韓·中·日의 語文政策에 따른 漢字敎育 比較 硏究 : 識字敎育을 중심으로

Abstract

As of the nation playing a pivotal role of politics, economy and culture, from old times Korean, Chinese, and Japan have shared Chinese character, being affiliated with Chinese character culture. As Chinese character has taken up a major role of language for three countries up to this day, that is essential for three countries to communicate one another about cultural custom and their way of thinking. At the moment, recognition of chinese character in three countries' language life is differently showing each countries' historical background and state. Especially, in Korea, the position of Chinese character has been losing its ground. this phenomenon comes from language policy that doesn't consider oughtness and necessity of education in Chinese. Due to this language policy, there is a study that said among OECD Countries we was ranked the lowest at literacy in reading according to academic ability of Korean. For understanding korean documents, we need to know many terminology, and korean terminology is mostly taken up with Chinese character. This can be said that it is lack of understanding Chinese character's comprehension. And therefore an unimaginative solution to a problem is caused by no smoothness of education in chinese at public education. So we need an effort to increase vocabulary based on education in chinese. something to notice here is literacy education. This paper defines literacy education as vocabulary education containing education in chinese and does a comparative analysis in three countries' language policy, curriculum, instructional chinese character and text book as well as through this, shows education in chinese and the way of improvement. The most problematic thing in comparative analysis in three countries is the difference of education in chinese, which is made from language policy and curriculum. In Korea, education in Chinese character, from government policy is enacted in junior high school first. However, in Japan education in Chinese character, from government policy is enacted in primary school. So, from junior school, we have instructional Chinese character, enacted by government but in China and Japan, they have it from primary school. Also, In Korea at a subject, Chinese character is separated from a Korean language arts, but China and Japan include education in chinese in their language arts. Despite this matter, this paper has focus on the subject and the time when we begin education in chinese enacted by government through comparative analysis. And this paper gives a general description from 1945 when we recognize it is initial point of three countries' language policy and Curriculum and does a comparative analysis in three countries for pointing out a problem. Among junior school's Chinese character arts of Korean , Chinese primary school's language textbook of China, and language arts of Japan, literacy education part is quoted and from that, the part which is needed to make up on Chinese character arts of Korea is mentioned. Through the analysis of Language policy, curriculum, instructional Chinese character, and textbook, I pointed out the problem of our education in Chinese and gave the directing point. Before pointing out the matter, and giving directing point, we'll see the need of education in Chinese character in Korea. Due to basic demand, fundamental law of language is partly revised, and the negative effect that is come from we don't learn Chinese character and we have a negative view of only-Korean-use policy, is dealt in a daily paper as a project. In this manuscript, disputed questions of Language policy, Curriculum, instructional chinese character, and text indicate all of those wasn't efficient for literacy education. Dut to only-Korean-use policy in language policy, Education in Chinese character in junior school has not taken so, many problems is presented on instructional chinese character and text book. Consider all of the problems, I can give you an improvement scheme that changes language policy to establish education in Chinese in junior school. As doing this, It will be naturally organized again, also the textbook containing education in Chinese will be made. In a word, a systematic approach in doing education in Chinese so that literacy education is going to be efficient. Like this, Education in Chinese charter in Korea has been affected by changing language policy, and then Curriculum, instructional Chinese character and textbook have changed many times. This manuscript suggested the way forward in comparison among Korean, China, and Japan's Language policy and Literacy education. Because literacy education is a necessity beyond generation and place, I think that due to social needs, and current trends, language policy of Korea is needed to change. Though this changes will never be done in a short time, if the study studied by foster students had been stocked, it might have not been far from here.