A Study on Name Changes and Resident Registration in Colonial Korea

本文以朝鲜殖民时期的日本户籍（1923年以前的民事户籍）为例，说明了该制度在显示与户籍相同的身份关系的同时，也包含着显著的差异。这些差异包括存在一个杂项登记册（包含雇主家庭的受抚养人）以及关于就业状况和疫苗接种结果的记录信息。通过分析这些记录中登记的朝鲜人姓名的变化，我们也可以了解殖民政府如何理解这些居民。我审查了殖民当局为追踪居民所采取的措施，包括妇女和儿童的姓名以及禁止使用朝鲜字母书写的姓名。为了解决这些问题，我研究和调查了殖民时期登记在韩国地方行政办公室。尽管殖民地政府的监视努力，许多人没有记录在家庭登记册-这种情况甚至在日本帝国主义的最后几年也没有改善。根据审查的实际调查报告，从该时期，我表明，韩国的阻力是一个重要因素，解释了未登记的个人的问题。我还总结了我的书《改名政策》的发现（Iwanami shinsho，2008年），该法案于1940年实施：（1）朝鲜人被迫更改户籍中记录的姓名;（2）虽然这一改变旨在促进家庭制度中的“同化”，但它继续维持日本人和朝鲜人之间的差异; 3）韩国人的反应方式多种多样，既有默许的情况，也有抵制的情况。

Taking the Japanese family register (civil register minseki until 1923) in colonial Korea as a resident registration system, this article shows that while this system displayed status relations like the family register, it also contained significant differences. These differences include the existence of a miscellaneous register (containing dependents of an employer's house) and recorded information about one's employment status and vaccination results. Through an analysis of how the names of Koreans registered in these records changed, we can also come to know how the colonial government understood these residents. I examine the measures taken by colonial authorities to keep track of residents, including the naming of women and children as well as the prohibition on using names written in Korean letters. To pursue these issues, I examined and surveyed colonial period registers housed in South Korean local administrative offices. Despite the colonial state's surveillance efforts, many individuals were not recorded in a family register-a situation which did not improve even during the final years of Japanese imperialism. Based on examinations of actual survey reports from the period, I show that Korean resistance was an important factor which explains the problem of unregistered individuals. I also summarize the findings of my book, The name change policy (Iwanami shinsho, 2008), which was implemented in 1940: 1) that Koreans were forced to change names recorded in family registers; 2) that while this change aimed to promote "assimilation" in the family system, it continued to maintain differences between Japanese and Koreans; and 3) that Koreans responded in diverse ways, which included both cases of acquiescence and resistance.