조선전기 유생상소와 조정공론 - 15세기 유생상소를 중심으로 -

김남이 한국한문고전학회 2022 漢文古典硏究 Vol.45 No.1

The people who had the authority and duty to discuss and implement the affairs of the state in the Joseon Dynasty were josa(朝士) as the “courtiers and remonstration officials in the royal court”, Confucian scholars were not players of politics, but subjects of politics, just like the people below the commoners' class. Making petition to the king was an official channel for Confucian scholars to speak about government affairs of the state in this situation. As pupils and future bureaucrats, Confucian scholars were such a being to influence the formation and passage of public opinion out of office, which also played a certain role in the general opinion of the royal court. However, there is not much available data that can confirm the trends, remarks, and thoughts of Confucian scholars. Among them, this present author paid attention to Confucian scholars’ petitions to the king in the 15th century, focusing on the data in the Annals of the Joseon Dynasty. Except for cases where personal wishes were expressed, they are broadly classified into eungji(應旨) ones and byeokbul(闢佛) ones. Responses from the king and royal court officials to Confucian scholars' eungji petitions to the king can be summarized in several ways. First, it derived the act itself of Confucian scholars' eungji petition to the king to be a large or small violation of the laws. Second, it started an ethical argument to brand them as less socialized or antisocial and unethical ones. Third, it clouded the essence of the problem raised by diverting the point to partial errors of fact. This includes responses such as taking issues with expressions in their petitions to the king or bringing irrelevant facts, and claiming that Confucian scholars do not know the government affairs of the state and the big picture. And in all these punitive responses, a basic dispute was activated over the qualification that Confucian scholars could not speak of the government affairs of the state because they were not the member of josa. The content and route of Confucian scholars' eungji petitions to the king were, first, the reality and suffering of the people outside the royal court, which the Confucian scholars learned through their own knowledge and experience. Other things were the ones learned in the course of their studying. It was the one focused on justifications and what one should do such as governing ideology and values from the perspective of Confucianism. Lastly, the things heard among teachers and fellow pupils include general opinion in the royal court as well as out of office, hearsay, rumors, words on the street, and distorted/wrong information, etc. In particular, what they heard from teachers and fellow pupils implied the possibility that many of the