근대초기 잡지에 수록된 고시조의 담론특성 연구

윤설희 ( Seolhee Youn ) 사단법인 아시아문화학술원 2021 인문사회 21 Vol.12 No.3

본 연구는 근대지식의 조직과 제도화에 목적을 둔 근대초기 잡지에 수록된 고시조의 담론 특성을 살피는데 목적이 있다. 이를 위해 최남선의 『소년』과 『청춘』에 수록된 고시조 작품을 중심으로 그 수록 양상의 특징과 담론 특성을 살펴보았다. 연구 결과 『소년』은 과거의 고시조를 당대의 새로운 매체인 잡지에 소환하는 한편, 민족의식의 고취를 가능케 하는 내용의 고시조 작품을 정기적으로 수록함으로써, 고시조를 민족적 지식의 일부로 구상하고 있음을 살필 수 있었다. 그리고 이후 『청춘』에서는 조직화된 과학적 지식으로서의 문학 개념을 정립하고 그 일부로 고시조를 자리매김 하는 작업이 다양한 차원에서 이루어졌음을 살필 수 있었다. 근대지식의 구성과 조직에 깊이 관여한 잡지를 통해 고시조를 소환, 재편한 최남선의 노력은 고시조가 조선의 문학으로 근대지식 담론 위에서 학술적으로 소통되는 데 크게 기여한 것이었다는 점에서 문학사적 의의가 있다. The purpose of this study is to observe characteristics of Gosijo discourse for those Gosijo published in early modern magazines, whose objective was to organize and institutionalization of modern knowledge. To do this characteristics of publication format and discourse has been observed focusing on Gosijo works published in Sonyeon and Cheongchun. As result, Sonyeon summons Gosijo in to a modern media called magazine, and by regularly publishing Gosijo which inspires national awareness, embodys Gosijo as part of National knowledge. In Cheongchun, thesis has been set on concept of literature as part of organized scientific knowledge- part of such work has been applied on Gosijo in various aspects. Efforts of Choinamseon to summon and reorganize Gosijo into magazine, which has deeply been involved in structuring and organization of modern knowledge, hold literatry historic importance on the point that his works provided Gosijo as Josun literature to be shared upon modern knwoledge discourse.

1910년대 조선-서양 근대 지식인의 고시조 담론

윤설희(Youn, Seol-Hee) 부산대학교 인문학연구소 2017 코기토 Vol.- No.81

The main objective of this report is to study the activities related to Si-jo by scholars of Choseon and the West during the 1910s. Through this enables searching the meanings of Si-jo being discussed based on Modern Scholastic discourse. Studies on such are done by focusing on a Christian missionary James Scarth Gales(1863∼1937) who were first to introduce Si-jo into Western network of literature studies, and on Choi Nam Seon, who brought the interest on Si-jo to Writers and field of Literature. Gale and Choi Nam Seon has been recognizing Si-jo at their own literature discourse, one a foreigner christian missionary and the other as Korean scholar. In accordance, their discussions on Si-jo may appear to be similar im general, but has many differences in details. 1910s were the turning point on recognition on Si-jo. From then Gale and Choi nam Seon had applied perspective where their study object Si-jo are represented as comparatively old to the up to date lierature then. Si-jo before 1910s were called “Go-Si-jo”, and its discourse has also changed from text sang in musical format into written literature. However while Gales’s recognition on Si-jo was based on its nature seeking both text and the musical phases, Choi Nam Seon saw Si-jo as part of poetry and seeked more meaning as a written lierature than musical phase. During the time both foreign and Korean(Choseon) scholars in general neglected literary value of S-ijo considering that the Chinese culrue and literature has had major affect to Si-jo. Gale and Choi Nam Seon saw different. Gale understood the Chinese letters found in Si-jo as literary vocabulary, as well as recognizing the similar characteristics of Si-jo with Chinese literature as distictive character of Si-jo its own. Majority of scholars of the time has seen Si-jo as imitated copy of Chinese poems - however, Choi Nam Seon claimed that Si-jo is most distict Choseon Literature with originality, matching all conditions and format to be seen as perfect Choseon Literture. Choi Nam Seon had negative perspectives on Chinese literature affecting on Si-jo in many ways, but did not make conclusions in this regards, his claim was focusing on Si-jo’s literary value as Choseon culture and written literature. This difference is due to the different basics of the two scholars knowledge and approach on literature. Gale had already been familiar with the modern concept of literature, so he could study Choseon literature and Si-jo as 3rd party under very objective perspective. Choi Nam Seon, on the other hand, had to apply the modern literature concept that wah relatively new to him at the time, as such concept was taken into Choseon from the west. In this regards Choi Nam Seon had to seek for Choseon Literature and its value as national literature, which is different from Gale’s perspectives. Si-jo was recognized by Gale as Choseon Literature, for Choi Nam Seon it was recognized as the national literature.

