CENTRAL BUREAUCRACY 639
and the corresponding absence of the modern version of nationalistic sentiment
that has been so often ascribed to Yu and other members of the supposed Sirhak
school of practical learning. Yu's attitude, as well as that of Cho Han, was char-
acteristic of the mentality of the learned Korean scholars of the time who felt
that they were participants in a magnificent culture and civilization of univer-
sal validity, and that their role was to bring their own people up to that level of
culture. Yu was not simply enamored of Ming culture alone, but of ancient and
classical standards, because he added that ifMing clothing should in any respects
not represent an accurate reproduction of the styles described in the classics,
Korean scholars should find the differences and correct the style to conform to
the ancient original.
To that end he also quoted Han Paekkyom, who wrote a lengthy description
of the sim'11i undergarment prior to his death in 1613. Han based his essay on
a thorough analysis of the Li-chi in the course of which he disputed some of the
interpretations of the design of this garment by two of Chu Hsi's disciples. He
concentrated on the original text and attempted by deduction and contempla-
tion to grasp the meaning of the original, a method that antedated the spirit of
the school of empirical research (k ao-cheng) of the eighteenth-century Ch'ing
dynasty.7^1
Chinese Pronunciation and Colloquial ChineseThus far we have seen sufficient evidence of Yu Hyongwtm's devotion to clas-
sical Chinese texts, but he never mentioned anything about colloquial Chinese
because it was not particularly relevant to the given topic under discussion. But
now that he was stressing the adoption of Ming clothing styles, it was obvious
that he believed that much was to be learned from the contemporary Chinese,
even under Manchu rule. Unfortunately, Yu found that despite the facility of edu-
cated Koreans in reading classical Chinese texts, there were absolutely no civil
officials who understood the spoken Chinese language.
King Sejong in the early fifteenth century had faced this problem directly by
ordering the publication of pronunciation dictionaries for Chinese characters,
first Sin Sukchu's annotation of The Correct Tones of the Hung-~nl Era (i.e .. the
HongnIlI chong'itll y/5khun), and when that proved too hulky. a shorter version
called A Comprehensil'e Study qf'the Four Tones (Sasong t 'ollggo). Yu mentioned
that Sejong had founded the Office of Diplomatic Correspondence
(S(mgmunwon) and required that all beginning civil officials (in that office?)
begin the study ofhoth spoken Chinese and the Korean cIcrk's script (idu). He
used the Sasong I (I/lggo to educate these officials in Chinese pronunciation. and
he required that all officials of the Office of Diplomatic COlTespondence usc
only Chinese pronunciation for all Chinese characters as part of their language-
learning process. Unfortunately. hecause this practice was abandoned. Korean
officials and clerks had been using Korean-style pronunciation for Chinese terms
ever sincc. Whenever important matters of state were discussed with China, every-