discussions were involved in Confucian scholars' petitions to the king. This had room to escalate into serious crimes of forming factions & side taking by factions, which 'the royal law did not forgive'. On the other hand, the speech of byeokbul was a united front of courtiers against the king's worship of Buddhism and the arbitrary exercise of the king's authority for this purpose. As the Confucian scholars' official opinion was invited to or joined the royal court's general opinion of byeokbul by itself, the royal court's official public opinion was able to establish a line as an official public opinion of the country. At this time, there were about three ways of logic for bureaucrats of the royal court to defend and support Confucian scholars. First, they regarded those Confucian scholars as crazy guys who do not know the big picture. They protected Confucian scholars saying that "we need to forgive them since they dared to make such reckless petitions to the king with no good knowledge". Second, they asked to forgive the Confucian scholars saying that "the scholars expressed their mind openly because they believed King Seongjong to be a noble and wise monarch while praising the king. Lastly, it... 조선시대 國事를 논의하고 실행할 수 있는 권한과 의무를 가진 사람은 朝士였다. 儒生은 정치의 주체가 아니고 良人 이하 백성들과 마찬가지로 정치의 대상이었다. 上疏는 이런 상황에서 유생이 국가의 公務大事에 대해 발언할 수 있는 공식적 통로였다. 학생이면서 예비관료인 유생은 在野여론의 형성과 통행에 영향을 끼치는 존재였고, 그것은 朝廷여론에도 일정하게 작용하는 것이었다. 그중에서 조선전기 유생언론은 주로 16세기 사림공론을 중심으로 언급되었고, 그중에서도 15세기 유생언론은 제한적이고 부수적인 것으로 다루어져 왔다. 그러나 16세기 士林의 시대가 15세기 初期士林의 생성과 결집으로 도래했다는 점은 보다 강조될 필요가 있다. 그리고 초기사림의 대오는 돌출된 몇명 ‘선각자・순교자적 존재’뿐만 아니라, 이들과 共鳴한 동시대 유생들의 에너지가 함께 작동하여 형성된 것이다. 필자는 15세기 유생상소가 바로 그와 같은 에너지의 생성・작동과 관련되어 있음에 주목하고 조선왕조실록에 수록된 15세기 유생상소를 고찰하였다. 15세기 유생상소는 應旨上疏와 闢佛上疏로 대별된다. 유생의 응지상소에 대한 왕과 기성권력의 반응은 긴장과 징벌이라는 말로 상징할 수 있다. 정리하자면 이 새로운 비평자들에 대한 반응은 첫째, 유생의 응지상소 행위 자체를 크고 작은 법률 위반으로 몰아가는 것이다 둘째, 윤리 시비를 일으켜, 유생들을 사회화가 덜 되었거나 반사회적이고 비윤리적 존재로 낙인찍는 것이다. 셋째, 상소에 있는 부분적인 사실 오류를 발굴, 논점을 전환하여 유생상소가 제기한 문제의 본질을 흐리는 것이다. 표현을 문제 삼거나, 관련 없는 사실을 가져오며, 유생이 國事와 大體, 왕실의 일을 모른다는 식의 대응이 여기에 포함된다. 한편 유생이 응지상소에서 다룬 내용의 기원과 경로는 첫째, 유생이 자기의 견문과 경험으로 알게 된 조정 밖의 백성의 현실과 고통이다. 둘째, 공부의 과정에서 배운 것으로, 정치의 마땅한 도리와 군신의 명분 같은 것들이다. 셋째, 師友 사이에서 들은 것으로 조정과 재야를 포함한 여론, 傳聞, 소문, 풍문, 왜곡/잘못된 정보 같은 것들이다. 특히 師友에게서 들었다는 내용은 집단의 생각과 의견이 유생상소에 연루되었을 가능성을 내포한다. 이는 ‘王法이 용서하지 않는’ 朋黨・朋比의 重罪로 확전될 여지를 가진 것이었다. 다음, 벽불언론은 왕의 불교 애호와 이를 위한 자의적 왕권 행사에 대한 신하들의 공동전선이었다. 유생언론은 이같은 조정의 벽불언론에 초대받거나 스스로 합세했고, 조정공론은 이런 유생언론을 포섭함으로써 一國公論으로서 대오를 갖추는 효과를 얻었다. 이런 기성세대의 반응은 포섭과 환대라고 표현할 수 있다. 이때에 조정관료들이 유생을 옹호하고 지지하는 논리는 대략 세 가지 정도이다. 첫째, 유생이 대체를 모르는 狂童이라는 것이다. 잘 알지 못해서 겁 없이 상소했으니 용서하라며 유생을 보호하는 논리이다. 둘째, 성종을 칭송하여 聖明한 군주임을 유생들이 믿었기 때문에 숨김없이 말했으니 용서하라는 논리이다. 마지막으로 유생들도 나라일에 대하여 말할 만한 자격이 있고, 그들이 주장하는 바가 틀리지 않았다는 논리이다. 이는 응지상소에서 유생언론에 대응하는 태도와 현격하게 다르다. 이런 환대 속에서 성종대 유생들은 스스로를 대간과 같은 ‘군주의 耳目’이라고 표명했다....

