongKao ZiYi YunLv DaBan HaiPianXinJing (翰林重考字義韻律大板海篇心鏡, Vol. 20s) which was rescheduled by Liu KongDang (劉孔當) in 1596. The purpose of this paper is as follows: Firstly, we introduced content and collection situation of YuTang LiZheng ZiYi YunLv HaiPianXinJing (Korean version), which has not been formally introduced to the academic community; Secondly, we described the structure, the preparation of the whole story and author of this book; Thirdly, we compared this book with various HaiPian, expecially to find the origin of the relationship between them. Finally, we concluded its influence on Korean academic and literary circles in the later 17th century.

언어와 문자는 언제 생겼는가? 어느 누구도 이 질문에 정확하게 말할 수 없다 는 것을 우리는 알고 있다. 우리나라 언어학자들은 “語先文後(말이 먼저 있는 후 글이 다음에 있었다)” 론을 꾸며내었지만, 실상은 자신들 조차도 서로 모순되는 것이었다. 이것은 어떤 이유에서인가? 언어학은 과학적 학문이다. 과학은 이야기 하는 것에 근거가 있어야지 허투루 단정을 할 수 없다. 만약 그 근거가 없다면, 단지 가설이라고 부를 뿐이다. 가설 또한 아무렇게나 말할 수 없다. 논리의 증명에 순서가 있어야지 논리적 잘못이 있어서는 안 된다. 무릇 논리에 맞지 않으면, 또한 역사 발전의 추론 중에서도 그 혼란이 있을 수 있다. 우리나라 언어학자는 왕왕 비평가를 반박할 권리를 가지고서, 그들이 언어학의 ABC를 이해하지 못한다고 말하고, 그들의 비평을 억압한다. 언어학의 ABC란 무엇인가? 내가 생각하기에 그것은 역사, 규율과 기본개념이다. 본고는 “语先文后”의 쟁론 가운데 깨달은 언어학중의 ABC, 즉 기호와 부호 두 가지의 개념을 이용하여 발전한 역사적 발전 속에서 언어와 문자 발전의 이치를 탐구하였다. 이 기호와 부호라는 두 가지 개념의 분석 중 이 두개의 개념이 뒤섞이게 된 원 인을 찾아내고, 동시에 언어학에서 찾아낸 부호 체계, 기호 체계, 문언, 문장 등의 기본 개념에 대해 진지한 구분을 하고자 노력하였다.