Subjects for Justice in the Divided Korea

권진관 한국민중신학회 2012 Madang: Journal of Contextual Theology Vol.0 No.18

This essay aims at analyzing the problematic of justice from the subjectsØpoint of view. The author argues that justice is first of all a matter of subjects. In other words, it is a problem of choosing and siding with the faithful subjects. He divides subjects into five categories: faithful subjects,reactionary subjects, opponent subjects, the subaltern, and inmin subjects, of which the faithful subjects are the most genuine bearers of history. He suggests three major historical tasks that the faithful subjects carry out. They are the building of peace and reunification, the constructing of equality and justice in society; and the protection of ecological integrity. They are at least partly interconnected and exist in the context of national division. The author examines the trajectory of the faithful subjects in the Korean history. The Donghak peasant revolutionary war in 1894, the March 1st Movement in 1910 and others were considered here as typical historical events where faithful subjects were involved. He also examines the trajectory of the opponent subjects and others. He finds some meeting points between the faithful subjects and the inmin subjects. He argues that the dialogues and exchanges of the latter two groups of subjects are necessary and required for expanding the space for peace, reconciliation,and reunification between North and South Korea. The author claims that justice is to make clear the differences between/among different groups of subjects. The widening of the gap and difference between different groups of subjects is not the final goal of justice. The ultimate goal and structure of justice is love. Justice in a narrow sense widens the differences between/among groups of subjects in order to clarify different subjectivities and their historical trajectories. Justice in a wider sense reunites all subjects, because justice includes love and reconciliation as its requisites. The author argues that two principles, presentation and representation for minjung must be balanced in our society and that the balance and dialectic of the two principles will contribute to building a new democracy alternative to the inhuman jungle-like liberal democracy (South Korea) and to the rigid and controlled socialist democracy (North Korea). Finally, the author finds Jesus as the model of presentation and representation for others. His cross can be seen as an event of presentation (direct participation in the suffering situation) and representation for poor and suffering people. The author also analyzes Jesus and his events from the subjectsØpoint of view.