육당 최남선의 시조정리사업과 그 의미 -『가곡선』과 『시조유취』를 중심으로

윤설희 ( Seol Hee Youn ) 한국시가학회 2012 韓國 詩歌硏究 Vol.32 No.-

This report investigates the reproduction process of Sijo as literary discourse method and Yookdang(also named Choi Nam Seon)`s change in perception of Sijo upon publication of Gagokseon and Sijo Youchui, which were designed from Yookdang Choi Nam Seon`s cultural practice of his own literary discourse, like his other Sijo-rearrangement projects. In addition, the meaning of Yookdang`s Sijo-rearrangement project itself is also dealt as major purpose of this report. The process of Yookdang`s selection and reception of Sijo-text handed down from the previous period were product of cumulative literary discourse. He had made succession of variety aspects from shared and enjoyed culture of Gagok which are accumulated from the prior periods(18~19th Century), as well as taking these work pieces apart and re-arranging them with adding new values from his present time period. Through this disorganization and re-integration, he has published Gagokseon and Sijo-Youchui as a result of re-context process. Gagokseon was a project to set up a standardized model of national literature holding national identity of Chosun dynasty by founding the basis to develop national literature of Chosun through Gagok-Sijo as a song, within boundary of music, while Sijo-Youchui was a process of reorganizing Sijo as a linguistic text, into a Genre of national literature of Chosun. His projects and works from Gagokseon to Sijo-Youchui shows the constant change in Genre Sijo was facing during the early 20th century, where traditions and modern period was in the verge of change. Sijo, originally being a written Gachang text for acting and singing performance, had came to be more apart from its purpose, and led to searching for poetic discourse as a linguistic method, and at last got fixed poetic style as a literary text. These Efforts of Yookdang had done a conclusive and important role for Sijo as a literary genre to be set in its place within Korean literature. Such work has provided the basis for scholars after age to start theoretical studies of Sijo`s contents and format, which are left untouched. And from his works Sijo was detached from Gachang(Musical discourse), started having poetic format as literary text, thus developed basis of Sijo as literature, Sijo as poem.

19세기 말 在外 외국인의 한국시가론과 그 의미

이상현 ( Sang Hyun Lee ),윤설희 ( Seol Hee Youn ) 한양대학교 동아시아문화연구소 2014 동아시아 문화연구 Vol.56 No.-