嶺南地域에서의 蘆沙學派와 寒洲學派의 成立과 學說交流

김봉곤 한국공자학회 2007 공자학 Vol.14 No.-

Nohsa(蘆沙) Scholars’ faction in Youngnam area was formed through Yeongnam Sarim(士林-gentlemen) increasingly keeping company with Nohron (老論-a political party). in the 19th century. Not only Jung Yeo Chang(鄭汝昌)’s family firmly tied with Kim In Hoo(金麟厚)’s family by marriage but also many scholars all around Jinju, Sancheong and Hapcheon including Jo Sung Ga(趙性家), Choi Sook Min(崔琡民), Jung Jae Gyoo(鄭載圭) and etc. Most of Nohsa Scholars’ families in Youngnam area tried to make scholarly achievement based on their economical success around the 19th century. They made strong connection with Nohron families in that area based on their scholarly power and extended their activity spaces by conducting various activities in that area where Jo Sik and Jung Yeo Chang were respected. Gi Jung Jin’s philosophy of Li-Yil-Li-Bun-Soo(理一理分殊) and idea of Wi-Jung-Cheok-Sa(衛正斥邪) deeply influenced Hanju Scholars’ Faction. For although Hanju(寒洲) Scholars’ Faction in 1870’s period was formed in Youngnam area by the scholars including Heo Yu(許愈), Gwak jong suk(郭鍾錫), Lee Jeong Mo(李正模) etc, facing to Lee Hwang(李愰) scholars’ attact to the theory of mind equal to reason(心卽理), Hanju Scholars’ Faction wanted to firmly establishing the theoretical faundation by suppoting Nohsa(蘆沙)’s theory. Therefore in the theory Hanju(寒洲) Scholars’ Faction was similar to Nohsa(蘆沙) Scholars’ faction and Heo Yu(許愈), Gwak jong suk(郭鍾錫) was deeply tied with Jung Jae Gyoo(鄭載圭) in the many sides including political, social, scientific activites. 본고는 19세기 후반 전반적으로 주리설이 확산되는 배경하에 영남지역에서 기호학파인 노사학파와 심즉리설을 주장한 한주학파가 어떻게 성립되었으며, 두 학파간에 어떠한 학술 교류를 진행하였는가를 검토한 것이다. 먼저 영남지역의 노사학파는 영남 사림들이 기호학통 계통의 인물들과 활발히 교유하면서 형성되었다. 기정진 대에는 함양의 정여창 가문과 장성의 김인후 가문이 혼반관계로 연결되어 있어서 함양의 사림들이 기정진을 자주 찾아오기 시작하였다. 이후 함양의 정여창 가문과 가까운 산청의 여흥민씨 가문을 비롯해서 진주의 趙性家, 崔琡民이 찾아오고, 합천에서 鄭載圭 등이 찾아오면서 노사학파가 형성되기 시작했다. 이들은 대체로 영남의 노론가문 출신으로, 왜란 때 창의하였거나 이괄의 난 등을 토벌하는데 공을 세웠으나, 상당기간 동안 영락한 집안의 후손들이었다. 이들은 당대나 부친 대에 재산 형성에 성공하고 학문을 통해서 영남지역에 다시 두각을 나타내고자 한 인물들이었다. 이들은 학문적인 역량을 바탕으로 이 지역 노론 가문과 연대를 강화해 나갔으며, 조식과 정여창을 숭앙하는 기풍이 강한 이곳에서 그들의 선양 활동을 다양하게 전개해 갔다. 그러한 결과 하동, 진주, 산청, 함양, 합천, 의령 일대에 노사학파가 활동할 수 있는 공간이 마련되어지고, 많은 문인들이 배출되었다. 한편 한주학파는 寒洲 李震相(1818-1886)이 1870년에 이르러서야 허유 등에게 비로소 적극적인 강학활동을 전개하면서 형성되었다. 그러나 영남 서부 지역은 오랫동안 퇴계학설의 영향이 깊은 곳으로 이진상의 심즉리설이 쉽게 받아들여지지 않았다. 이에 이진상은 자신의 심즉리설이 주자와 퇴계설의 근본 취지를 계승한 것으로 설명하였다. 또한 이진상이나 그의 문인들은 정재규와의 논쟁을 통해 호남의 저명한 성리학자였던 기정진으로부터 자신들의 학설을 입증받고자 하였다. 이에 따라 이진상의 호발설이나 명덕, 지각설 등이 기정진에 의해서 검토되었고, 이진상이나 허유, 곽종석 등은 기정진의 학설중에 사단칠정을 리발로, 명덕을 리로, 지각을 리의 작용으로 이해하게 되었다. 이에 따라 영남 지역 노사학파는 지각설이나 심설에 대해서 이진상의 학설과 밀착되게 되어 기정진의 학설이 더욱 주리적인 경향을 띠게 되었다. 이러한 영남지역 노사학파와 한주학파는 이진상 사후에도 지속적인 교류가 이루어져 노사학파의 조성가와 최숙민, 정재규, 그리고 한주학파의 허유, 곽종석간에 밀접한 교분이 있게 되었다. 특히 정재규는 허유와 함께 삼가지역의 학문을 이끌면서 함께 조식을 크게 선양하였으며, 곽종석과도 자주 성리학과 시국에 대해 토론하였다.

