『清朝名家書牘』脫草原文및 校釋

강찬수,김희경 원광대학교 인문학연구소 2011 열린정신 인문학연구 Vol.12 No.2

『清朝名家书牍』, 爲搜集清朝文人曹江寄给朝鲜文人金善民、金善臣、金正喜、金命喜的7篇亲笔书翰而装订的一部擢帖, 现藏于韩国高丽大学汉籍室。该书是研究19世纪韩中两国文人交流情况的珍贵文献资料。本文经过『清朝名家书牍』原文的脱草及校释工作,初步考察了其内容和价值。 第一,通过『清朝名家书牍』的内容,不仅可以补充有关曹江的事迹及其交游状况,而且还可以弥补有关金善民、金善臣、金正喜、金命喜的燕行史料资料。 第二,通过此书翰资料的校释内容,可以看到清朝文人曹江和朝鲜文人金善民兄弟、金正喜父子兄弟之间的深厚的友谊和怀念之情。 第三,通过书翰和文具、书藉、金石、书画等各种物品交流所进行的状况,可以进一步考察到19世纪韩中两国文人之间的紧密和广泛的文化交流。

북경대 소장 ≪洪湛軒尺牘≫ 原文 및 校譯(Ⅰ)

강찬수 고려대학교 중국학연구소 2019 中國學論叢 Vol.0 No.65

HongDamHeon Cheokdok(≪洪湛軒尺牘≫), kept in the Rare Books Collection Division of Peking University library, is a collection of letters and poems sent by Hong Daeyong(洪大容), a scholar of the Chosun Dynasty, to three scholars of the Qing Dynasty, Yan Cheng(嚴誠), Lu Fei(陸飛) and Pan Tingjun(潘庭筠) between 1766 and 1767. The collection is in Luo Yizhi(羅以智)'s Ilha Jegeum Habjip(≪日下題襟合集≫). Through a meticulous translation of these letters collected in HongDamHeon Cheokdok, I found that there were several of his letters that were not in the Korean ancient literary books. My finding is original and different as it will be an important literature material for supplementing or correcting Hong Daeyong’s literary works in the future researches. As HongDamHeon Cheokdok has a lot of volumes, it is difficult to introduce them at once. I, therefore, present only his nine letters out of thirty letters in this paper. On the basis of this paper, I hope to facilitate further researches that can discover not only the missing contents of Hong Daeyong’s anthology, but several unknown stories of the Qing Dynasty’s three scholars.

圓光大 소장본 ≪都是幻≫에 대하여

강찬수 원광대학교 인문학연구소 2022 열린정신 인문학연구 Vol.23 No.2

≪都是幻≫은 迷津渡者가 지은 ≪梅魂幻≫6回와 ≪寫眞幻≫6回를 合本하여 총 12회로 간행한 명청 교체기의 話本小說로, 중국에 현전하는 판본조차도 겨우 2種 5部에 불과한 稀貴本이다. 필자는 원광대학교 중앙도서관에서 고서를 열람하는 과정에서 우연히 책 표지 위에 ‘都是幻’의 석 자가 적힌 零本 1部를 발견하였는데, 그 안을 살펴보니 비교적 양호한 상태로 ≪梅魂幻≫6回가 수록되어 있었다. 원광대 소장본은 비록 零本이기는 하지만 그동안 전혀 알 수 없었던 작자 迷津渡者의 주요 활동 시기를 추정할 수 있는 頭註, 異本에 미수록된 <評>과 <總評> 등 기존 통행본에서 찾아볼 수 없던 부분이 온전히 남아있을 뿐만 아니라 異本의 오류를 보완할 수 있는 내용이 다량 포함되어 있어 서지적으로 매우 높은 가치가 있는 것으로 평가되었다. 이에 원광대 소장본의 書誌 現狀, 수록 형식의 특징 및 주요 내용 등 이번 연구 과정에서 새롭게 조사된 서지정보를 추가로 학계에 제공하고자 한다. 이번 조사 결과는 국내 소장 古本 명청 소설서로서의 문물적 가치 외에도 중국통속소설의 국내 유입 양상을 모색하는 데도 참고할만한 기초 자료의 一例가 될 것이다.