이 연구의 목적은 재외에서 출판된 모리스 쿠랑(Maurice Courant, 1865~1935)과 오카쿠라 요시사부로(岡倉由三郞, 1868~1936) 그리고 러시아 대장성의 한국시가(詩歌) 관련 기록물을 분석, 검토하는 것에 있다. 특히, 19세기 말 외국인들의 한국 시가론이 근대지식으로 유통된 한 사례로 3편의 논저를 검토함으로, 19세기 말 한국의 시가가 문학이라는 근대적인 지식으로 정립되는 과정과 그 의미를 고찰하는 것에 있다. 나아가 그 구성과정 속에서 소거된 외국인이 한국이라는 낯선 이문화와 접촉했던 흔적은 무엇인지를 질문하는 것에 있다. 러시아 대장성의 『한국지』는 1900년까지의 서구인 한국학 논저를 집성한 저술이다. 한국에 관한 종합지라는 성격을 지니고 있던 단행본 저술 『한국지』에서 한국문학은 하나의 주제항목으로 구성되어 있었다. 이는 전시기 서양인 저술과는 다른 큰 변별점이었다. 『한국지』의 편자들이 ‘한국문학’ 주제항목을 구성하는 데 가장 많이 참조한 저술은 쿠랑의 『한국서지』 「서설」(1894)이었다. 그 이유는 쿠랑의 「서설」이 한국문헌의 전반적인 기술이었을 뿐 아니라, 이를 서구의 근대 학술 체계에 맞추어 질서화 해준 논의였기 때문이다. 또한 충실한 서지조사 및 실증작업을 통해, ‘한국에는 자국어로 된 고유성과 높은 문예성을 지닌 국민문학이 부재하다’는 당시 서양의 한국문학담론을 논증해주었기 때문이다. 그렇지만 쿠랑, 오카쿠라 요시사부로의 한국시가 관련 기록물에는 『한국지』가 미처 포괄하지 못한 두 사람의 현장적 체험이 존재했다. 그것은 서구적 근대문학개념에는 낯선 한국의 시가문학을 이야기하고자 했던 두 사람의 곤경이었다. 동시에 이는 서구적 근대문학개념에 의거해 한국의 국문시가가 본래의 음악적 향유 혹은 노랫말이 아닌 문학적 텍스트로 전환되는 순간이며, 한문시가와 분리되어 한국의 국민문학으로 재조명받는 지점이었다. 하지만 이러한 시가와 외국인의 접촉 그리고 그 번역의 현장은 『한국지』에 새겨지지 못했다. 쿠랑은 한국시가문학을 문학텍스트로 재규명하기 위해 국문 시가의 주제와 율격문제에 대한 문제를 논의하였다. 국문시가가 담아내고 있는 주제적 특성 및 중국 문학의 영향 관계를 지적하는 한편, 비록 규칙적인 운이나 자수 등 율격의 실상을 확인할 수는 없었지만, 시조를 문학적 텍스트로 인식하고 그 문학적 형식을 이야기 하고자 했던 것이다. 또한 쿠랑이 『한국서지』 「서설」을 작성할 때 참고문헌으로 제시한 오카쿠라 요시사부로의 논문은 19세기 방각본 가집 『남훈태평가』 소재 시조 작품을 번역한 최초의 사례였다. 이는 일본-서구 동양학 학술 네트워크에 한국 시가를 알린 최초의 시도였다. 그는 한국 시가에 사용된 언어-한국어, 한자어-표현에 관심을 가졌다. 그는 외국문학이자 번역의 대상으로서 한국 시가작품의 존재를 인식했으며 최대한 본래 시가작품의 모습을 번역·재현하고자 노력했다. 이러한 두 사람의 시도는 개신교 선교사의 시가론과 함께 『한국지』에 거의 수용되지 않았다. 일례로 유일하게 『한국지』에 수용된 헐버트의 시가론은 한국 시가의 연행 환경의 실제에 가까웠을 뿐 아니라, 번역 자체가 서구인에게 낯선 한국 시가 작품과의 교감을 모색하는 훌륭한 시도였음에도 불구하고, 쿠랑에 비해 많은 부분이 배제되었던 것이다. 이는 한국의 시가를 문학이라는 근대지식으로 소환하려 했던 『한국지』의 지향점을 잘 말해주는 것이었다. The purpose of study is to analyze and review the traces of Maurice Courant (1865~1935), Okakura Yoshisaburo (1868~1936), and Russian Finance Ministry in regards to Korean poetry. Through this, the report is to study the characteristics and meanings of Korean poetry discourse of Foreigners in late 19th century. In particular, reviewing the 3 studies as examples of Korean poetry discourse distributed by foreigners in late 19th century as modern knowledge, this report has focused to study over the process and significance of late 19th century Korean poetry being established as modern knowledge in a form of literature. Furthermore, this report is to examine the directions and practices of foreign scholars, which were lost within such establishment. Russian financial ministry`s ‘KOPEИ’ is a collection of Korean studies of foreigners untill year of 1900. ‘KOPEИ’, characterized as publication writing about Korea in general, has set a separate chapter on a specific subject, Korean Literature, which is the difference compared with other writings of westerners on Korea. The most used reference by editors of ‘KOPEИ’ on composing a whole chapter of ‘Korean Literature’ was Courant`s ‘Introduction(1894)’. This was because Courant`s ‘Introduction’ was not only a description on Korean Literature in general, but also was the first organized discussion about Korean literature under modern studying categories and system of western countries. Also, through enough bibliographic research and demonstration, the ‘Introduction’ has made objectivity against ready-existing Korean Literature discourse of Westerners which asserted that Korea does not have a native language-composed, highly literary and unique national literature.”However, the writings on Korean Literature of Courant and Okakura Yoshisaburo holds experiences which were not involved in ‘KOPEИ’:they are the difficulties Courant and Okakura had in discussing the Korean Poetry which was new and unfamiliar to western literature concepts. At the same time, these are the works that are the threshold of Korean poetry literature being converted from musical format like lyrics of songs into literary text; being separately reviewed from Chinese written poetry as a Korean national literature. On the other hand, ‘KOPEИ’ could not blend the foreign contact to Korean poetry and the translating process. Courant has discussed the subject and metrical issues of Korean poetry in order to redefine Korean poetry as a literary text: pointing out the influential relationship with Chinese literature and the characteristics of subject in poetry on one side, Courant had taken Korean poetry as literary text and discussed the literary format on the other side, let alone the frequency in rhyme, numbers of letters and meter in actual counts. Furthermore, Okakura Yoshisaburo`s report, which Courant has taken under consideration when writing the ‘Bibliographie Coreenne’, is to be highlighted for translating the works of Sijo in 19th century Bang-gak-bon Ga-jip ‘Nam-Hun-Tae-Pyeong- Ga’. This is because such was the first experiment of interpretation of Korean Literature coming from Japan-Western Oriental studies network. Also, Okakura was interested in Language-Korean and Chinese character-Expression which was used in Korean poetry. He had taken Korean poetry pieces as foreign literature piece and as a subject of translation, which led him to concentrate on translating and reviving the Korean poetry with its own characteristics untouched. These efforts of Courant and Okakura were, along with other poetry discourse of foreign missionaries, were not accepted or given credit by ‘KOPEИ’. For example, the only foreign poetry discourse published in ‘KOPEИ’, of Herbert, was far more disregarded compared to that of Courant`s ; however, Herbert`s poetry discourse was not only very close to actual mode in performance of the Korean poetry then, but were a highly valuable attempt interacting with Korean poetry pieces which were unfamiliar for westerners even translation itself. Such disregard shows direction of ‘KOPEИ’ focussed on reviewing Korean poetry analyzed under Modern Knowledge frame.

