광복 70년, 국어학 외연의 확대와 발전

홍종선(Hong Jongseon) 한국언어문학회 2015 한국언어문학 Vol.95 No.-

Over 70 years since Independence, the outer edge of the Korean Linguistics has been expanded in various ways with the development of the Korean Linguistics. When we roughly divide the study which is included in the external areas of the Korean Linguistics into interdisciplinary research and applied research, there are philosophy of language, sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, neurolinguistics, rhetorics, Korean stylistics, glottochronology, mathematical linguistics, computational Korean lingustics, Korean corpus lingustics and Korean language culture studies in interdisciplinary research. In applied research, there are Korean educational linguistics, Korean educational linguistics as a foreign language, Korean lexicography, Computational Korean Linguistics, Korean lalopathology, Korean language policy, Korean medium lingustics, Korean advertising lingustics, interpretation studies and translation studies. These external studies of Korean Linguistics and pure Korean Linguistics help each other to expand their views and research methodology, adding various viewpoints in many ways, and achieving mutual rising development by providing new facts and materials in the aspect of information. It can also contribute to the development of Korean language culture by adding practicality that can be used in real life through external studies. Among interdisciplinary researches and applied researches, there are a lot of fields where the researches are already activated but there are still quite a few areas which are about to be studied. In the future, Korean linguistics research should foster user-oriented grammar with researcher-oriented grammar and greatly develop the study of spoken language and discourse. Therefore, we should enlarge the cooperating researches providing more information to external areas of Korean linguistics.

국어학에서의 융합의 개념과 유형

한재영(Han, Jae young) 국어국문학회 2015 국어국문학 Vol.- No.170

본고의 목적은 국어학에서의 학문적인 융합이 뜻하는 바를 생각하여 보고, 융합의 유형을 살펴 국어학 연구가 지향하여야 할 방향을 점검하여 보는 데에 있다. 융합을 정당하게 이해하기 위하여, 여기서는 국어학과 관련된 학문 분야와의 관계와 국어학을 구성하고 있는 세부 학문 분야 사이의 관계를 살피고 구체적인 작업내용들에도 관심을 가지기로 한다. 본고에서는 국어학과 국어학 외적인 학문과의 융합이라고 할 수 있는 국어학과 문학의 문체론(文體論, Stylistics), 국어학과 사전학의 국어사전학(國語辭典學, Korean Lexicography), 국어학과 전산학의 국어정보학(國語情報學, Korean Informatics) 그리고 국어학과 교육론의 국어교육론(國語敎育論, Korean Language Education)의 내용을 먼저 살폈다. 다음으로 국어학 내적 학문 영역 사이의 융합이라고 할 수 있는 형태통사, 형태음운, 통사의미 그리고 통사음운을 주제로 삼은 기존의 논의 목록을 살펴 국어학에서 융합을 다룬 양상을 보았다. 국어학에서의 융합의 필요성을 보다 잘 느끼기 위하여 국어의 문법 현상 중의 하나인 ‘피동’의 경우를 중심으로 살펴, 피동이 파생이라고 하는 형태론적인 측면에서 뿐만 아니라 통사론적으로나 의미론적으로도 아울러 살펴야 할 주제임을 확인하고, 나아가 음운론 특히 성조론과 방언학의 문제와도 밀접한 관계를 가지고 있음을 인식할 수 있었다. 그와 같은 과정을 통하여 국어학에서 융합적인 사고와 접근 태도가 가지는 가치를 알 수 있었으며, 융합이 가지는 효과를 증대시키기 위해서는 개별 학문에서의 성과가 전제가 된다는 점도 지적하였다. The objective of this manuscript is to consider the meaning of academic convergence in Korean linguistics and examine the direction to which a study of Korean linguistics should be oriented by exploring the type of convergence. In order to understand convergence legitimately, the manuscript examines the relationship among academic fields related to Korean linguistics, the relationship between sub-academic fields constituting Korean linguistics, and specific contents of work. This manuscript first explores Korean linguistics and stylistics in literature, Korean linguistics and Korean lexicography, Korean linguistics and Korean informatics in computer science, and Korean linguistics and Korean language education in education theory, which can be considered as the convergence of Korean linguistics and the academic study of other linguistics-related fields. Next, it examines previous discussions on morphosyntax, morphophonology, syntactic semantics, and syntax-phonology, which can be described as the convergence of various academic fields of Korean linguistics, and the aspect of convergence in Korean linguistics. In order to better explore the need for convergence in Korean linguistics, it is confirmed that the grammatical phenomenon of passivity is a subject that needs to be considered, not only from a morphological perspective, which claims that passivity is derivation, but also from syntactic and semantic perspectives. Additionally, the manuscript confirms that phonology is closely related to issues of tonology and dialectology. Through this process, the manuscript examines the value of convergent thinking and approach in Korean linguistics and points out that the results of individual studies become the premise for increasing the effectiveness of convergence.