論淸代中朝文士筆談的主要特徵

陳俐,(Chen Li) 대동한문학회 2016 大東漢文學 Vol.46 No.-

Comparatively detailed written discussions among Chinese and Korean scholars that are remained are at least 647 essays, up to eight hundred thousand words. The major characteristics are shown as below: In the term of characters: Korean scholars who participated in writing discussions mainly consist of three Korean diplomatic envoys and the offspring of military officers. The characteristics of the Scholars in Qing Dynasty are: Firstly, with the difference of time period, the major identity characteristics of the figure who participating in writing discussions present distinctive changes. The pattern is as follows: The majority of scholars who participated in writing discussions in Qing Dynasty are intelligent in lower class before the middle of 18th century. Between the mid-18th century and the mid-19th century, the majority became scholars in the imperial court, metropolitan graduates and provincial graduates. During the middle and late 19th century, most of the scholars who participate in the written discussion are the assistants in the imperial court, government officials from six central departments and Tianjin Machinery Bureau. Secondly, most of the scholars who participate in the written discussion are Han people. The minority of them are Manchu, Mongolian people and Qing people. Lastly, the Qing people who had contacts with Korean scholars are several constant groups and individuals. Some of them are the bachelors in the imperial academy. Some are the former subordinates of Sangui Wu, such as Chaorui Guo, the father Huan Guo and his son, Shengqi Tian, Benyu Lin and etc. Some are the Qing scholars who are famous in the ancient Korean academy, such as Tingyun Pan, Yun Ji. Some of them are intended and dedicated in communicating with Koreans such as Peilian Qi. In terms of location: the major areas of the written discussions happened in the northern part. According to the division of province and district, mostly happened in Beijing, Fanyang, Shanhaiguan, Yongping fu, fenrun county and Yutian county. It can be seen from the detailed locations: commonly the places of discussions were the mansions of Qing scholars and Korean diplomatic envoys. Also, the main places were Beijing Liu Li Chang, which means “glazed tile factory.” and Imperial Academy. Few written discussion was recorded in the southern province in Qing Dynasty. In the term of content: the contents of written discussions among Chinese and Korean scholars are very multiple, also with some certain regularity: general contents are abundant and systematical. With the transferring of time, the contents of written discussions indicated a periodical characteristic, influenced by social development and whether Chinese scholars had profound communications with Korean scholars. The contents are closely related to the academic features of the scholars; the topics also have a close relationship with the hometown and ancestors of the Qing scholars. The content of the written discussion is usually authentic. In the term of format and language: the sentences are usually brief and concise. Generally speaking, the written discussions adapt to the question-answer pattern. Both questions and answers are very direct and condense, no more than 50 words and commonly only severs or around 10 words. But when it refers to political topics, Chinese and Korean scholars were afraid of literacy inquisition. Their Language is more twists and turns, and sometimes even very obscure.

