校正廳本 『맹자언해』의 존대법 고찰

A Study on the Honorific Way of Speech Applied to the Gyojeongcheon Version of 『Maengja Eonhae』

선조조 교정청본 경서언해서는 성리학의 사회적 이념인 정통론에 입각하여 堯舜부터 孟子까지 儒家 道統 전수자들의 言行에 모두 존댓말을 사용하였다. 특히 孔子와 諸侯의 대화에서 공자에게는 존댓말을 쓰되 제후에게는 존대하지 않았고, 子思와 魯繆公의 대화에서도 子思에게만 존대하였다. 하지만 『맹자언해』는 맹자와 제후의 대화에서 맹자에게도 제후에게도 모두 존대하였다. 이는 孔子-曾子-子思-孟子로 이어지는 유가 도통의 계보 내에 일종의 층위가 존재하는 것이다. 공자~맹자의 도통이 중시되면서, 교정청본 『논어언해』는 상대적으로 顔子를 소외시켜 그에게 존댓말을 쓰지 않았다. 하지만 교정청본 『맹자언해』는 1곳에서 안자에게 존댓말을 썼는데, 그 이유는 아마도 안자는 亞聖이요 맹자는 大賢으로 평가 받기 때문일 것이다. 즉 이는 맹자가 비록 도통의 전수자이지만 결코 안자보다 우위에 있지는 않음을 보여주는 것이다. 한편, 교정청은 맹자와 餘他人의 대화를 해석할 때, 여타인은 대부분 맹자에게 존대하고 맹자는 그들에게 말을 낮추는 형태로 언해하였다. 그러나 오직 告子와 맹자, 陳相과 맹자의 대화에서는 상호 존대하지 않는 어법으로 언해하였다. 이는 告子 및 陳相을 이단으로 규정하여 배척하는 ‘闢異端’의 뜻을 명확히 표출한 것이다.

The Gyojeongcheong version of Saseo Eohae was compiled and published during the reign of king Seonjo in the country. Standing itself on the legitimate doctrines of the Sung-Confucianism, that version uses the honorific way of speech in expressing all words spoken by successors of the very Confucian ideas of enlightenment, that is, dotongron. In depicting dialogues between Kong-zi and feudal lords, especially, the Gyojeongcheon version provides words spoken by the latter to the former in the form of honorific speech, but doesn’t employ the same form in delivering words spoken by the former to the latter. Regarding dialogues between Lu- Mougong and Zi-si, similarly, honorific expression is restricted to words spoken by the former to the latter. In contrast, 『Maengja Eonhae』 contains in an honorific way all words with which Meng-zi and feudal lords talk to each other. This may be attributed to the fact that the genealogy of the above mentioned successors from Kong-zi, Zeng-zi and Zi-si to Meng-zi is in nature hierarchical. Despite 『Noneo Eonhae』 doesn’t apply honorific linguistics to the expression of words spoken to Yan-zi because he was not considered belonging to the successors, however, 『Maengja Eonhae』 depicts in an honorific way words that are spoken to Yan-zi in a particular dialogue. This is because although he was one of the successors of dotongron, Meng-zi was never recognized to be superior to Yan-zi. Meanwhile, the Gyojeongcheong version annotated dialogues between Meng-zi and others in a way that words spoken by the latter to the former are mostly written in the form of honorific speech, but those spoken by the latter to the former in plain terms. Only one exception is that dialogues between Gao-zi and Meng-zi or between Chen-xiang and Meng-zi were in any case annotated into non-honorific talks between the two figures. This suggests that the version was made clearly in favor of the rejection of heresy as it defined both Gao-zi and Chen-xiang as heretic.