최인훈 단편소설에 나타난 주체의 세 영역 -최인훈과 라캉의 주체를 중심으로-

김기우 한국문학이론과비평학회 2017 한국문학이론과 비평 Vol.76 No.-

This researcher focused on Choi In-hun’s short story which is being neglected. The researchers set the goal of studying the subjects shown in his short stories. Through the process of change of subjectivity, I examined the discourse, main characters and author's recognition of the world of Choi In-hun short story. In addition, I examined a writer's thinking about novel and art is revealed as a subjectivity in the relationship between a work, a reader, and a writer. First of all, I put 「Gray Club History」, 「Life of Raoul」, 「Su(囚)」 in the works corresponding to <subject of bondage>. The main content is the main subject caught by the desire of the imaginary system. Therefore, the first human type of Choi In-hun, DNA (Closed Stable), was inserted and analyzed. Of course, it is necessary to move away from the imaginary system in order to enter the symbolic world which is the world of language and symbol. The characters of 「Gray Club History」, 「Life of Raoul」, 「Su(囚)」 look inside the mirror and stay inside. They see society through ‘windows’ like mirrors. Judgments about the outside reality can not jump directly into reality through the window. Second, it is <the subject of conflict>. I put the 「House of Idols」, 「Laughter」 and 「Dalaria of the September」. The core contents are the subjects corresponding to Choi In-hun's DNA' (open instability) as a subject who is troubled to enter into the symbolic system. Though it is the subject who is active in the world of symbols, the longing to the imaginary world is still. In reality, She know that she can not go back to the imaginary world, so she assume the vain thing and return to the time of love as she imagined. Even if the love is vain, it is precious. It is another self, and it is someone who protects me. Therefore, the reality of the woman's laughter was her own. In other words, the vanity was the one she made. The third is <the subject of freedom>. 「The letter of the sea」 corresponds to the subject which deviates from the world of the symbol. It is the subject corresponding to DNA ∞ (open stability) among three types of human being. Choi In-hun breaks away from long silence after 『Topic』 and publishes a short novel 「Letters of the Sea」. The 60-volume 「Letter of the Sea」 is a short story with the same weight as 4000 pieces of novels, 『Topic』. The 「Letter of the sea」, which begins with the unfolding of the consciousness of the skeleton, the speaker, proceeds with the same structure as the principle of ‘the generation of involuntary memory’. 「Letter of the sea」 can be said to be the same epic as the one described in the memory of 『Topic』 converted into the consciousness of the skeleton. The speaker, skeleton, digs through deeper memories through involuntary memory and finds a true subject. The end is the subject of freedom, knowing me with no me. 최인훈 문학에 대한 논의는 여러 연구자들에 의해 다양의 시각으로 이루어져 왔고, 의미 있는 연구 성과 또한 적지 않다. 하지만 그 대부분은 최인훈의 장편소설이나 희곡에 집중되어 있다. 이에 반하여, 최인훈의 단편소설들에 대한 연구는 드물다. 이제까지의 최인훈 문학에 대한 연구에서 단편소설은 상대적으로 외면당해온 것이다. 그러나 작가 스스로 밝힌 대로, 그의 단편소설은 『광장』 『화두』 등 최인훈의 대표적인 장편소설들의 원형질에 다름 아니라고 할 수 있다. 특히 「바다의 편지」는 『화두』의 압축본이라 할 수 있는데, 작가 스스로 자신의 소설 전체를 3부작으로 읽히기를 바라고 있는 것도 여기서 연유한다. 이 글은 바로 이 점에 주목, 최인훈의 단편소설들이 내보이는 ‘주체’의 모습들을 분석하여 주체성의 변화 양상을 살피고, 이를 통해 최인훈 단편의 담론과 작중인물, 그리고 작가의 세계인식, 나아가 최인훈 소설의 특성을 밝히고자 하였다. 최인훈은 그의 「인간의 Metabolism의 3형식」에서 인간을 세 가지 차원의 주체성을 지닌 생명으로 보고 있다. ‘생명주체’ ‘문명주체’ ‘환상주체’가 그것인데, 이를 라캉의 주체 개념을 원용하여 규정해보면 ‘속박의 주체’ ‘갈등의 주체’ ‘자유의 주체’로 바꿔 정의할 수 있다. 이 글에서는 라캉의 주체 개념을 원용하여 최인훈의 단편소설을 세 가지 주체로 나눠 살펴보았다. 기호와 이데올로기에 속박되어 체념하는 작중인물들의 주체, 즉 ‘속박의 주체’(「그레이 구락부 전말기」 「라울전」 「수(囚)」), 사회와의 연계를 자신의 실존과 결부하여 갈등하는 주체, 즉 ‘갈등의 주체’(「웃음소리」 「우상의 집」 「구월의 다알리아」), 그러한 갈등을 처절하게 겪어내고 해방되어 진정한 자유인이 되는 주체, 즉 ‘자유의 주체’(「바다의 편지」)로 분류하고, 「그레이 구락부 전말기」로부터 「바다의 편지」에 이르는 주체성의 변이 과정을 통해 최인훈 단편의 주체가 사회 상황에 어떻게 대체하고 극복해 나가는지 살펴보았다. 그 결과, 다음과 같은 세 가지 중심 내용을 얻을 수 있었다. 의 ‘속박의 주체’는 상상계로 회귀하려는 욕망에 갇혀 있는 주체이며, 최인훈이 말한 ‘DNA(닫힌 안정)’ 층위에 속하는 주체이다. 의 ‘갈등의 주체’는 상징계 진입에 고뇌하는 주체로서, DNA'(열린 불안정) 층위에 위치하는 주체이며, 의 ‘자유의 주체’는 기호 세계를 벗어난 주체, DNA∞(열린 안정) 층위의 주체이다. 다시 말하여, 최인훈 단편소설의 주체성은 ‘속박’에서 ‘갈등’을 거쳐 ‘자유’의 주체로, ‘닫힌 안정’에서 ‘열린 불안정’을 거쳐 ‘열린 안정’으로 변화하는 양상을 보이는 것이다. 그리고 이러한 주체성의 변화 양상은 그의 장편소설들에 원형적 인자로 기능하고 있다.