정원을 통해 본 영남선비의 思惟樣式과 價値志向 -연못을 중심으로-

윤호진 ( Ho Jin Yun ) 경북대학교 영남문화연구원 2010 嶺南學 Vol.0 No.18

We looked through how scholars thought about their ponds, and what values they pursued. Gardens were only parts of their living spaces, but could represent features of living spaces and life styles of the scholars who expressed themselves through organised beautiful plants grew around the ponds inside the gardens. Yeongnam scholars had their exceptional features, comparing with other areas` scholars and they also had their distinctions about gardens and ponds. However, in the respect of general perspectives of ponds, it was not easy to find the difference between them. There were no distinguishable difference in the respect of appreciations of planted flowers and trees around the ponds. On the other hand, in the respect of valuation of ponds and plants, there were contrasting aspects between them. Firstly, comparing with other scholars Yeongnam scholars sang a lot about ponds and environed plants watching Suck Ga Mountain. Probably, they lived far away from hometowns so that it was natural they missed their hometowns watching Suck Ga Mountain. Secondly, Yeongnam scholars showing their values through ponds` lotus was different from the other areas. Expecially, after Yi Huang made Jung Wu Dang and wrote about lotus the concept that lotus is a friend of noble men was natural among Yeongnam scholars. Finally, Yeongnam scholars thought that a lake is a mirror which reflects mental states, and tried to develop themselves mentally. After Yi Huang read ``Bang Dang Poem he wrote many poems and continuously deliberated them with his students. Moreover, he digged a lake and named it Guang Yung Dang. This story influenced Yeongnam scholars and the other areas` scholars also. Particularly, a contemporary scholar, Yi Yick, showing enormous interest in this represent the trend at that time. Like above Yeongnam scholars were mostly similar with other scholars, but their perspectives and appreciations were little bit different from other scholars. Yeongnam scholars were very active expressing their values through objects.

