http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 송효섭 (검색결과 91 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
-
-
-
구조, 그 모자람과 넘침 - 프로프와 레비스트로스 설화학의 대립적 관점 -
송효섭 한국기호학회 2008 기호학연구 Vol.24 No.-
This paper aims to reveal two opposite views shown in Propp and Levi-Strauss on the structure of folktale. Firstly, Propp describes the features of folktale genre by extracting the common features from many versions of tales through morphological analysis. Meanwhile, Levi-Strauss describes the common logic of cultures through analysing mythological texts. In this case, myth genre is not static and absolute, but dynamic and relative. In Levi-Srauss, existing concepts of myth genre are not significant any more. Secondly, we can observe the differences of structurally articulated units suggested by two scholars. ‘Function’ in Propp always appears in tales statically and constantly. Meanwhile, ‘mytheme’ in Levi-Strauss appears in structure relatively and variably. Mytheme is created according to respective situations and the meaning of myth is described by means of various relations of mythemes. This process is situational and epistemological. Finally, two opposite views on the concept of structure have to be emphasized. Propp describes the morphology of folktale focusing on form and insists that, in order to deal with residual content, another different researches are needed. Meanwhile, Lévi-Strauss seeks to complete structural strategies liquidating any residues by insisting that structure is exactly content itself. From structural perspective, we can call Propp ‘under-structuralist’ who understands the structure of tales only as a form and Levi-Strauss ‘over-structuralist’ who understands it as a whole that contains everything in the world.
-
문학 연구의 문화론적 지평―새로운 실증적·실용적 인문학을 위하여
송효섭 현대문학이론학회 2006 現代文學理論硏究 Vol.0 No.27
A Cultural Perspective on Literary Theory In this paper, I will show why literary theory has to be implied with cultural perspective in this age. This subject is closely interweaved with contemporary philosophical attitude which wants to be free from existing metaphysical thought. Metaphysical thought has had a deep root in literary theory. It was prominent in literary theories that was influenced by humanism, psychologism and historicism. We can see a symptom of de-metaphysicalizing tendency in formalism that emphasizes the autonomy of literary form, and this tendency is realized more intensively in structuralism. Nowadays, structuralism is also criticized that it is not completely free from metaphysical thought. In this paper, I will suggest two alternative ways by which contemporary literary theory perform its de-metaphyicalizing project. One is deconstruction and the other is interpretive semiotics. In these strategies, the existing distinction between literature and culture is not valid any more. In this broad cultural perspective, by crossing over every existing metaphysical distinctions, we can create more practical and positivistic discourses.
-
송효섭 한국기호학회 2004 기호학연구 Vol.15 No.-
In this paper, I would like to answer the question how the dokkaebi is generated. In order to do it, I will adopt a position opposed to historical or psychological determinism. From a semiotic perspective, generation is a kind of semiotic event that can be described as semiosis, which happens in a certain interpretive context. I assume that the dokkaebi is a kind of sign, which means that dokkaebi is a semiosis in which the dynamic process of signification happens. In this paper, I will describe the semiosis of the dokkaebi according to the scheme that I propose. In order to achieve this aim, I assume three worlds that are related to semiosis, that is, the story world, the possible world and the real world, and classify several types of semiosis that happen among these worlds. Applying this scheme to the interpretation of dokkaebi stories, I will elucidate how dokkaebi signs come into being.
-
-
-
-
송효섭 한국구비문학회 2014 口碑文學硏究 Vol.0 No.38
This paper a ims to d escribe how the paradigm ' Orally S peaking(口述)/Literally Writing(記述)' is applied into actual discursive practice. As analternative paradigm of existing paradigm 'Orally Transmitted'(口碑)/LiterallyRecorded'(記錄)', 'Orally Speaking/ Literally Writing' shows performativecharacteristics of discourse. It does not only perform its instrumental role, butmore widely determines various psychological, social and historical conditionsof its message. By the way, since 'Orally speaking' and 'Literally Writing'always appear complexively in all discourses, we can not apply them intodiscourses separatively. As both 'Orally speaking' implies 'Literally writing' andvice versa', all discourses appear as a complex of these two opposite modes. In order to show how they do, we have to make clear what kind of poeticsis applied into these two modes respectively. Therefore, at first, I proposethe models of oral poetics and literary poetics respectively, and according tothem, I also create an integrative model of poetics by which oral texts thathave to be inevitably written are described. Lastly, I suggest the possibilityof expansion of this paradigm into broad cultural area by showing that it canbe applied into stylistics and rhetorics in general. 이 글은 ‘구술/기술’의 패러다임이 담화에서 실현되는 구체적 양상을 기술하는 것을 목표로 한다. ‘구술/기술’은 기존의 ‘구비/기록’에 대한 대안적 패러다임으로 여기에는 ‘말하고 쓰는’ 연행적 의미가 내포되어 있다. 이러한 패러다임은 단지 도구적인 데 그치지 않고, 메시지의 심리적, 사회적, 역사적인 조건들을 결정하는 데 중요한 역할을 한다. 그런데 이러한‘구술’과 ‘기술’은 담화에서 각기 독자적으로 실현될 수 없어 모든 담화에서 복합적으로 드러난다. 구술이 기술을, 기술이 구술을 내포함으로써, 모든 담화는 구술과 기술의 복합체로실현되는 것이다. 이러한 양상을 기술하기 위해서는 구술과 기술 각각에서 구현되는 시학이 무엇인지를 밝힐 필요가 있다. 이에 따라 이 글은 먼저 구술시학과 기술시학의 모델을제시하고, 이를 토대로 문자로 기술될 수밖에 없는 구술 텍스트를 시학적으로 기술하기 위한 통합적 방법론을 제안했다. 마지막으로 이러한 패러다임이 문체론과 수사학에 적용되는양상을 통해 그것이 갖는 문화적 확장 가능성을 제시하였다.
RISS연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