중국어의 비(非)화제 주어 (2)

오유정 중국어문논역학회 2018 中國語文論譯叢刊 Vol.0 No.42

Many Chinese linguists agree to various degrees that Chinese is a topic-prominent language, as is proposed by Li & Thompson (1976). It is presupposed in Li and Thompson’s theory that subject and topic are not identical. Many grammarians, however, still hold the viewpoint initially claimed by Yuen-Ren Chao and Charles Hockett that all subjects in Chinese clauses are topics pragmatically. Since in Chinese there is no overt morphosyntactic marking specified on subjects and the subjects do often function as pragmatic topics, it is rather difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish the two overlapping notions. This paper aims to set a cluster of criteria under which one can specify situations where subjects are definitely not topics. The criteria are based on syntax, information structure, prosody and cross-linguistic comparison. By the application of these criteria to Mandarin Chinese, the paper identifies seven situations in which subjects are not topics, i.e.1) subject is a contrastive focus; 2) subject is an information focus; 3) the whole sentence is in focus; 4) subject is indefinite; 5) subject is bound by a focus-sensitive operator; 6) subject is determined by a minimal quantifier, and, 7) subject is new information. In many cases, non-topic subject occurs in a thetic judgement rather than a categorical judgement. Finally, the paper revisits the issue concerning relationships between subject and topic in general. The author agrees with M. Shibatani that cross-linguistically the prototypical subject is the agent semantically. Languages vary in how far a subject can deviate from the role of agent. In many languages, some non-agent elements with topicality are not allowed to serve as subjects while any agent element, even being in focus, can freely occur as subject. In topic-prominent languages like Chinese, subjects bear topicality more often than in other languages; yet, subjects without topicality, i.e.non-topic subjects are still allowed in a considerable number of cases, as is shown in this paper. Li & Thompson(1976)에 따라 많은 학자들이 중국어를 화제 부각형 언어로 분류한다. 하지만 일부 학자들은 여전히 중국어의 주어를 화용적 화제로 이해하고, 심지어 중국어에는 통사적 주어는 없고, 오직 화용적 화제만 존재한다고 주장한다. 본고는 통사, 정보구조, 운율적 특징 및 범언어적 비교를 통해 최소한 1) 주어가 대조초점인 경우 2) 주어가 정보초점인 경우 3) 주어가 문장 초점문에 사용된 경우 4) 주어가 초점 운용자의 결속을 받는 경우 5) 비한정 주어문일 경우 6) 신정보 주어문일 경우 7) 최소 양화 주어문일 경우에는 주절의 주어가 화제가 아니며, 특히 종속절에서는 그러한 경우가 더욱 많음을 주장한다. 중국어의 주어와 화제는 많은 공통점을 가지지만 엄연히 독립적인 통사 성분인 것이다. 나아가 범언어적 관점에서 주어와 화제의 관계를 살피고, 이를 통해 주어의 원형은 행위자라는 관점을 지지한다. 주어는 행위자 원형을 중심으로 다양한 의미역으로 확대될 수 있으나, 그 원근 거리는 언어마다 차이를 보일 수 있다. 화제 부각형 언어의 주어는 다른 유형의 주어보다 화제적 특성이 뚜렷하지만, 그렇다고 비화제적 행위자 성분이 주어가 될 수 없는 것은 아니다.