조선시대 『명유학안』 독해 양상과 그 성격

강경현(Kang, Kyung-hyun) 한국양명학회 2017 陽明學 Vol.0 No.46

『명유학안』은 17세기 황종희의 양명학적 시선에 따라 명대 학자들의 행적과 사상이 서술된 학안류 문헌이다. 『명유학안』이 제공하고 있는 양명학 중심의 명대 유학 이해의 시야는 동아시아 사상사를 이해하는 데 있어 큰 영향력을 발휘해왔다. 16세기부터 양명학을 수용한 조선에서도 『명유학안』은 수입되어 읽혔다. 물론 주자학을 근간으로 하던 조선 학술계에서 『명유학안』에 대한 논의는 활발히 진행되지 않았다. 다만 그들 역시 자신이 처한 시대적 상황과 문제의식에 따라 『명유학안』을 독해하였다. 조선시대에 이루어진 첫 번째 『명유학안』 독해 양상은 “명대 인물과 사상 이해”이다. 이것이 조선시대 발견되는 가장 이른 시기(19세기)의 『명유학안』 독해 양상이다. 명대 인물의 언행과 사상을 싣고 있는 『명유학안』을 통해 명에 대한 이해를 심화하고자 한 것으로, 『명유학안』을 일종의 전기류문헌으로 파악한 것이다. 두 번째 활용 양상은 “양명학 비판”이다. 16세기 이황으로부터 시작된 조선의 양명학 비판 흐름은 『명유학안』을 읽는 데에도 이어졌다. 일군의 학자들은 주자학적 입장에 바탕을 하여 『명유학안』을 독해하였고, 『명유학안』에 수록된 양명학적 인물들은 비판의 대상이 되었다. 이는 물론 주자학적 인물들에 대한 우호적 평가와 병행된다. 마지막으로 『명유학안』은 왕수인의 생애와 학술을 재구성하거나 양명학을 재해석하는 데 활용되었다. 특히 양명학적 시선에 따라 왕수인의 사상과 중국 양명학의 계보를 다시 구성하여 조선 양명학사를 체계화하고, 그에 기반을 하여 당대의 시대적 문제에 대한 해결 방안을 제시하기 위해서 『명유학안』은 독해되었다. The Records of Ming Scholars(『明儒學案』) is a scholarly literature written in the 17th century, describing the history of scholars in the Ming Dynasty and their ideas in the observation of Huang Zongxi with perspectives prevalent in the teachings of Wang Shouren. In trying to understand the Confucianism centered around the teachings of Wang Shouren, The Records of Ming Scholars provides views that have become major influence for comprehending the history of ideas in East Asia. The Records of Ming Scholars was introduced to Joseon Dynasty after the acceptance of the teachings of Wang Shouren since the 16th century. As one would expect, little attention was given for The Records of Ming Scholars as scholastic field in Joseon Era based their views in the teachings of Zhu Xi. However, they still perceived The Records of Ming Scholars in their own historical circumstances and issues arising thereof. First interpretation tendency of The Records of Ming Scholars in Joseon is “understanding scholars and their ideas”. This is the earliest discovery of tendency(19thcentury) for interpreting The Records of Ming Scholars. They classified The Records of Ming Scholars as a type of biographical record in deeply understanding the Ming Dynasty through which people and their history of behaviors and ideas are described. Second tendency for interpreting The Records of Ming Scholars is as “criticism on the teachings of Wang Shouren”. Criticism on the teachings of Wang Shouren has began with Yi Hwang in the 16th century, still remained in reading The Records of Ming Scholars. A group of scholars interpreted The Records of Ming Scholars with the basis of teachings of Zhu Xi and multitude of people in The Records of Ming Scholars with influence of Wang Shouren recorded had become grounds for criticism. This is, of course, in parallel to amicable evaluation on people in the teachings of Zhu Xi. Lastly, The Records of Ming Scholars was used to re-evaluate the teachings of Wang Shouren. More specifically, The Records of Ming Scholars was apprehended to re-construct the pedigree of Wang Shouren school. This was to systematize the chronicles of Wang Shouren school and to provide solutions to issues predominant in the times of Joseon Era.