북한 조선어학의 특징에 대하여 -<조선어학전서>(2005)와 <언어학연구론문색인사전>(2006)을 대상으로-

이상혁 ( Sang Hyeok Lee ) 민족어문학회 2011 어문논집 Vol.- No.64

이 논문은 <조선어학전서>(2005)와 <언어학연구론문색인사전>(2006)이라고 하는 두 문헌 속에 반영된 소위 북한의 ``조선어학``은 어떠한 것이며, 두 문헌의 차이는 무엇인지 살펴봄으로써 북한 조선어학의 특징과 현황을 파악하는 데 그 목적이 있다. 그리고 이 귀납적 접근을 통한 북한 ``조선어학``을 탐색하여, 그 안에 담긴 북한 국어학 연구자들의 학문적 경향도 부수적으로 살펴보았다. 기본적으로 <전서>는 ``조선어학``에 국한된 문헌의 집대성이다. 그 반면에 <색인>의 체계는 주로 ``조선어학``에 집중하고 있긴 하나, 북한 나름대로 일반언어학적 분류를 <색인>에 반영하고자 했다. 두 문헌의 시각의 차이가 드러난 셈이다. 또한 두 문헌의 분류 방식을 통해서 2000년대 북쪽 조선어학의 특징과 경향을 귀납화하고 도식화해 보았다. 두 문헌 체계 전체에 걸쳐 남한과 공통점과 차이점을 모두 가지고 있었다. 특히 두 문헌을 통해서 본 북한의 ``조선어학``은 이론과 실용, 규범을 한데 아우르고 있으며, 남한보다 실용 분야에 중점을 두고 연구를 진행하고 있음을 확인할 수 있었다. 북한 조선어학의 분류가 남한보다 더 넓은 측면이 있었다. 그에 따라서 남한에서는 다루지 않는 북한만의 ``조선어학`` 의 특징과 경향이 있었다는 점을 확인할 수 있었다. 우리는 남북 분단으로 인한 반쪽의 국어학 체계를 현실로는 받아들일 수 있다. 남북의 연구 태도가 다르고, 국어학을 바라보는 이론적 배경도 다르기 때문이다. 국어학을 바라보는 관점의 차이가 오히려 학문적 발전에 기여할 수도 있다. 그러나 한편으로는 남북 언어 통합을 위해서는 결국에는 그 차이를 극복할 수 있는 노력이 필요하다. 그 현실을 넘어서지 못한다면 결국 남북 간의 학문적 분단은 고착화되고 그것은 곧 학문적 단절의 요인이기 때문이다. 그런 의미에서 <전서>와 <색인>에 대한 남한의 적극적 탐색은 앞으로 계속 이루어져야 하며, 이러한 논의는 궁극적으로 남북 국어학의 통합을 위한 기초와 밑거름이 될 것이다. The purpose of this paper is to analyze ``Joseoneohak(Korean Linguistics in North Korea)`` in the text of ``The Series on Korean Linguistics in North Korea(Jeonseo, 2005)`` and ``Index dictionary on Linguistics in North Korea(Saegin, 2006), to study the difference of two text(Jeonseo(2005) and Saegin(2006)) by the inductive method each other. One of the weaknesses on Korean Linguistics is to have neglected the North Korean Linguistics problem until now. Therefore, this article is based on this issue and explains ultimately the nature and system of the North Korean Linguistics for integration of the Korean Linguistics, focusing on Jeonseo(2005) and Saegin(2006). In this paper we pointed out that the system of Jeonseo(2005) is limited to Korean Linguistics in North Korea. But Saegin(2006) is consist of the content of the general linguistics including South-Korean Linguistics, Notrh- Korean Linguistics, and other Linguistics in North Korea academic field. Specifically, we have classified the tendency of main stream in the txet of Jeonseo(2005) and Saegin(2006), based on the theory, practical aspect, and prescription on North-Korean Linguistics in North Korea. Also, we emphasized the similarities and differences between North-Korean Linguistics and South-Korean Linguistics. The system of North-Korean Linguistics is wider than South-Korean Linguistics in terms of the categories of Korean Linguistics. Finally, we suggested the several ways of plans must been performed for integration on Korean Linguistics. This paper is related to the analysis of Jeonseo(2005) and Saegin(2006) as the system of North-Korean Linguistics, but this first attempt will be able to lead to discussion for the ultimate reunification of the Korean Linguistics for our people and overseas Koreans in South Korea.