한영 법령 번역에서 이중주어 구문 번역 양상

이지은,최효은 한국외국어대학교 통번역연구소 2020 통번역학연구 Vol.24 No.3

Dual-subject construction―which is found in the language of Korean law―is one of the unique features of the topic-prominent Korean language. The first subject in a dual-subject sentence in Korean source texts is often the sentence topic. This paper presents an examination of dual-subject sentences in the Criminal Act, Administrative Procedure Act, Foreign Investment Promotion Act and Civil Act and considers how the two subjects, N1 and N2, were translated into English. First, we identified 41 dual-subject phrases from 38 sentences in the four Korean statutes and analyzed them according to Yang (1989). Second, we examined how the dual subjects were translated into English based on Chae’s (2010) categorization of translation types of dual subjects. Our analysis indicated that in English translations, either N1 or N2 of the source text served as the subject. When N1 of the Korean source text was translated into a subject in English, N2 of the source text played various roles either as an object, complement, component of a verbal phrase or a prepositional phrase. N2 also worked as an adjective phrase, serving to describe N1, the subject. Conversely, when N2 became a subject in the English translations, N1 tended to be omitted in the translated dual-subject clauses. In this study, we identified seven types of English translations of dual-subject sentences of Korean statutes, including two types that were not found in Chae’s (2010) work. The findings suggest that given the different and diverse roles of N1 and N2, despite their seemingly subject-like features, translators need to determine the semantic relationship of N1 and N2 when translating dual-subject statutes into English.

조사 ‘이/가’와 ‘은/는’의 기본 전제와 기능 분석

김미형(Kim, Mihyoung) 담화·인지언어학회 2011 담화와 인지 Vol.18 No.3

In this paper, the characteristics of differences between the postpositional particles used in place of a subject, i/ka and eun/neun, are discussed. Although i/ka has been traditionally categorized as a subjective postposition, there have been many researches about the identity of this postpositional particle, since subjective case is expressed without such particle, and eun/neun is also sometimes used. Eun/neun is known to represent a topic or the contrast when used in the place of subject. However, many preceding researches could not clearly explain the function of the two postpositions. In this research, the fact that each of the two postpositions possess different premise is explained. i/ka, in which a predicate is fixed in speaker’s cognition, selects a sister of a subject. On the other hand, eun/neun, in which a subject is fixed in speaker’s cognition, selects s sister of a predicate. Such basic premise is a main factor that enables i/ka to function as a subjective postposition and eun/neun to express the topic. In addition, because of such premise, i/ka intentionally means ‘selective designation’, and eun/neun contrast conditional on the flow of sentence. In the case of subjective clause, i/ka is used when a predicate is fixed, and eun/neun is used when a subject is fixed. Hence, when a postposition i/ka is used in the place of subject, the status of a given subject depends on a predicate. For eun/neun, the status of a given predicate depends on a subject.

학교 중심의 교과 생성 연구에 관한 논의

김세영 ( Se-young Kim ) 한국교육과정학회 2019 교육과정연구 Vol.37 No.3

본 연구는 학교를 교과 생성의 장으로 보고 이 맥락에서 학교가 교과 생성 연구의 중심이 될 수 있는지 그 가능성을 탐색해보았다. 즉, 초등학교 교육과정을 구성하는 요소가 교과이고, 학교를 교과교육의 장이라고 보면, 학교는 교과의 생성 여부에 영향을 미치는 하나의 원천이 될 수 있다는 주장을 하였다. 연구 결과, 학교를 교과 적용·실천의 장일뿐만 아니라, 교과 생성의 장으로 인식할 수 있음을 확인하였다. 이를 위해서 두 가지 접근을 하였는데, 첫째, subject 개념을 어원 분석하여 subject를 둘러싼 주권자와 복종자가 끊임없이 전복한다는 특성을 도출하였다. 이는 곧 subject의 생성권이 있는 주권자로서의 국가와 subject를 수용하는 복종자로서의 학교가 서로 전복될 수 있다는 의미 확장이 가능하며, 따라서 학교가 subject의 주권자로서 역할을 할 수 있다는 점을 시사한다. 둘째, subject의 주권자로서 학교 중심의 교과 생성 연구란 구체적으로 어떤 모습인지를 알아보기 위해서 학교 수준의 교과 생성 연구로 볼 만한 사례를 제시함으로써 그 가능성을 예시하였다. This study explores the possibility of forming the subject matter in schools. It is based on the assumption that schools play a central role in creating and organizing the subject matter. This requires a change of perception; traditionally, schools have been viewed as places to apply or practice subjects, not to create them. In this paper, the term subject is analyzed etymologically to broaden the definition of the term. This etymological study indicates that the sovereign (subjectum) and submissive persons (subjectus) constantly change positions regarding the subject. Extended to a nation and to schools, this implies that schools can play a role as sovereigns (subjectum) in the subject. This leads to a new field of research: the study of subject matter at schools. This study practically demonstrates the potential of this field by presenting a case study on the study of subject matter in schools.