오카쿠라 요시사부로 한국문학론(1893)의 근대 학술사적 함의

이상현(Lee, Sang Hyun),김채현(Kim, Chae Hyun),윤설희(Youn, Seol Hee) 동아시아일본학회 2014 일본문화연구 Vol.0 No.50

The purpose of this study is to evaluate modern scholastic position of “Korean Literature(朝鮮の文學)” written by Okakura Yoshisaburo, published in the eighth edition of Tetsugakuzassi (哲學雜誌), chapters 74-75, issued in 1983. “Korean Literature(朝鮮の文學)” is a valuable reference on the outlook and written language of nineteenth-century Korean books, distribution of story books, and the book-lending culture in Korea. Okakura introduced Nam-Hun-Tae-Pyeong-Ga and studied the reading of Korean poetry. One of the key points of his work was musical characteristics and the influence of Chinese culture. The translated Korean poetry has a distinctive translated direction that first focused on phonetics of original pieces; second, pointed out relationships with Chinese culture and literature through categorizing the use of Chinese characters; and third, through focusing on the unique text layout of each piece, revealing the context. Although there are traces of Japanese viewpoints of devaluation on Korean nationality and its characters, Okakura’s translation of Nam-Hun-Tae-Pyeong-Ga, the first translation of Korean poetry and the first poetry discourse published, has its own significance, considering its publication was made when printing of the Korean language itself was not easy.