韓國語學의 發展을 위한 提言

최명옥 한국어문교육연구회 2010 어문연구(語文硏究) Vol.38 No.1

This paper proposed four tasks as a way of developing Korean linguistics. Firstly, to be a good Korean linguist, he/she should remember as much information as possible, including general linguistic theories, existing linguistic studies on Korean language, and linguistic data about synchronic and diachronic Korean language. And the information should be considered all together when they read other studies or examine linguistic materials. Secondly, the object of Korean linguistics should be not ‘standard Korean' but ‘Korean as a natural language of Korea'. Thirdly, existing studies of Korean linguistics, which have made in the frame of several different linguistic theories, should be reviewed critically and we should correct them if any problem is found. Fourthly, lecturers of Korean linguistics in university should train their students to have language analyse ability and guide them to study Korean linguistics through Korean language as natural language. 筆者는 이 글에서 韓國語學의 발전을 위한 4가지 課題를 提示했다. 첫째, 좋은 硏究者가 되기 위해서는, 一般言語學 理論, 現代와 現代 以前의 韓國語에 대한 旣存의 硏究 情報와 資料 情報를 가능한 한 많이 기억해야 하며 韓國語에 대한 旣存 硏究를 읽거나 韓國語 資料를 檢討할 때에, 그러한 情報를 同時에 適用할 수 있어야 한다. 둘째, 韓國語學의 硏究對象인 ‘韓國語’는 ‘標準 韓國語’가 아니라 ‘自然語로서의 韓國語’가 主가 되어야 한다. 셋째, 서로 다른 言語 理論을 바탕으로 이루어진 旣存의 韓國語 硏究를 批判的으로 檢討하여 問題點을 발견하고 그것을 바로 잡아야 한다. 넷째, 大學과 大學院 過程의 韓國語學 講義 擔當者는 ‘自然語로서의 韓國語’ 資料를 많이 活用하여 學生들이 言語 分析 能力을 가지게 하고 自然語로서의 韓國語 硏究를 하도록 指導해야 한다.

인문언어학의 한국어교육에의 적용 - 중국인 학습자를 대상으로 한 한국어교육에서 -

김성란 ( Jin Chenglan ) 연세대학교 언어정보연구원(구 연세대학교 언어정보개발원) 2018 언어사실과 관점 Vol.44 No.-

The application of Humanistic linguistics to Korean language education is to focus on convergence education between the Korean humanities and Korean linguistic knowledge. It enables the Korean humanities to penetrate into the course of Korean language department and its required courses in Chinese school curriculums so that students can learn Korean linguistic knowledge in the Korean humanities while learning the Korean humanities in Korean linguistic knowledge. The Korean humanities and Korean linguistics can not be separated. Learning Korean for Korean language department students is about learning the Korean humanities. Students majoring in Korean language should not only proficiently use Korean but also know basic knowledge of the Korean humanities. Learning Korean language, as a foreign language, with the Korean humanities helps students to expand understanding of Korea and to communicate well with Koreans. The Korean language proficiency of students comes from a grasp of linguistic contents in a linguistic form as well as a linguistic form itself and knowledge about the humanities that learners have accumulated. This study discusses ways to nurture competent students by applying humanistic linguistics to Korean language education as a primary response to the era of the 4th industrial revolution and new silk-road in China. This study is to apply humanistic linguistics to Korean language education and to deal with the current problems of undergraduate curriculums at Korean language department in Chinese universities such as Korean language department of Minzu University of China and Yanbian University, which have focused on transferring of language knowledge. Furthermore, the study suggests how to design curriculums that apply a teaching method to enable a humanistic linguistics approach to Korean language education in China and also, explores ways to revise Korean textbooks that encompass all areas of the humanities including Korean literature, history, philosophy, etc. and Korean linguistic knowledge.

