A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF KOREAN MOVIE “THE HOUSEMAID” – FOCUSED ON FILMS IN 1960 AND 2010 –

Korean legendary film director Kim Ki-Young’s 1960 work The Housemaid was remade in 2010 by director Im Sang-Soo. The study of the two films can be found as a comparative study of cinematic studies on sound analysis and genre analysis, and a sociological study on social images. However, few studies have looked with a discourse oriented approach. Discourse in the movie is not only a window for communication between characters, but also an important device with non-verbal elements, so it can be said to be discourse has a high importance as an analysis target. This study analyzes the film discourse according to Erving Goffman’s dramaturgical analysis to find out the differences between the characters. This study can be said is meaningful in that it has the characteristics of interdisciplinary Eun-hye KIM: A Comparative Study on Discourse Analysis of ... 58 research in linguistics and film studies through discourse analysis of two films with different periods.


Introduction
Director 김기영 (Kim Ki-Young) left legend movies in Korean screen history with his sense beyond the generation. After his huge successful work 하녀 (Ha-nyeo, a.k.a. The Housemaid), he made Housemaid film series: 화녀 (Hwa-nyeo, Woman of Fire), 충녀 (Chung-nyeo, Insect Woman), 살인나비를 쫓는 여자 (Sarin nabireul jjotnun yeoja, A Woman After a Killer Butterfly). Among them, Housemaid, which is the first movie of his serial works as well as considered to be a monumental work in the history of Korean thriller film. In 2010, director 임상수 (Im Sang-Soo) released the remake of The Housemaid, a lot of interests gathered in how he created a new drawing. Then in conclusion, two works has a lot of differences except the basic plot that is the housemaid and male master's sexual relationship shakes the family.
There were studies about the two films, in the aspects such as social characteristics and modernity, cinematic analysis and general review (e.g. Mok Hae-Jung 목혜정 2010; Kim Sun-Jin 김선진 2011; Lee Chae-Won 이채원 2011). However, discourse-centric researches regarding two works are still lacking. Discourse can be seen as an important device to not only the conversations of the characters, but also including the nonverbal elements. Furthermore, it can explore the meaning of the whole work. Therefore, this study has a significant meaning which compares the two films through a discourse analysis as well as runs the research in linguistic and Film Studies.
As that what already been stated above, the two films are different in some ways such as space background, time background and characters, although they share the same basic plot. This study seeks to find the difference between the original and the remake through a discourse analysis tool.

Dramaturgical analysis of Erving Goffman
According to Schiffrin (1994: 5), there are six ways of discourse analysis -speech act theory, interactional sociolinguistics, ethnography of communication, pragmatics, variation analysis and conversation analysis. Among them, this paper focused on interactional sociolinguistics, especially Goffman's (1956) dramaturgy in social interaction. The reason for selecting Goffman's (1956) approach as an analysis tool is it can be a link between movie or drama and language. Goffman (1956) developed the analysis of discourse in a unique way. He described the personal life of another person 'self' concept projected into the society as well as explained interaction discourse theory by saying the role of 'self' and how it is recognized on others. Each person who has a self, gives a definition about the same situation in one's separate way. The definition about one situation can be different by people's experiences, culture patterns and life orders. However, those factors can be formed by the conversation. A self realizes one's role through the discourse in an endless interaction then makes social symbol. Goffman compared discourse as a drama. He saw the social aspects that belongs to a discourse with the drama aspects which was the new paradigm at that time. Moreover, he didn't focused on the discourse itself, instead he did a new interpretation of the individual leading the discourse. Apply for the actual life of the various components in the theater is a unique feature of Goffman's theory.

Impression management
Goffman thought 'self' as a result of interaction actors and audiences. Also actors use various strategies in order to define the situation and get an impression on when he goes to situation. To define the situation, he can get some help from speaker and audience. But Goffman believed that the subject who has a self, defines in perception of the dialogue by oneself and overcome the factors that are hampering analysis and on the situation in the process is more important. Goffman expressed this overcome process as an 'impression management'. Impression is a self-image from others. He classified appearance and attitude of the elements of this impression management as an individual dimension. Such as clothes, speaking way, attitude and intonation can show one's social level, characters and so on.