신가폴(新嘉坡)서원 간행본, ≪보도시식지론(普度施食之論)≫

강찬수 고려대학교 중국학연구소 2013 中國學論叢 Vol.41 No.-

韓國奎藏閣所藏≪普度施食之論≫是英國傳敎士麥都思在新嘉坡書院刊行的一部西學書,也是助於我們了解當時新嘉坡地區雕版印刷情況的國內唯一的文獻資料.本稿以奎藏閣所藏≪普度施食之論≫爲硏究對象, 從文獻學的角度探討了麥都思的出版傳敎生涯和雕版印刷的見解, 同時分析該書的文獻特徵, 印出時期, 主要論述內容, 以及文獻價値, 幷對此問題初步作了梳理.該版本的內封左下方標記著“新嘉坡書院藏板”, 幷且曾與麥都思爲同僚的英國偉烈亞力在≪Memorials of Protestant Missionaries to the Chinese≫中提及該書分別於1828年,1833年, 1834年以單行本的形式印刷於巴達維亞, 1834年之後在新嘉坡地區又加印一次.由此可以推定, 該版本大約在1834年之後刊行於新嘉坡地區.本書共3779個字傳敎文, 是以27個問答形式而成的. 其中主要記述了他把西洋基督敎的耶소≪聖經≫與中國的孔子≪論語≫對比說敎, 試圖淸除當地人對於基督敎的排斥感和華夷觀. 同時我們從中可以發現早期的西學書的敍述特徵均以反對佛敎文化爲主要內容.總之, 該書除了留存著反映西學和中國雕版印刷技術結合、 西學東漸的文化交流情況及其相應細節的珍貴文史資料, 還爲我們提供硏究19世紀新嘉坡雕版印刷術的重要文獻之一.韓國奎藏閣所藏≪普度施食之論≫是英國傳敎士麥都思在新嘉坡書院刊行的一部西學書,也是助於我們了解當時新嘉坡地區雕版印刷情況的國內唯一的文獻資料.本稿以奎藏閣所藏≪普度施食之論≫爲硏究對象, 從文獻學的角度探討了麥都思的出版傳敎生涯和雕版印刷的見解, 同時分析該書的文獻特徵, 印出時期, 主要論述內容, 以及文獻價値, 幷對此問題初步作了梳理.該版本的內封左下方標記著“新嘉坡書院藏板”, 幷且曾與麥都思爲同僚的英國偉烈亞力在≪Memorials of Protestant Missionaries to the Chinese≫中提及該書分別於1828年,1833年, 1834年以單行本的形式印刷於巴達維亞, 1834年之後在新嘉坡地區又加印一次.由此可以推定, 該版本大約在1834年之後刊行於新嘉坡地區.本書共3779個字的傳敎文, 是以27個問答形式而成的. 其中主要記述了他把西洋基督敎的耶소≪聖經≫與中國的孔子≪論語≫對比說敎, 試圖淸除當地人對於基督敎的排斥感和華夷觀. 同時我們從中可以發現早期的西學書的敍述特徵均以反對佛敎文化爲主要內容.總之, 該書除了留存著反映西學和中國雕版印刷技術結合、 西學東漸的文化交流情況及其相應細節的珍貴文史資料, 還爲我們提供硏究19世紀新嘉坡雕版印刷術的重要文獻之一.

북경대 소장 ≪洪湛軒尺牘≫ 原文 및 校譯(Ⅱ)