Subject Raising vs. Non-Subject Raising

Lee DooWon 한국중앙영어영문학회 2009 영어영문학연구 Vol.51 No.2

As far as the complement episodic predicate is concerned, there is a preference for the complement unaccusative predicate to be more salient than the unergative and transitive predicate, when the genuine subject undergoes RTO: that is, only the unaccusative and habitual unergative or transitive predicates are allowed in the embedded clause of the typical RTO construction. However such a restriction on genuine subject raising disappears in the case of non-subject raising. At this point, what is crucial is that the element in question, whether it is a genuine subject or non-subject, undergoes raising to the non-theta position of the upstairs clause, when RTO takes place. It has been newly shown that the complement indirect and direct objects can undergo RTO more freely than the complement genuine subjects. We have concluded that the peculiarities of non-subject raising are as follows. First, like the genuine subjects, the non-subjects such as initial DP on the possession-type MNC, adverbials, and indirect and direct objects can undergo raising from the complement sentence-medial position to the upstairs clause. Second, there doesn’t always arise Case alternation from nominative to accusative, when a non-subject undergoes RTO. Third, unlike the genuine subject raising, the non-subject raising is allowed even in the episodic predicate of the complement, when RTO takes place.

Subject Raising vs. Non-Subject Raising

이두원 한국중앙영어영문학회 2009 영어영문학연구 Vol.51 No.2

As far as the complement episodic predicate is concerned, there is a preference for the complement unaccusative predicate to be more salient than the unergative and transitive predicate, when the genuine subject undergoes RTO: that is, only the unaccusative and habitual unergative or transitive predicates are allowed in the embedded clause of the typical RTO construction. However such a restriction on genuine subject raising disappears in the case of non-subject raising. At this point, what is crucial is that the element in question, whether it is a genuine subject or non-subject, undergoes raising to the non-theta position of the upstairs clause, when RTO takes place. It has been newly shown that the complement indirect and direct objects can undergo RTO more freely than the complement genuine subjects. We have concluded that the peculiarities of non-subject raising are as follows. First, like the genuine subjects, the non-subjects such as initial DP on the possession-type MNC, adverbials, and indirect and direct objects can undergo raising from the complement sentence-medial position to the upstairs clause. Second, there doesn’t always arise Case alternation from nominative to accusative, when a non-subject undergoes RTO. Third, unlike the genuine subject raising, the non-subject raising is allowed even in the episodic predicate of the complement, when RTO takes place.

