이 연구는 사전마다 다르게 처리된 동음어, 다의어의 유형을 살펴보고 그 기준이 무엇이며 동음어와 다의어의 구분을 어떻게 하는 것이 좋을지를 논의하는 것을 목적으로 하였다. 이를 위해 국어대사전, 외국인을 위한 학습사전, 대역사전 들을 대상으로 사전 표제어의 동음어, 다의어 처리 기준을 분석한바 어원, 의미적 기준, 문법적 기준 외에도 관련어, 대역어 등이 영향이 미침을 살펴보았다. 의미적 기준은 주관적 판단이 개입되며, 문법적 특징에 따른 기준은 자립명사의 분류사적 용법, 품사 통용, 보조용언, 접미사 등에 대한 국어학적 이론에 따라 처리가 달랐다. 또한 사전 이용자와 사전 편찬의 목적에 따라서도 동음어와 다의어 처리가 다른데, 본고에서는 사전의 종류에 따라 동음어, 다의어 구분기준을 달리하는 것을 제안하였다.

The purpose of this study is to examine the standards that classify homonym (words with the same sound) and polysemy (word with the multiple meanings) in various dictionaries and to claim that the standards may differ depending on the dictionary. We examined the Korean Unabridged Dictionary, the dictionary for learners of Korean, the bilingual dictionary. Through this we found out the key factors that influence the standards that classify homonym and polysemy was not only the origin of the words, standards based on semantic and grammatical characteristics of the word, but also the related and translated words. The criteria based on the meaning of the word was relatively subjective while the criteria based on the grammar of the word was objective. Furthermore, the standards that classify homonym and polysemy may also differ depending on the user of the dictionary and the purpose of its publication. In this study, I would like to suggest that the standards should be different depending on the type of dictionary. First of all, the Korean Unabridged Dictionary should have the characteristic of a historical dictionary. For this, the origin of the word must be the top priority when sorting homonym and polysemy. When its origin is not clear the standard based on the meaning of the word would be the second priority. Once a entry with the same origin is used in different parts of speech, we can show its origin by dividing and partitioning the word in one entry as shown in the < Standard Korean Language Dictionary >. Secondly, in the case of the dictionary for learners of Korean, the standard based on the grammar of the word should be used. By doing so, it would be easier for the foreigners to learn Korean words that can be used in different parts of speech. The classification of words based on grammar must remain objective and consistent. Finally, since the publisher of the bilingual dictionary is a foreigner, his/her intuition of the target language affects the standard. The characteristics of contrastive linguistics and the translation words seems to be constantly involved in classifying the homonym and polysemy. Considering that foreigners who are engaged in Korean are the users of the dictionary, the accuracy of the meaning and grammatical terms must be the most important criteria when classifying homonym and polysemy. To wrap up, through this study we once again emphasize the importance of the origin of the word when sorting the homonym and polysemy. We would also like to assert that the main objective of the publication of the Korean unabridged dictionary is to strengthen its character as a historical dictionary. We were able to compare the publishers intuition on classifying the homonym and polysemy and found their pattern and standards. Yet, the fact that we were not able to have a closer examination remains lacking.