강찬수 고려대학교 중국학연구소 2019 中國學論叢 Vol.0 No.66

This is the second paper in a series of research courses that examine HongDamHeon Cheokdok(≪洪湛軒尺牘≫), kept in the Rare Books Collection Division of Peking University library, comparing 13 letters--from the tenth to the 22nd letter--with the domestic literary collection and translating it back into Korean. Most of these letters were written in February 1766 when the Chosun’s envoy, Hong Dae-yong(洪大容), stayed in Beijing, and only the 22nd letter was written by Hong Dae-yong in late July of the same year to ask his regards to a scholar of the Qing Dynasty, Yan Cheng(嚴誠), after he returned to Chosun. Through a comparative study of these letters and Hong Dae-yong’s DamHeonSeo (≪湛軒書≫), a collection of documents published in the Chosun Dynasty, I investigate and reveal the differences between the two books, as well as an unknown story not written in DamHeonSeo (≪湛軒書≫), such as the postscript at the end of the 10th and 13th letters. In addition, the 11th letter includes NonSeongSeo (≪論性書≫) written by Chosun’s Kim Won-haeng(金元行) and annotations written by a scholar of Qing Dynasty. On the basis of these contents, I examine the traces of high-level academic exchanges and discussions made between scholars of both Dynasties.

풍요로운 지구를 위한 생명의 세계

강찬수,Gang, Chan-Su 대한출판문화협회 1995 출판저널 Vol.181 No.-

기후변화 보도에 인색한 한국 언론

강찬수 관훈클럽 2019 관훈저널 Vol.- No.153

환경보도에 대한 제언

姜讚秀 관훈클럽 1995 관훈저널 Vol.- No.60

≪中朝學士書翰≫脫草 원문 및 校釋

강찬수 중국어문연구회 2009 中國語文論叢 Vol.0 No.41

高麗大學校漢籍室所藏本≪中朝學士書翰≫是,蒐集淸代乾隆年間浙江杭州貢生嚴誠、潘庭筠、陸飛其3人寄給朝鮮金在行的17篇親筆詩文和朝鮮文人羅烈所寫的追記而裝定的一部摺帖,同时≪中朝學士書翰≫也是研究18世紀韓中兩國文人交流情況的珍貴文獻資料。 經過初步釋讀工作、原文翻譯,以及與相關文獻的對比,筆者從這18篇的文獻中發現了12篇的逸詩、逸文。我們通过現存燕行錄所未見的内容,不仅可以重新研讨有關金在行和洪大容的若干事迹,而且还可以補足嚴誠、潘庭筠、陸飛其3人文集中所缺漏的内容,進而研讨18世紀韓、中文人之間所談論的思想以及文獻的實際交流情況與意義。

高麗大學校所藏燕行文獻≪華簡≫淺考

강찬수 중국어문연구회 2018 中國語文論叢 Vol.0 No.85

Hwagan(華簡) is a collection of original documents compiled with three parts--the calligraphy, the letter and the conversations by writing. The first part is the two calligraphies of Haineizhiji(海内知己) and Sihaibilin(四海比邻) that a Qing Dynasty’s scholar presents to Choson Dynasty’s envoy, Pak Hongyang(朴弘陽). The second part is the thirty-five letters that five Qing Dynasty’s scholars--Guan Yi'e(管貽萼), Cheng Gongshou(程恭壽), Wang Zhongxi(汪重熙), Wen Zhongyan(溫忠彥), Wen Zhongshan(溫忠善), and Sun Qi(孫楫) sent to Pak Hongyang(朴弘陽) from Xianfeng five years (1855) to Xianfeng nine years (1859). The third part is the conversations by writing between Pak Hongyang and several Qing Dynasty’s scholars on January, Xianfeng five years (1855). In my previous studies, I had already introduced the original text and translation texts through a decoding of the all of Hwagan. During this process, my studies discovered that there have been profound friendship and frank communication among the scholars of two countries. They also found that there were thirty poems that were written in an extraordinary style. In addition, they also obtained some information about the birth and death year of Qing Dynasty’s scholars, noms de plume, their office positions and other research materials. As there is no other historical materials on this envoy in Xianfeng five years (1855), I believe that Hwagan is a historical record of academic value. However, as time goes by, their friendly intercourse and communications were gradually disappeared in the corner of history. Besides, their letters were inherited for a hundred and fifty years, and they have long been moulded and worm-eaten. Finally, I hope that my present paper would supplement the existing literatures and historical relics of the mid-19th century’s envoy, which can draw Korean and Chinese scholars’ particular attention for their academic value and make further research.