국어학 연구 60년의 회고와 전망

남기탁(Nam, Ki-tak) 국어국문학회 2012 국어국문학 Vol.- No.161

A scientific and systematic study of modern Korean Linguistics began in the 1900s. From this perspective, the history of modern Korean studies can be divided as follows. 1. An earlier era of modern Korean linguistics : 1900s-1940s 2. A settle down era of modern Korean linguistics : 1950s-1970s 3. An expansion era of modern Korean linguistics : 1980s-now It was a very difficult time until the first half of 1960 because of the Korean war. The society of Korean Language and Literature was founded in these difficult times by the enthusiasm of a small number of Korean linguistics scholars. Korean phonological system of the Middle Ages was studied through the IC analysis along with the influence of structuralism. There were the research papers on a Syntactic and morphology system at that time. The introduction of various generative theories has brought an increase of research and also a high performance of study was made by increased scholars in a settle down era of modern Korean linguistics. Especially cognitive linguistics is affecting various fields of Korean linguistics in recent years.

정전 이후 북한 〈조선어학사〉의 서술과 그 지향

이상혁(Lee, Sanghyeok) 돈암어문학회 2013 돈암어문학 Vol.26 No.-

이 논문에서는 북한의 조선어학사의 서술과 그 지향이라는 주제 설정을 통해 북쪽의 〈조선어학사〉 서술의 경향은 지난 과거에서 현재에 이르기까지 어떻게 전개되고 있는지에 대하여 북쪽 조선어학사 저작물인 김병제(1984), 김영황(1996), 안경상(2005)의 연구 경향을 중심으로 그 변화와 흐름을 살펴보았다. 또한 북쪽 사회의 특성상 특정 주제에 대한 다양한 연구 성과가 양산되지는 않는다는 점을 전제하면서 세 텍스트와 함께 사회과학원 〈전서〉(2005) 및 〈색인〉(2006)에 드러난 북쪽의 ‘조선어학’ 체계안에서 ‘조선어학사’의 위상도 아울러 검토하였다. 이 두 문헌도 모두 북한의 ‘조선어학사’의 흐름을 전면적으로 파악해 볼 수 있는 공시적 연구 성과이자 통시적 자료의 성격을 함께 띠고 있다는 점에서 그 의의가 크다. 해방 이후 북한에서는 조선어학사에 대한 전면적인 서술이 존재하지 않았다. 1980년 이후 저술된 ‘조선어학사’ 3종의 연구서에서 북한은 민족주의적 어학사 서술이 이루어져 소위 ‘주체 언어학’의 기조 위에서 좀 더 체계적인 ‘조선어학사’ 서술의 경향을 확인할 수 있었다. 그것은 조선어학사 서술 시기의 확장과 함께 단군 조선에서 현대 항일무장투쟁 시기에 이르기까지 일관된 민족주의적 시각의 구축과 공고화였다. 그것은 어학사 서술에서 남한과의 차이를 보이는 특별하면서도 논쟁적인 지점이다. 또한 남한과 달리 ‘조선어학사’와 ‘조선어사’를 보다 큰 분류인 ‘언어(발전)력사’ 의 범주 속에 묶어서 보려는 경향도 남한과 차이를 보였으며〈전서〉와〈색인〉을 통해서 그 일면을 확인할 수 있었다. 결국 북한의 조선어학사는 조선어학의 체계 안에서 민족주의적 관점을 견지한 학설사의 서술 지향의 양상을 보여준 것과 동시에 그들의 이데올로기에 따른 서술의 관점이 반영된 것이었다. 또한 다른 한편으로는 언어정책사적 차원에서 실용적 영역도 조선어학사 범주에 한데 아우르는 체제로 발전해 온 측면도 간과할 수 없는 사실이다. The aim of this article is to examine diverse research conducted on the description and aim about the history of Korean linguistics in North Korea. It points out the historicity revealed in the textbooks of three kinds and the Series on Korean Linguistics(Jeonseo, 2005)" and Index dictionary on Linguistics(Saegin, 2006) in North Korea, and discusses the issues that may be raised in regard to producing that textbooks and its description depended on the viewpoints of the history of Korean linguistics after concluding a ceasefire agreement Korea War(1953). With this background information, we first demonstrate the distribution of the researchers the late 1940s in North Korea and analyze their academic trends at that time. We then explain the history of Korean linguistics in North Korea, due to the construction and its consolidation of the description for nationalism. We note that there are differences in perception between the textbooks of three kinds, Kim Byeongje(1984), Kim Yeonghwang(1996) and An Gyeongsang(2005) in identifying the starting point of the history of Korean linguistics each other. We also note that there are differences in perception of the history of Korean linguistics between Series on Korean Linguistics(Jeonseo, 2005)" and Index dictionary on Linguistics(Saegin, 2006) in North Korea. Nevertheless, we point out that the priority should be given to the similarity of the history of Korean linguistics of the two countries in additions, due to its unification. We believe that our claim is a desirable consideration, particularly because our focus is on issues that can be achieved essentially based on the viewpoints of the history of unified Korean linguistics.

