지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The main objective of this report is to study the activities related to Si-jo by scholars of Choseon and the West during the 1910s. Through this enables searching the meanings of Si-jo being discussed based on Modern Scholastic discourse. Studies on such are done by focusing on a Christian missionary James Scarth Gales(1863∼1937) who were first to introduce Si-jo into Western network of literature studies, and on Choi Nam Seon, who brought the interest on Si-jo to Writers and field of Literature.
Gale and Choi Nam Seon has been recognizing Si-jo at their own literature discourse, one a foreigner christian missionary and the other as Korean scholar. In accordance, their discussions on Si-jo may appear to be similar im general, but has many differences in details.
1910s were the turning point on recognition on Si-jo. From then Gale and Choi nam Seon had applied perspective where their study object Si-jo are represented as comparatively old to the up to date lierature then. Si-jo before 1910s were called “Go-Si-jo”, and its discourse has also changed from text sang in musical format into written literature. However while Gales’s recognition on Si-jo was based on its nature seeking both text and the musical phases, Choi Nam Seon saw Si-jo as part of poetry and seeked more meaning as a written lierature than musical phase.
During the time both foreign and Korean(Choseon) scholars in general neglected literary value of S-ijo considering that the Chinese culrue and literature has had major affect to Si-jo. Gale and Choi Nam Seon saw different. Gale understood the Chinese letters found in Si-jo as literary vocabulary, as well as recognizing the similar characteristics of Si-jo with Chinese literature as distictive character of Si-jo its own. Majority of scholars of the time has seen Si-jo as imitated copy of Chinese poems - however, Choi Nam Seon claimed that Si-jo is most distict Choseon Literature with originality, matching all conditions and format to be seen as perfect Choseon Literture. Choi Nam Seon had negative perspectives on Chinese literature affecting on Si-jo in many ways, but did not make conclusions in this regards, his claim was focusing on Si-jo’s literary value as Choseon culture and written literature. This difference is due to the different basics of the two scholars knowledge and approach on literature. Gale had already been familiar with the modern concept of literature, so he could study Choseon literature and Si-jo as 3rd party under very objective perspective. Choi Nam Seon, on the other hand, had to apply the modern literature concept that wah relatively new to him at the time, as such concept was taken into Choseon from the west. In this regards Choi Nam Seon had to seek for Choseon Literature and its value as national literature, which is different from Gale’s perspectives. Si-jo was recognized by Gale as Choseon Literature, for Choi Nam Seon it was recognized as the national literature.
Gale and Choi Nam Seon has been recognizing Si-jo at their own literature discourse, one a foreigner christian missionary and the other as Korean scholar. In accordance, their discussions on Si-jo may appear to be similar im general, but has many differences in details.
1910s were the turning point on recognition on Si-jo. From then Gale and Choi nam Seon had applied perspective where their study object Si-jo are represented as comparatively old to the up to date lierature then. Si-jo before 1910s were called “Go-Si-jo”, and its discourse has also changed from text sang in musical format into written literature. However while Gales’s recognition on Si-jo was based on its nature seeking both text and the musical phases, Choi Nam Seon saw Si-jo as part of poetry and seeked more meaning as a written lierature than musical phase.
During the time both foreign and Korean(Choseon) scholars in general neglected literary value of S-ijo considering that the Chinese culrue and literature has had major affect to Si-jo. Gale and Choi Nam Seon saw different. Gale understood the Chinese letters found in Si-jo as literary vocabulary, as well as recognizing the similar characteristics of Si-jo with Chinese literature as distictive character of Si-jo its own. Majority of scholars of the time has seen Si-jo as imitated copy of Chinese poems - however, Choi Nam Seon claimed that Si-jo is most distict Choseon Literature with originality, matching all conditions and format to be seen as perfect Choseon Literture. Choi Nam Seon had negative perspectives on Chinese literature affecting on Si-jo in many ways, but did not make conclusions in this regards, his claim was focusing on Si-jo’s literary value as Choseon culture and written literature. This difference is due to the different basics of the two scholars knowledge and approach on literature. Gale had already been familiar with the modern concept of literature, so he could study Choseon literature and Si-jo as 3rd party under very objective perspective. Choi Nam Seon, on the other hand, had to apply the modern literature concept that wah relatively new to him at the time, as such concept was taken into Choseon from the west. In this regards Choi Nam Seon had to seek for Choseon Literature and its value as national literature, which is different from Gale’s perspectives. Si-jo was recognized by Gale as Choseon Literature, for Choi Nam Seon it was recognized as the national literature.
