One of the most representative data for modern traditional toponyms is ‘Hangukjimyeongchongram’ written in the 1970's. Most of data recorded in ‘Jiriji’ or other documents is using Chinese character toponyms with Gun and Hyeon-based or larger units, but ‘Hangukjimyeongchongram’ includes all traditional endemic toponyms transcribed for broad-scale areas. In the ‘Joseonjijijaryo’, however, contains Korean transcription for traditional toponyms with Myeon-based or smaller units approximately 60 years before ‘Hangukjimyeongchongram’. ‘Joseonjijijaryo’ (in the 1910's) is one of the oldest toponym documents transcribed in Korean, including traditional toponyms. It is very valuable data since it shows correspondences between Hangeul toponyms (Eeonmun section) and Chinese character toponyms (Jimyeong section).
In this article, 639 kinds of toponyms for Hoedeok-gun, Jinjam-gun, and Hyeonnae-myeon of Gongju-gun, corresponding to Daejoen of the present, written in ‘Joseonjijijaryo’ were researched to study the transcription characteristics including s-series Hapyongbyeongseo, the use of disappeared characters such as /ㆍ/, misspelling transcription, final consonant (a supporting floor part of Korean characters structure) transcription, the inter-siot(ㅅ) transcription, the borrowing letters transcription, the transcription for reorganization of Sino-Korean word, the transcription reflecting phonological phenomenon, the length transcription, and the diphthong transcription below sibilant such as ㅅ(s),ㅈ(ʧ), and ㅊ(ʧh) as well as their meanings. Ultimately, the study for transcription characteristics of Daejeon toponym is a prerequisite for the research for toponym morpheme analysis of Dajeon toponym.
In addition, ‘Joseonjijijaryo’ have some limitations. At first, traditional toponyms are not precisely transcribed. Although most of town toponyms is specifically transcribed, other toponyms are not so. Especially, valley, rock, and street toponyms cannot be found at all. This data has been also evaluated as ‘uncompleted’ in ‘You Jaeyoung’(1994：828) because some places are concretely transcribed, some places are roughly described, and some Dos (including Hamgyeong-do, Jeollabuk-do, Pyeonganbuk-do, and Gyeonggi-do) are totally omitted. Secondly, detail information of each toponym cannot be found as well. Partially, the note section(備考) describes where the toponyms suggested with assort classification(種別) are located. Therefore, only fundamental forms of toponym can be deduced if Chinese character toponyms are corresponding to Hangeul toponyms.
This article suggests two proposals to resolve the limitations; Korean linguistic characteristics of modern toponym in the early 20 century should be officially confirmed through toponym data analysis based on the transcription features of ‘Joseonjijijaryo’ and the diachronic research should be carried out for traditional toponyms in the relations with toponym data such as ‘Joseonjijiaryo’ and ‘Hangukjimyeongchongram’ and modern data including ‘Daejeon Jimyeongji’(1994). Then, it can be said that the characteristics of Daejeon toponym are truly identified.