論淸代中朝文士筆談的主要特徵

진리 대동한문학회 (구.교남한문학회) 2016 大東漢文學 Vol.46 No.-

Comparatively detailed written discussions among Chinese and Korean scholars that are remained are at least 647 essays, up to eight hundred thousand words. The major characteristics are shown as below: In the term of characters: Korean scholars who participated in writing discussions mainly consist of three Korean diplomatic envoys and the offspring of military officers. The characteristics of the Scholars in Qing Dynasty are: Firstly, with the difference of time period, the major identity characteristics of the figure who participating in writing discussions present distinctive changes. The pattern is as follows: The majority of scholars who participated in writing discussions in Qing Dynasty are intelligent in lower class before the middle of 18th century. Between the mid-18th century and the mid-19th century, the majority became scholars in the imperial court, metropolitan graduates and provincial graduates. During the middle and late 19th century, most of the scholars who participate in the written discussion are the assistants in the imperial court, government officials from six central departments and Tianjin Machinery Bureau. Secondly, most of the scholars who participate in the written discussion are Han people. The minority of them are Manchu, Mongolian people and Qing people. Lastly, the Qing people who had contacts with Korean scholars are several constant groups and individuals. Some of them are the bachelors in the imperial academy. Some are the former subordinates of Sangui Wu, such as Chaorui Guo, the father Huan Guo and his son, Shengqi Tian, Benyu Lin and etc. Some are the Qing scholars who are famous in the ancient Korean academy, such as Tingyun Pan, Yun Ji. Some of them are intended and dedicated in communicating with Koreans such as Peilian Qi. In terms of location: the major areas of the written discussions happened in the northern part. According to the division of province and district, mostly happened in Beijing, Fanyang, Shanhaiguan, Yongping fu, fenrun county and Yutian county. It can be seen from the detailed locations: commonly the places of discussions were the mansions of Qing scholars and Korean diplomatic envoys. Also, the main places were Beijing Liu Li Chang, which means “glazed tile factory.” and Imperial Academy. Few written discussion was recorded in the southern province in Qing Dynasty. In the term of content: the contents of written discussions among Chinese and Korean scholars are very multiple, also with some certain regularity: general contents are abundant and systematical. With the transferring of time, the contents of written discussions indicated a periodical characteristic, influenced by social development and whether Chinese scholars had profound communications with Korean scholars. The contents are closely related to the academic features of the scholars; the topics also have a close relationship with the hometown and ancestors of the Qing scholars. The content of the written discussion is usually authentic. In the term of format and language: the sentences are usually brief and concise. Generally speaking, the written discussions adapt to the question-answer pattern. Both questions and answers are very direct and condense, no more than 50 words and commonly only severs or around 10 words. But when it refers to political topics, Chinese and Korean scholars were afraid of literacy inquisition. Their Language is more twists and turns, and sometimes even very obscure. 現存的較爲詳細的中朝文士筆談至少在647次以上,有80餘萬文字。其特徵主要表現爲: 人物方面:參與筆談的朝鮮文士以朝鮮三使、軍官子弟爲主。淸文人特徵表現爲:首先,隨著時代的不同,參與筆談交流人物身份的總體特徵也呈現出不同的變化,規律如下:在十八世紀中期以前,淸代參與筆談交流的文士以下層知識分子爲主。十八世紀中期至十九中期,以朝廷文人、進士、舉人爲主。十九世紀中後期,參與筆談交流的淸文士多爲朝廷重要輔臣、六部官員、天津機器局官員等。其次,參與筆談的淸文人以漢人爲主,少數滿人、蒙古人與淸人有筆談。最后,與朝鮮文士多有筆談交流的淸人,有幾個固定的群體和個人:一是翰林院庶吉士;二是吳三桂的舊部,如郭朝瑞、郭垣父子、田生琦、林本裕等;三是聞名於朝鮮學壇的著名淸文士,如潘庭筠、紀昀等;四是有意或醉心與朝鮮人交流的淸文士,如齊佩蓮。 地點方面:大部分的筆談發生在北方區域,就州縣而言:以北京、瀋陽、山海關、永平府、豐潤縣、玉田縣等爲主。從具體地點來看:一般爲淸文士的寓所、朝鮮使臣的住所等。此外,北京琉璃廠、北京翰林院等也是筆談發生的主要場所。少量的筆談發生在淸朝的南方州縣。 內容方面:中朝文士交流的內容非常豐富,也呈現出一定的規律性:整體內容豐富而具有系統性;隨著時間的推移,受到社會發展、中朝文士是否深入交流等的影響,筆談內容總體上呈現出階段性特徵;筆談內容與交流者的治學特點密切相關;話題的提出亦與筆談交流對象淸文人的籍貫、先祖有著密切的關聯;筆談的內容往往具有真實性。 形式與語言方面:筆談的語句往往簡短而精煉。一般來說,採用一問一答式,而問和答都比較直接而集中,字數很少超過五十字,以幾個字或十幾個爲常見。但涉及到時諱的話題時,出於對文字獄的恐懼和防範,以免招致殺身之禍,中朝文人的筆談語言就顯得比較曲折,有時甚至極爲隱晦。

