RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    일본나이프형석기의비판적검토 -연구사와용어를중심으로- = A Critical Study of Japanese Knife-shaped Tools

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A104687781

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    It is thought that the use of ‘knife-shaped’ tools (Naihukata sekki) began in the Upper Paleolithic period of Japan. Several attempts have been made to critically study these knife-shaped tools in Japan. However, an in-depth consideration of the problem of these knife-shaped tools has yet be carried out.
    The terminology of the knife-shaped tool first appeared in the Kamiyama field-research report. It also appeared in the book titled “An Outline of World Archaeology” which was published in 1959. Since then, the term ‘knife-shaped’tool has become universally used.
    These tools can be used as both a knife and a point. In spite of their similarly retouched ways, they appear to have had complex functions. A matter of some confusion has been the way that knife-shaped tools are classified as being ‘knife-shaped’ rather than simply as a ‘knife’. The knife-shaped tools consist of various different types which are regional and local. Therefore,although they have been used as an all-round adaptation for tool typology in Japan, the knife-shaped tool cannot be regarded as a category encompassing all sorts of tool types.
    The majority of Japanese researchers believe that knife-shaped tools are found and excavated only in Japan. If we are to better understand the Upper Paleolithic of Japan, the current chronological scheme which uses a tripartite division based on knife-shaped tools, bifacial points and microlithics must be reconsidered.
    However, the definition of the ‘point’ needs to be reconsidered, as its definition and the way this definition is used has been misinterpreted within the Japanese academic circle. If we were to compare the knife-shaped tool culture to the Upper Paleolithic culture, it would become clear that no difference exists between them.
    번역하기

    It is thought that the use of ‘knife-shaped’ tools (Naihukata sekki) began in the Upper Paleolithic period of Japan. Several attempts have been made to critically study these knife-shaped tools in Japan. However, an in-depth consideration of the p...

    It is thought that the use of ‘knife-shaped’ tools (Naihukata sekki) began in the Upper Paleolithic period of Japan. Several attempts have been made to critically study these knife-shaped tools in Japan. However, an in-depth consideration of the problem of these knife-shaped tools has yet be carried out.
    The terminology of the knife-shaped tool first appeared in the Kamiyama field-research report. It also appeared in the book titled “An Outline of World Archaeology” which was published in 1959. Since then, the term ‘knife-shaped’tool has become universally used.
    These tools can be used as both a knife and a point. In spite of their similarly retouched ways, they appear to have had complex functions. A matter of some confusion has been the way that knife-shaped tools are classified as being ‘knife-shaped’ rather than simply as a ‘knife’. The knife-shaped tools consist of various different types which are regional and local. Therefore,although they have been used as an all-round adaptation for tool typology in Japan, the knife-shaped tool cannot be regarded as a category encompassing all sorts of tool types.
    The majority of Japanese researchers believe that knife-shaped tools are found and excavated only in Japan. If we are to better understand the Upper Paleolithic of Japan, the current chronological scheme which uses a tripartite division based on knife-shaped tools, bifacial points and microlithics must be reconsidered.
    However, the definition of the ‘point’ needs to be reconsidered, as its definition and the way this definition is used has been misinterpreted within the Japanese academic circle. If we were to compare the knife-shaped tool culture to the Upper Paleolithic culture, it would become clear that no difference exists between them.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 이기길, "한국 서남부와 일본 큐슈의 후기구석기문화 비교 연구" 호남고고학회 25 : 5-43, 2007

    2 이기길, "임실하가유적의 발굴과 성과" 137-153, 2008

    3 이융조, "수양개유적의 슴베 연모에 대한 새로운 연구" (6) : 13-24, 2002

    4 張龍俊, "韓國 後期舊石器의 製作技法과 編年硏究-石刃과 細石刃遺物相을 中心으로-" 부산대학교 대학원 2006

    5 佐藤達夫, "長野県南佐久群野邊山B5地点の石器" 信濃史學會 22 (22): 1-6, 1970

    6 戶澤充則, "長野県八島遺跡における石器群の硏究" 8 : 66-97, 1958

    7 白石浩之, "茂呂系ナイフ形石器を主體とした石器群の變遷" 考古學硏究會 23 (23): 9-23, 1976

    8 安斉正人, "舊石器社會の構造變動" 同成社 2000

    9 稻田孝司, "舊石器時代槪說"

    10 M.C.バーキット, "舊石器時代" 同朋舍 1973

    1 이기길, "한국 서남부와 일본 큐슈의 후기구석기문화 비교 연구" 호남고고학회 25 : 5-43, 2007

    2 이기길, "임실하가유적의 발굴과 성과" 137-153, 2008

    3 이융조, "수양개유적의 슴베 연모에 대한 새로운 연구" (6) : 13-24, 2002

    4 張龍俊, "韓國 後期舊石器의 製作技法과 編年硏究-石刃과 細石刃遺物相을 中心으로-" 부산대학교 대학원 2006

    5 佐藤達夫, "長野県南佐久群野邊山B5地点の石器" 信濃史學會 22 (22): 1-6, 1970

    6 戶澤充則, "長野県八島遺跡における石器群の硏究" 8 : 66-97, 1958

    7 白石浩之, "茂呂系ナイフ形石器を主體とした石器群の變遷" 考古學硏究會 23 (23): 9-23, 1976

    8 安斉正人, "舊石器社會の構造變動" 同成社 2000

    9 稻田孝司, "舊石器時代槪說"

