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 : 박지흥 (검색결과 5 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
-
-
-
박지흥,신양섭 한국영화학회 2002 영화연구 Vol.- No.19
This essay tries to reconstruct the basic logical structure of semiology in the context of searching for an overarching paradigm of understanding films. Apart from the ongoing debates how far it can persuade to read a film 'objectively' in terms of the codes, as we retrospect to the history of film theory up to now, we then can find out the traces of logical continuity and abrupt discontinuity between the classical paradigms such as realism and formalism and the modem ones such as auteurism, semiology, genre theory and psychoanalysis. The modernity of semiology in comparison with classical film theories lies in the denial of an uncritical projection of non-cinematic ideas on cinema and the arising consciousness of cinema as an autonomous human and social culture. But the immanent logical problems of semiology lead to the increasing tendency of the methodic relativism for which modern genre theory and psychoanalysis are representative, This dramatic turnover in general comes from the total 'decline of modern subjectivity'. However, it would be an overevaluation of psychoanalytic film theory if one has come to the conclusion that the semiological debate had ultimately been overturned by the psychoanalytic one. The very subtile mechanism of modern film theory allows no such a reductive argumentation. For psychoanalytic film theory under the great influence of Lacan and post-structuralism has failed at last to prove the absolute irrational being of the human psyche. On the contrary, modern film theories are now faced with the universal relativism of paradigm of understanding films; moreover, classical film theories have begun to look overcoming the hard attack of psychoanalytic position. Semiology is as an overarching cinematic paradigm now obsolete, but remains as a methodological tool for analyzing cinematic text "modern" because it is very sensitive to the spatio-temporal boundedness of film culture. Here lies the modernity of semiology itself.
-
박지흥 釜山大學校 師範大學 1984 교사교육연구 Vol.9 No.1
The main structure of 「Hunminjeongeum」 and the minor that of 「The Explanations of Primary Consonants and Vowels and Secondary Consonants」 are abstracted as following. 1. 「Hunminjeongeum」 is made up of 「The Preface」 and 「The Explanations and Examples」 and 「Cheong In-Jee's Epilogue」. 2. The item of 「The Explanations. Examples」 is devided into 「The Explanations」 and 「The Examples」; 「The Explanations」 has the explanations of 「Primary Consonants」 and 「Vowels」, 「Secondary Consonants」 and 「the Arrangement of letters」. And 「The Examples」 has the only item,「the examples of Application letters」. 3. 「The explanations of Primary Consonants」 is made up of 「the Body」 and 「Geoul」; 「The Body」 has three parts of thematic and commentary, subsidary sentences. 「Geoul」, the main meaning of 「The Body」 has the subsidiary and thematic sentences. 4. 「The Explanations of Vowels」 is made up of 「The Body」 and 「Geoul」; 「The Body」 has two parts of thematic and subsidiary sentences. 「Geoul」, main meaning of the subsidary sentences in 「The Body」 has the subsidary sentences of 「The Body」. 5. 「The Explanations of secondary consonsnts」 is made up of 「The Body」 and 「Geoul」; 「The Body」 has the sentences of thematic and subsidiary. 「Geoul」, the main meaning of the subsdiary sentences in the body has the subsidiary sentences of 「The Body」 The above explanation is diagrammed as following. ◁표 삽입▷(원문을 참조하세요)
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
