The English word heritage is etymologically associated with the idea of inheritance. The contemporary Korean word yusan (유산 遺産), which can be taken as a rough equivalent, suggests heritage has something to do with what is left over or left behind (yu 遺), with what follows or comes next (san 産). Pertinent to discussions about what might count as textual heritage, the second half of the compound that comprises the Korean word for heritage (san 産) also suggests what “is brought about,” “produced,” or “given birth to.” I will suggest that textual heritage might be taken to mean the exploration of what has been inherited as text—the texts and objects that have been “left over” or “left behind.” I will also suggest that textual heritage can be understood to include what texts and textual objects “bring about” and “give birth to.” If textual heritage can be conceived in these terms, then an older, somewhat out-of-favor discipline called bibliography can provide a variety of productive theoretical and practical tools for investigating the ways that texts are produced, circulated, and used in various cultural and historical contexts. To suggest how bibliography might contribute to discussions of textual heritage, I will introduce a few key definitions of bibliography from the European, Anglo-American, and East Asian traditions. To ground my discussion of bibliography’s potential usefulness, I will present a bibliographical analysis of a literary text called “Pun oˇlgol (Powdered Face)” by the Korean poet Kim So-woˇl as it has been inherited in print and digital forms. To explore the limits of textual heritage as a concept and bibliography as a means for studying it, my analysis of Kim’s poem will focus on the various ways that the word “sound” has been represented orthographically in instantiations of Kim’s poem. A discussion of how the sound of the word “sound” has been represented in printed instances of Kim’s poem and the ways that it might be reiterated in other media forms usefully illuminates a boundary often drawn between what might be thought of as textual and aural inheritances. A discussion of the digital code needed to represent “sound” in Kim’s poem when it is expressed as a digital text by contemporary platforms usefully illuminates another boundary, the one often placed between the abstractions of digital textuality and the physical materiality of what is printed as text, made manifest to the eyes on a screen, or made available to the ear by means of digital devices rattling the air. By enabling encounters with these boundaries, this presentation will, I can hope, facilitate a discussion about how textual heritage as a framework for considering textual inheritance may transgress or reinforce these boundaries.