Role distance 1
When people are acting (living), they think their self-image is not fit with the role, role distance is happened. One's roles are different situationally. Role distance is able to work in life positively. It can give to relax tensions related to prestige, check the appearance of the self-extending beyond the role, reduce the burden even if one does not like the current role and decrease conflicts in interpersonal relationships.

Stigma
Stigma is a spoiled social identity. It can be a prejudice, but Goffman saw it as an individual's another role. Stigma has 3 types. The first one is 'Overt or external deformities'. Physical disabilities belong to it. The second one is 'Known as deviations in personal traits'. The psychological such as beliefs, thought, and mental illness are included to this. The last one is tribal stigma. Affiliation with a specific nationality, religion, or race can belong to it. The stigmatic actor has a tension with audiences, and should manage oneself to protect one's reputation.
However, Goffman provides only illustrative information to flesh out his methodological arguments. He is not concerned with how grammar and lexicon function both to frame what is being said and to affect situated assessments of what is conveyed at any one point in an encounter.

Discourse function analysis
Additional analysis was performed to compensate for the lack of Goffman's discourse analysis way. Cho Kuk-Hyun (조국현 1999) critically discussed J. R. Searle's functional classification of communication in speech act. Cho Kuk-Hyun (조국현 1999) pointed out the Searle's functional classification has the limitation because it was conducted by an inductive approach. Furthermore, he maintained 'illocutionary act' 2 , which is a core concept of speech act theory, is justified unclearly and Searle only explained through the elements and combination rules as well as cannot find how a conclusion is derived (Cho Kuk-Hyun 조국현 1999: 534-535). With this base, Lee Byoung-Gyu (이병규 2015) introduced the new outline about the discourse function like the following. 3. Subjects of study