시를 통한 한국어교육의 실제

이영조(Lee Young-jo) 한국비평문학회 2008 批評文學 Vol.- No.28

The most salient character of literature is that is composed with linguistics. The language from the literature is a Korean asset which is carried out in actual and detailed situation. Especially, Korean literature is the cultural assets if Korean which originates from the concrete situations and the actual state of the culture which delicately refined. The meantime, practical methods of the literature have been discussed constantly in Korean education. If we assume that the most recent goal of linguistic education is improvement of ability in communication, literature education is one of the most suitable methods of education. The reason is learners prefer speaking languages fluently in everyday life to using linguistics in standardised teaching materials. In addition, the final goal to be achieved of teaching Koreans as a foreign language is about understanding Korean linguistics culture. Followed this, goal of Korean linguistics' education also has to be adjusted from basic communication to high level of communication ability, ability of building linguistic culture. Again, goal of Korean education through the literature is not to teach huge Korean literature, but to teach efficiently with linguistics. This is a way of being mature human being at same time. This paper will preferentially look into connection between literature and Korean education, but we also consider how to apply Korean education to writing education. The next step, we extend Korean class area from focusing in reading materials to improvement of reading skills through practical use in Korean education, understanding of Korean culture etc. As we provide the actual education plan, which can improve the learners' esthetical experience, we can achieve the integrated education curriculum. Therefore, this paper will show the class method in actual use to discover effective value over importance of Korean education though the literature. One the other hand, this paper is also carrying a meaning to check present position of Korean education.

특집 : 인문학의 한류를 위한 세계적 시야의 한국어문확 연구와 교육; 인문학의 한류를 위한 "한국어 학": 무엇을, 어떻게? -언어 연구 및 언어 교육을 위한 문화교육을 중심으로-

김남길 ( Nam Kil Kim ) 겨레어문학회 2013 겨레어문학 Vol.51 No.-

The Korean cultural wave is currently attempting to spread throughout the world after transforming from popular culture to ‘the K-culture’. The aim of this paper is to show that the nucleus of Korean culture (K-culture) comes from the humanities and that study of the Korean language can do ‘what’ and ‘how’ for the study of the Korean cultural wave of the humanities. In order to demonstrate the fulfillment of this aim, the core content of this paper consists of three sections. The first section investigates what the Korean cultural wave means and how it has evolved and will transform in the future; and at the same time, this section reveals that the Korean cultural wave of the humanities forms the foundation for K-culture. The second section concentrates on the treatment of differences between general linguistics and applied linguistics involving the teaching of language, which constitute the two central figures for the study of the Korean language. This section also presents the recent trends and claims that the 21stcentury is the age in which neo-empiricism leads applied linguistics based on practicality and application and that powerful descriptive linguistics such as corpus linguistics become resources for the formulation of important linguistic theories and provide support for the development of applied linguistics. The third section attempts to find the way that the study of culture is effectively linked to the teaching and the learning of language for people who are interested in learning Korean. For the purpose of achieving this goal, the general analysis of culture is presented on the basis of Moran (2001), and culture and its study are integrated through the cycle of cultural experience, cultural knowledge, and experiential learning. This section also emphasizes that in order for language learners to enhance their cultural experience, they must put their utmost effort not only to collecting cultural information, encouraging cultural activities, and finding good cultural interpretation but also to participating in experiential learning cycles that promote self-consciousness. Language-culture in which language and culture are mingled reflects two sides of a coin where two sides are in relation where one cannot separate itself from the other. Finally, by utilizing my Korean textbook in preparation, it is shown how Korean teaching through cultural experience is conducted in classrooms. Although various ways to teach and learn both language and culture may exist, Moran`s (2001) cultural experiential learning model is used to demonstrate the effective teaching of Korean culture in the Korean language classroom because his model contains rich contents and appears to be easy to understand, as well as effective in teaching.