목차
국문초록
1. 머리말
2. ‘고(古)’시조(時調)의 소환
3. 조선‘문학’, 국‘문학’으로서의 시조
4. 맺음말
참고문헌
abstract
참고문헌 (26)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
무인시조의 실체와 정서 표출 양상
인문학연구
2016 .01
-
시가어의 재편과정과 번역 - 게일의 미간행 영역시조와 시조 담론의 계보학 -
열상고전연구
2015 .08
-
『게일 유고』소재 한국고전 번역물(1) -게일의 미간행 영역시조에 대하여-
열상고전연구
2015 .08
-
전란에 뒤흔들린 민간인의 일상 - 민간인의 무신란(戊申亂) 체험 실기 연구 -
열상고전연구
2016 .12
-
조오현 선시의 문학사적 의의
동서비교문학저널
2015 .08
-
근대 미디어와 사회주의 문화정치
한국학(구 정신문화연구)
2017 .09
-
순조대 전반기 정국 변동과 의리론의 추이
한국사연구
2018 .03
-
접촉과 접속, 다른 기억으로 야담 만들기 -<조광조 일화>를 중심으로-
고전문학연구
2022 .12
-
靜谷 曹信天의 家訓書 『筆語』 연구
동양한문학연구
2018 .01
-
『진본 청구영언』 무명씨 후반부 항목의 배열 체계와 그 의미-『진청』 382-391을 대상으로-
어문론총
2016 .12
-
조지훈 시의 동아시아적 미학과 존재론: 홍자성의 『채근담』의 영향을 중심으로
동서비교문학저널
2020 .09
-
시조의 영역(英譯), 그 횡단적 아로새김의 미학(美學)
어문론총
2019 .01
-
조선 초 궁녀 조두대의 생애와 女謁
한국사학보
2022 .05
-
고려후기 문신 초은(樵隱) 이인복(李仁復)의 정치 인생과 인적 네트워크
한국학(구 정신문화연구)
2020 .06
-
세조, 초월적 절대군주를 꿈꾸다 (김순남, 2022, 『세조, 폭군과 명군 사이』, 푸른역사)
한국사학보
2023 .02
-
루이자 메이 올콧의『작은 아씨들』에 나타난 여성의 글쓰기
영미문학교육
2021 .12
-
개화기 서구인의 시조번역과 시가(詩歌)인식 : 게일과 헐버트를 중심으로
국제언어문학
2018 .12
-
문화적 이질성을 초월한 페미니즘 - 조남주 소설의 중국어 번역과 수용 양상 연구 -
한국언어문학
2024 .07
-
正祖 經學의 淸代 學說 受用 樣相에 對한 一考察 -『弘齋全書』 『經史講義 書』와 『欽定書經傳說彙纂』의 比較를 中心으로-
고전문학연구
2019 .01
-
『창조』와 3.1 운동
한국민족문화
2018 .11
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
한국판 노인 양방향 사회적지지 척도(2-WSSSB)의 타당화 연구
이상준
,
이영순
한국노인복지학회 학술대회
2022
.05
「최남선의 통합적 교육과 언문일치 연구: 『소년』에 수록된 이음표를 중심으로」에 대한 토론문
윤재민
한국시학회 학술대회 논문집
2017
.11
백두산 관광을 통해 본 식민지 ‘진정성’의 구성 방식 : 1920-30년대 민태원, 최남선, 안재홍의 백두산 기행문을 중심으로
신진숙
동악어문학
2017
.05
한말 일제 초 단군과 고조선 인식의 체계화 : 신채호 · 최남선을 중심으로
류시현
한국사학보
2015
.11
최남선의 1920년대의 민속연구
임돈희
,
로저L.자넬리
민속학연구
1995
.08
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2017-001-002254306