The Housemaid in 1960
The main characters in the movie are 6 people. The hero 동식 (Dongsik), Dong-sik's wife, their daughter and son, factory worker 경희 (Kyung-hee) who introduced a maid in the house of Dong-sik, and the housemaid who is leading the film. Dong-sik is a piano tutor of female factory workers. For economic stability, he also does private lessons in his house. He treats his weak and pregnant wife very well by doing something like massaging her feet and cooking instead of her. On the other hand, he has a passive and timid side by showing that he is dragged by his wife and housemaid. Dong-sik's wife is a typically good wife and wise mother (현모양처 hyeonmo yangcheo, 賢母良妻) 3 who does sewing work even when her health is awful during the pregnant and after giving birth the baby. She seems like the most multi-faceted character. At first, she is warm and self-giving, and then became cold-hearted person who tells housemaid to erase her baby. In the end, she lost her husband to housemaid and also shrank back. Dong-sik's daughter who has handicapped legs and mischievous son showed the confrontation with housemaid and adds tension to the movie. Kyung-hee became close to Dong-sik's family while getting private piano lesson from Dong-sik in his house. She introduced housemaid for Dong-sik's house while having a heart for Dong-sik. She is also one of reasons that housemaid seduces Dong-sik 4 . Housemaid is a femme fatale who causes the breakup of the Dong-sik's home. Director explains her personality through her acting. She smokes from her first appearance, and shakes the rat with her bare hands. Audiences can assume her offensive and little bit abnormal personality.
Eun-ee is quite different from the original character. She is girlish, earnest, naive and silly in some ways. When Hoon comes to her room at the first time, she didn't refuse and even ask to him about the situation. That doesn't mean she waited that situation or enjoyed that. We can assume her stuffy and passive personality from Eun-ee and her friend's conversation. She became abnormal and represents her anger only after her miscarriage. Hoon belongs to the upper class who can get and enjoy all of he wants. For him, Eun-ee is just a plaything for pleasure as well as he thinks that his wife is in a lower position than him, not an equivalent position like normal couples. We can also see how arrogant he is through his behavior and words to his mother-in-law who is generally a difficult person to treat in Korea. Hea-ra is a typical woman from the rich family. Until the middle of the movie, she seems not that bad relatively comparing with other rich people like Hoon, Hae-ra's mother. But after she knew the news that Eun-ee has Hoon's baby, she reveals her true colors. She speaks rough words to Byoung-sik, slaps Eun-ee's cheek as well as makes Eun-ee lost her baby. Hae-ra's mother is a more vicious character. She makes Eun-ee falling down to the ground from the chandelier intentionally in order to Eun-ee's miscarriage even in front of her little granddaughter. And from her lines, we can find how snobbish she is. Generally, the most friendly person to Eun-ee in the movie is Hae-ra's daughter Na-mee. After 'chandelier' incident, she is the only one who says sorry for Eun-ee. And when Eun-ee burns herself to death, she looks at her until the last time through the window. In 2010 Housemaid, the most interesting character is Byoung-sik. Some of people compare her and Kyung-hee but their roles and characters are totally different. Byoung-sik has been worked as a maid and butler for a long time since Hae-ra was a child. As after a long period of working, she not only plays her cards right, but also has sharp eyes. She plays a big role in making this movie as a black comedy through her lines like '아더메치(ah-deo-me-chi)' 5 . 4. Discourse analysis 4.1. Discourse analysis criterion As stated above, this paper applied 3 criterion 'impression management, role distance and stigma' from Goffman. But, Goffman provides only illustrative information to flesh out his methodological arguments. He is not concerned with how grammar and lexicon function both to frame what is being said and to affect situated assessments of what is conveyed at any one point in an encounter. Therefore, this paper applied one more criteria, discourse function analysis. Lee Byoung kyu (이병규 2015) introduced new analysis form based on Cho Kuk Hyun (조국현 1999). However, this system is not only inconsistent but also not fit to into the discourse, in other words conversation. Among them persuasive and responsible functions are used in a lot of conversations, while expressive function usually belongs to writings such as essays, travel notes and diaries. This problem is happened because they defined the 'discourse' unsurely. This paper defines 'discourse' as spoken language and written language is 'text' (Jung Hee-Ja 정희자 2008: 23). Therefore in movie discourse, criterion should be different. Three basic factors are as follows.