    10 M.C.バーキット, "舊石器時代" 同朋舍 1973

    11 戶田正勝, "舊石器" ニュー․サイエンス社 10-12, 1999

    12 安蒜正雄, "縱長のナイフ形石器の製作" (4) : 43-46, 1983

    13 芹澤長介, "神山"

    14 芹澤長介, "石器時代の日本"

    15 織笠昭, "石器文化の硏究" 新泉社 2005

    16 安蒜政雄, "石器の形態と機能. In: 日本考古學を学ぶ(2)" 有斐閣 1979

    17 松藤和人, "海を渡った舊石器“剝片尖頭器”" 花園大學史學會 8 : 1987

    18 韓昌均, "東北亞細亞舊石器硏究. In: 東北亞細亞舊石器硏究"

    19 加藤稔, "東北の無土器文化硏究のために-ナイフ形石器を中心に-" (17) : 2-4, 1961

    20 杉原莊介, "東京都板橋區茂呂における關東ローム層中發見の石器について"

    21 岡村道雄, "日本列島の石器時代" 靑木書店 29-33, 2000

    22 大山栢, "日本舊石文化存否硏究"

    23 岡村道雄, "日本舊石器時代史" 雄山閣出版 1990

    24 佐藤宏之, "日本舊石器文化の構造と進化" 栢書房 1993

    25 杉原莊介, "日本先土器時代の新編年に関する試案" 信濃史學會 19 (19): 1-4, 1967

    26 八幡一郞, "新石器文化とその先驅" 1 : 1-16, 1959

    27 崔福奎, "抱川 禾垈里 쉼터舊石器遺蹟, 江原考古學硏究所 遺蹟調査報告 第13冊"

    28 杉原莊介, "常總臺地における關東ローム層中の石器文化" (5) : 57-72, 1995

    29 高橋郁父, "山形県における東山型ナイフ形石器の研究" 2 (2): 25-39, 1978

    30 杉原莊介, "尖頭器文化. In: 日本の考古学Ⅰ-先土器時代-" 河出書房新社 57-72, 1965

    31 張龍俊, "密陽 古禮里遺蹟 몸돌(石核) 硏究" 부산대학교 대학원 2001

    32 金煥日, "大田 龍山洞 舊石器遺蹟 1次 發掘調査 槪報. In: 호서지역의 최근 발굴사례" 호서고고학회 5-22, 2004

    33 滝沢浩, "埼玉県市場坂遺跡" 2 : 39-56, 1964

    34 藤本強, "型式と分. In: 日本の舊石器文化" 雄山閣 1976

    35 小管將夫, "地域性の出現とナイフ形石器文化"

    36 佐藤宏之, "北方系削片係細石器石器群と定住化假設" (29) : 55-83, 1992

    37 芹澤長介, "北信․野尻湖底發見の無土器文化(豫報)" 39 (39): 26-33, 1953

    38 戶澤充則, "切出形石器をめぐる問題" 68 : 1-2, 1957

    39 鈴木美代子, "切出形石器の硏究" (3) : 1-18, 2007

    40 芹沢長介, "先繩文文化"

    41 鈴木忠司, "先土器時代の知識" 東京美術 1984

    42 芹澤長介, "先史時代Ⅰ" 日本評論新社 1957

    43 鎌田洋昭, "今峠型ナイフ形石器について" 人類史硏究會 11 : 135-156, 1999

    44 加藤眞二, "中國北部の旧石器文化" 同成社 1-286, 2000

    45 芹澤長介, "ローム層に潛む文化. In: 世界考古學體系 1" 平凡社 17-38, 1959

    46 小管將夫, "ナイフ石器の変遷" 石器文化硏究會 75-84, 1991

    47 安斉正人, "ナイフ形石器文化批判(後篇)" 6 : 119-135, 2008

    48 安斉正人, "ナイフ形石器文化批判(前篇)" 5 : 1-32, 2007

    49 鈴木次郞, "ナイフ形石器文化前半期の樣相"

    50 滝沢浩, "ナイフ形石器の機能" 下総考古學硏究會 1 : 39-56, 1964

    51 織笠 昭, "ナイフ形石器の型式論"

    52 小野 昭, "ナイフ形石器の地域性とその評價" 16 (16): 1969

    53 滝沢浩, "ナイフ形石器の一考察" (3) : 1962

    54 戶澤充則, "‘日本の眼’と‘外國の眼’" 72 : 1-2, 1958

    55 Jacques Bordaz, "Tools of the old and New Stone Age" David & Charles Newton Abbot 1970

    56 Kenneth P.Oakley, "Man the Tool-maker" The University of Chicago Press 1976

    57 Michel Brézillon, "La Dénomination des Objets de Pierre Taillée"

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2023 평가 계속평가 신청대상 (등재유지)
    2018-01-01 등재 우수등재학술지 선정 (계속평가)
    2015-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2011-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2009-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2007-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2004-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2003-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2001-07-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 1.49 1.49 1.24
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    1.32 1.4 2.51 0.36
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