KJCKorea
Journal Central

This study analyzed Yeosohak, Monghakicheonja, and Dialect Sourcebook Publication in Korea to understand the realization of ‘ㅔ→ㅣ’ high-vowelization in the Boeun and Dangjin regions from the late 19th century to the early 20th century and the mid-to-late 20th century. In Yeosohak, ‘ㅔ→ㅣ’ high-vowelization is realized regardless of the presence or absence of a trigger in the word-initial position and word-internal position of the lexical morpheme, whereas in Monghak icheonja, ‘ㅔ→ㅣ’ high-vowelization is realized only in the environment where the word-initial position of the lexical morpheme and a trigger factor are present. In addition, in the Boeun region data of Dialect Sourcebook Publication in Korea, ‘ㅔ→ㅣ’ high-vowelization is realized regardless of the presence or absence of a trigger factor in the word-initial position and word－internal position of the lexical morpheme, but in the Dangjin region data of Dialect Sourcebook Publication in Korea, ‘ㅔ→ㅣ’ high-vowelization is realized only in an environment where a trigger factor exists in the word-initial position and word－internal position of the lexical morpheme. Therefore, ‘ㅔ→ㅣ’ high-vowelization is realized differently in the Boeun region and the Dangjin region even within the Chungcheong region. In addition, in Yeosohak, ‘ㅔ→ㅣ’ high-vowelization is realized only in an environment where the triggering factor of ‘ㅔ→ㅣ’ high-vowelization is confirmed, but in Dialect Sourcebook Publication in Korea, ‘ㅔ→ㅣ’ high-vowelization is realized even in an environment where the triggering factor is not confirmed. And in the case of Monghakicheonja, ‘ㅔ→ㅣ’ high-vowelization is realized only in the word-initial position of the lexical morpheme, but in Dialect Sourcebook Publication in Korea, it is realized in both the word-initial position and the word－internal position of the lexical morpheme. In other words, we can see that ‘ㅔ→ㅣ’ high-vowelization was more productive in the mid to late 20th century than in the late 19th century to early 20th century. This is related to the change in the sound value of ‘ㅔ’, which is related to the trend of realizing ‘ㅕ>ㅔ’ monophthongization.

Until now, in Korean syntax, direct quotations and indirect quotations have been grouped together, and thus it has been common to set noun clause embedded sentences, adverb clause embedded sentences, and quotative clause embedded sentences as subtypes of embedded sentences. Regarding this classification, this paper reviewed the problems, reflect the results, and re-establish the subcategory of sentences in Korean. In particular, this paper discussed that direct and indirect quotations have differences that are difficult to deal with in the same category. Direct and indirect quotations differ from each other in the following: Characteristics as utterance units, sentence-semantic relationship between the quoted clause and the quotation, and the syntactic structural characteristics, etc. Therefore, direct quotations and indirect quotations should be classified as separate categories, and it is reasonable to view indirect quotations as one type of Adverbial Clause Embedded Sentences. Additionally, direct quotes are more likely to be included in noun clause dmbedded sentence.

This study aims to identify and analyze problematic legal provisions from a linguistic perspective, drawing on recent legislative language reform initiatives undertaken in Korea. It provides linguistic rationales for revision and proposes concrete strategies to improve the structure and clarity of legal sentences. Legal texts function as the minimal shared standards that underpin social order, and from the standpoint of public language, they should be written in linguistically accurate and contextually appropriate Korean. To address this issue, the study classifies problematic legal provisions into four categories: grammaticality, conciseness, logicality, and everydayness. Based on this framework, the paper proposes targeted revision strategies, including correcting syntactic structures, adjusting grammatical particles to clarify argument-predicate relationships, and eliminating redundant or ambiguous expressions to improve readability. It also highlights the importance of restructuring sentence components to enhance logical flow and replacing overly formal or technical language with expressions more familiar to everyday Korean speakers. Notably, a single legal provision may exhibit multiple types of problems, thereby requiring multi-dimensional revisions. Although the practical impact of linguistic revisions may appear limited relative to the effort involved—and may not always align neatly with legal considerations—this study underscores the essential role of linguistic clarity in promoting legal transparency and inclusiveness. Despite the challenges of integrating such revisions into the formal legislative process, legal texts, as prototypical examples of public and formal written language, offer significant value as research material in linguistic inquiry. This study ultimately highlights the need for interdisciplinary approaches that bridge linguistics and law to enhance the accessibility and functionality of legal language.