국내 비한국계 코리언들의 언어현실과 언어적 공공성: 국내 중국 조선족의 사례를 중심으로

임경화 건국대학교 인문학연구원 2018 통일인문학 Vol.73 No.-

The present paper deals with the linguistic realities of the Chinese Korean residents of South Korea who constitute by far the largest group of (originally) non-South Korean Koreans there. It discusses the structures of linguo-ideological imagination needed to secure the “linguistic public space” in South Korea, and intervenes into the realities of Yanbian version of Korean facing discrimination inside South Korea’s pyramidal hierarchy of languages. In the times of Japanese colonial rule (1910-1945), Korean language was oppressed by the Japanese linguistic imperialism. After the decolonization, both Korean states in North and South formulated their own versions of standard Korean in the situation when one ethnic nation was represented by two states. However, in the post-Cold War times, with globalism spreading, South Korean society witnessed the speakers of the heterogenous versions of Korean – such as Yanbian Korean – coming to the country with their own speaking patterns and precipitating a clash of several linguistic nationalisms. In this situation, South Korean society refused to recognize the history of Yanbian Korean, with its own process of structuring one more local “Korean language” distinctively different from Seoul Korean. Instead, it tends to define Yanbian Korean as a subordinate variation of standard Seoul Korean and works to ensure that Yanbian Korean speakers end up being integrated into Seoul Korean-speaking community. Moreover, non-South Korean “Korean language” may serve as a “proof” of its speaker’s “pro-North Korean sympathies,” as well as a yardstick certifying one’s socio-economical standing. In addition to this, there are some efforts to transplant Seoul Korean into the Chinese Korean society, bordering on linguistic imperialism. A linguistic consciousness allowing the emancipation of the diverse standards of Korean language, enabling the society to perceive non-South Korean varieties of Korean language in an equalitarian way, and blocking the emergence of South Korean language nationalism, is urgently needed. Such a consciousness will serve as the basis for practising linguistic democracy in South Korea. 본고에서는 국내 거주 비한국계 코리언들 중 최대 규모인 중국 조선족 동포들의 언어현실을 살펴보고 언어의 계층구조 속에서 차별받는 연변말의 현실에 개입하여 ‘언어적 공공성’을 확보하기 위해서는 어떠한 언어사상적 상상이 요구되는지를 논하고자 한다. 식민지기에 일본어 제국주의의 억압을 받았던 조선인들은 해방 후에도 여전히 국가와 민족이 일치하지 않은 상황에 놓이면서 각각의 국가에서 독자적인 ‘조선어’의 동일성을 구축해 왔다. 그런데 탈냉전과 글로벌리즘의 확산으로 한국사회는 중국 조선족의 연변말 같은 비한국적 ‘조선어’들이 모이고 복수의 언어 민족주의가 충돌하는 상황에 놓이게 되었다. 하지만 한국사회는 한국어와는 다른 고유한 ‘조선어’ 구축의 과정을 밟아온 연변말의 역사를 인정하고 ‘조선어’의 일부로서 수용하는 것이 아니라, 한국어의 하위 변종으로 규정하고 한국어로의 통합에 주력하고 있다. 더욱이 비한국적 ‘조선어’들은 친북적 성향의 표식일 뿐만 아니라, 사회경제적 지위를 증명하는 척도로도 기능하고 있다. 나아가 중국 조선족 사회에 한국어를 이식하고자 하는 것은 언어 제국주의적인 인식에 더 가깝다고 할 수 있다. 이러한 한국어 제국주의의 출현을 억제하기 위해서는 비한국적 조선어들을 평등하게 바라보는 조선어 해방의 언어인식이 필요하며, 이것은 한국에서 언어 민주주의를 실현하는 기초가 될 것이다.