1)
Speaking to the audience or speaker (oneself) 2) Existence of the specific audience 3) Requirement of the behavior change.
Using those 3 standards, this paper made different criterion about discourse functions as figure 2. (1) The first appearance of a housemaid ( From the housemaid's first appearance, we can find her character is not a typical woman during that time. Maybe she got stigma kind of 'bad girl' from this scene, because of the cigarette.
In the remake first scene, we can see both of the housemaids' characters are totally different. Eun-ee nagged her friend to go and see a person's suicide place in a naive voice. Her intention seems not deep. It is just a curiosity like a child. (3) Meeting of Eun-ee and Byoung-sik (2010 (3), housemaid (Eun-ee)'s personality is exposed more clearly. Byoung-sik is trying to find Eun-ee's character. And when Eun-ee got passed, Byoung-sik will be her boss. That is why she doesn't try to manage her impression. For people in high positions, they don't need to disguise themselves in front of the people in low positions. On the other hand, Eun-ee's behavior is very calm. We can assume that is part of the impression management as an employee. The housemaid didn't make audiences disappointed. She doesn't care about her impression or stigma. From her first work day, she shows her raw personality by catching the rat 8 with a bare hand. The first appearance of Hae-ra also shows her impression. She is doing her yoga and Eun-ee and Byoung-sik are standing behind her. We can assume that Hae-ra thinks her yoga is more important than saying hello to the newly coming housemaid. Then, through Hae-ra and Eun-ee's voices, we are able to know that they are having a typical relationship between rich hostess and the housemaid. Hae-ra's voice is high and confident, while Eun-ee's voice tone is low and timid. Even as a child, Dong-sik's son makes his role as a master in front of the housemaid. This behavior is quite different when he was with his family. From his line linked up to daughter's saying, we can find out why they don't have a good impression for housemaid. Moreover, housemaid doesn't try to make her impression better. She takes away a glass of water, and drinks till the end with a defiant stand. Through her actions, she makes her stigma very firm.
In 1960 movie, the only one character who has the first type stigma (overt or external deformities) is Dong-sik's daughter. Later, Dong-sik and Dong-sik's wife tell her "We can be happy if you can walk". This is kind of harsh stigma for a girl.
Eun-ee is a kind housemaid. At first meeting with Na-mee, Eun-ee keeps looking at her face and smiled. From her action, Na-mee starts to have a good feeling. Na-mee use 'that lady' and it seems like Eun-ee is not there, but she is serving dinner and listening all of things. Before this scene, Dong-sik's son saw housemaid's cigarette and made fun of her as a punk and gave her cigarette to Dong-sik. Dongsik gives back to her the cigarette and lights a fire and then, she shows her ambition or jealousy to Kyung-hee from here. Interesting factor is housemaid hardly suffer a role distance. Role distance is happened to people when they feel impression managements are hard. We can find it from Dong-sik. He tries to be a good father and husband. But after spending the night with the housemaid, he lives in agony. However the housemaid scarcely gets any role distances because she doesn't manage her impression. (10) The first night of the housemaid and the hero ( After that night, housemaid calls herself as a second (mistress) in a blameless attitude. She keeps talking about her requirements, even though after Dong-sik expresses (expressed) his agony and pain. Only after Dong-sik shouted out, she changed her attitude. We can tell this is the first impression management of housemaid. It means this is the first event which makes her scared (or bothers her). She makes her as a pity woman in order to make Dong-sik can't ignore her and that night.
In the remake, the reaction is too cliché. Rich man gave his money, and poor woman felt deeply disappointed. Before Hoon's money, Eun-ee thought herself differently like the housemaid in 1960. She did make-up heavily and go in to the Hoon's piano room proudly. Then, Hoon's money made her feel a role distance. Through the money, she realized that she is still nobody for him. And we can see Hoon barely use expression function. Everything is requirement and order. (14) Lost Child ( Also from the 2010 film, we can see a new Eun-ee. In 1960, the housemaid seduced Dong-sik during his wife's absence. In 2010, Eun-ee became little bit awkward when Hae-ra is gone for giving birth her twins. Eun-ee shows a huge role distance from this part. She doesn't care who she is, and who Hoon is. She insists her baby is Hoon's, over taking a bath in Hoon and Hae-ra's bathtub.

Conclusion
The two works have the same basic plot that tragedy occurs after a housemaid enters a wealthy family. It can be seen that the important parts of the film's center are the same, and the study compared and analyzed those seven scenes focused on discourse (The first appearance of housemaid, The housemaid's first day of work, The relationship with children, Having a good feeling to hero, The first night of the housemaid and the hero, The After that night and Lost Child). However, the backbone of the movie was similar, the character of the housemaid and the hostess were different. As well as new characters Byoung-sik and the mother of the hostess in the 2010 appeared to create a new story.
There were studies about two films, such as the social characteristics and modernity, genre analysis and general review. However, discourse-centric researches regarding the two works are still lacking. Discourse can be seen as an important device to not only the conversations of the characters, but also including the nonverbal elements. Furthermore, it can explore the meaning of the whole work. Thus, this study made a discourse functional analysis framework based on Erving Goffman's (1956) dramaturgical analysis and Lee Byoung-Gyu (2015) discourse analysis framework to find out the two films through discourse. Based on this, it was intended to analyze the discourse of the same scenes, which is the center of movies in the 1960s and 2010s to identify the differences.
The limitation of this study is that the entire script was not covered. Therefore, in the future, to proceed with research to fill in the gaps while dealing with the entire script of one work through a discourse approach.