主谓谓语句的偏误与教学策略

Lu, Zhijie 부산대학교 중국연구소 2018 Journal of China Studies Vol.21 No.1

Subject-predicate predicate structure is Chinese special sentence patterns, due to using defferent criteria, for the classification and scope of the subject-predicate predicate structure scholars have different opinions, according to the standard of the difference between topic and subject, we can verify the subject-predicate predicate structure’s subject and the topic of the sentence is partially overlap, and futher discuss that sentence which after refers to the topic, most of subject-predicate predicate structure’s little subject not only by nominal composition as, but also can be act as verbal components. This paper discusses and analyzes the relationship between the subject and the topic of the whole sentence in the subject-predicate sentence of modern Chinese, the main point is that the components of the minor subject in subject-predicate sentence can be played by the nouns and the verbs, The minor subject in subject-predicate sentence of the verbal component which is limited and needs to satisfy the following three conditions: first of all, VP2 can not form a relationship of statement and be presented with NP. secondly, VP1 can't be omitted. thirdly, VP1 can not go into "in the aspects of" framework.For international students in the process of learning this structure appearing grammatical errors, semantic errors and pragmatic errors,The reasons for the analyses are interlingual transfer, intralingual transfer, learning context, communicative strategy and cultural transfer, and put forward the coping strategy, When teaching the grammatical knowledge of the subject predicate sentence, we should pay attention to the proper teaching method, different teaching strategies are formulated in view of the characteristics of different learners. In general, we use the method of looking for topics, adding speech pauses and modifiers to determine subject-predicate predicate sentence, in addition, we need to pay attention to the following three points, that is the topic function of the main subject of the subject-predicate predicate structure, explain the semantic relationship between subject and predicate of a sentence, the constrant conditions for the syntactic components of the subject and predicate. Context teaching, Cultivate language sense teaching, pay attention to culture teaching and appropriate contrast teaching can be combined with specific strategies, this paper analyzes the specific errors produced by different learners, teaching students in accordance with their aptitude, and using various teaching strategies properly, which will help us to improve teaching activities with Chinese as the second language more perfectly.

들뢰즈・가타리 철학에서 주체 개념의 의미

최진아 한국철학사상연구회 2019 시대와 철학 Vol.30 No.2

주체ʼ는 철학사적으로 가장 논쟁적인 개념 중 하나이다. 그것은 당연한 귀결이다. 왜냐하면 우리 삶을 바꾸는 문제에 대한 철학적 성찰과 실천은 언제나 주체 문제로 회귀할 수밖에 없기 때문이다. 주체에 대한 현대적논쟁은 탈-데카르트적 관점에서 마련될 수 있는 주체의 다양한 함의와 가능성의 지평을 제시해주었다. 그 중에서도 라캉은 주체를 무의식적 욕망의존재로 정의함으로써 정신분석학적 관점에서 주체를 새로이 복원시켰던 반면, 들뢰즈・가타리는 주체를 반-정신분석학적 입장에서 무한한 생산의차원으로 규정함으로써 전통적 주체를 넘어선 새로운 주체의 가능성을 보여주었다. 실제로 들뢰즈의 사상에서 주체 개념은 끊임없이 여러 다른 개념어로 대체되었다. 초기에 들뢰즈가 주체를 존재론적-인식론적 차원에서다루었다면, 이후 가타리와의 공동 작업을 통해서 주체에 대한 논의는 정치・사회적 변화를 실현시키는 혁명적 운동으로 확장된다. 특히 주체의 ʻ욕망하는 생산ʼ은 주체가 사회적 관계를 맺으면서 끊임없이 자신의 생산력을사회로 확장하는 자기-분열적인 주체성 생산이며, 이것은 곧 사회 전반에 욕망하는 미시-다양체의 다양한 흐름과 배치를 한다는 점에서 실천적이고혁명적이다. ʻSubjectʼ is one of the most controversial concepts in philosophical history. That is a natural conclusion. That's because philosophical reflection and practice on the matters of changing our lives always cannot help reverting to the Subject problem. The contemporary debate on the Subject has provided a horizon of the various implications and possibilities of the Subject being arranged from a post-Descartes perspective. Among them, while Lacan newly restored the Subject from a psychoanalysis perspective by defining it as the existence of unconscious desire, Deleuze and Guattari showed the possibility of a new subject beyond the traditional Subject by defining it as an infinite dimension of production from an anti-psychoanalytical stance. Actually, in Deleuze's thought, the concept of the Subject was constantly replaced by several different conceptual words. If, at an early stage, Deleuze addressed the Subject on the ontological-epistemological level, then through joint work with Guattari, the discussion of the Subject extends into a revolutionary movement to realize political and social change. In particular, the ʻDesiring Productionʼ of the Subject is a self-divergent subjectivity-production in which the Subject endlessly expands own productive forces into society as it forms social relationships. And it is practicable and revolutionary in that it is contrary to the diverse flow of micro-diversity that desires throughout society.