19世紀朝鮮與淸朝學人之間的文化交流和知識疏通

劉?(Liu jing) 동아인문학회 2014 동아인문학 Vol.29 No.-

This study is the product of analysing and summarizing the raw data of corresponding letters between Chosun scholar, Hong Yang Hu(1800∼1879) and Chinese scholars who lived from 19th century. Trough this study we examine and understanding the context, content and characteristics of cultural exchange and knowledge transfer between Chosun and Chinese scholars who lived during the period of Qing dynasty. Hong Yang Hu is the grandson of late Chosun famous scholar, Hong Dae Yong(a pen name, Shim Gan(湛軒),1731∼1783). The year 1826 (King Sunzo’s period of 26th) visited Qing with his uncle Shin Jae Sik. During his visit in Peking, Hong Yang Hu developed academic activities and private cultural exchange with Chinese scholars, after returned home, he continued to his efforts to develop cultural exchange with corresponding letters of Chinese scholars in Qing dynasty. The author focuses on the corresponding letter between Hong Yang Hu and Quing’s scholars such as the comparative study of Qing and Chosun, the books written by Wang Hee Son, the History of Ko-Jing Yoen., etc. Hong Yang Hu exchanges letters which includes Qing’s schlars, Lee Kun, and received 44 letters from Chineses scholars. In addition, Hong Yang Hu sent 18 letters to Chinese scholars in Qing dynasty. Mr. Hong Yang Hu had continued to exchange letters during the period from January 1827 when Mr. Hong stayed in Peking to April 1832, when he returned to Chosun. The letters include diverse contents such as the personal greetings, giving presents and academic debate, etc. Most of Chinese scholars, who made a friendship with Mr. Hong Yang Hu, and also mad close friendship with Kim Jung Hee and Kim Sun Shin who visited in Peking before. These scholars also made a friendship with the descendents from Chinese scholars in Qing dynasty. Most of them worked as governc. t’s officers at Hanlim Academy as they had a special condi, givthat made a friendship with foreign scholars. Most of them came from same hometown, Shandong, the relationship of teacher and students or acquaintance. thus they have common sociality amongst them. Through the academic debate between Chineses classics of Han-Song dynasties’s literatures through the exchange of letters made an outstanding effort to discover the critical activities of through the understanding of the Chinese literatures how Chosun Korean scholars critical attitude expressed their relation to Song dynasty’s literatures. In addition, this showed that academic debate and these Chosun-Qing literary exchange even came across the borders between Chosun(Korea) and Qing(China). This way of Chosun-Qing literary exchange through the exchange of letters was the media of academic dabate, which became the common form for knowledge communication amongst East Asian scholars.

19世紀朝鮮與淸朝學人之間的文化交流和知識疏通-以洪良厚和淸人來往書信爲例-

유정 동아인문학회 2014 동아인문학 Vol.29 No.-

This study is the product of analysing and summarizing the raw data of corresponding letters between Chosun scholar, Hong Yang Hu(1800∼1879) and Chinese scholars who lived from 19th century. Trough this study we examine and understanding the context, content and characteristics of cultural exchange and knowledge transfer between Chosun and Chinese scholars who lived during the period of Qing dynasty. Hong Yang Hu is the grandson of late Chosun famous scholar, Hong Dae Yong(a pen name, Shim Gan(湛軒),1731∼1783). The year 1826 (King Sunzo's period of 26th) visited Qing with his uncle Shin Jae Sik. During his visit in Peking, Hong Yang Hu developed academic activities and private cultural exchange with Chinese scholars, after returned home, he continued to his efforts to develop cultural exchange with corresponding letters of Chinese scholars in Qing dynasty. The author focuses on the corresponding letter between Hong Yang Hu and Quing's scholars such as the comparative study of Qing and Chosun, the books written by Wang Hee Son, the History of Ko-Jing Yoen., etc. Hong Yang Hu exchanges letters which includes Qing's schlars, Lee Kun, and received 44 letters from Chineses scholars. In addition, Hong Yang Hu sent 18 letters to Chinese scholars in Qing dynasty. Mr. Hong Yang Hu had continued to exchange letters during the period from January 1827 when Mr. Hong stayed in Peking to April 1832, when he returned to Chosun. The letters include diverse contents such as the personal greetings, giving presents and academic debate, etc. Most of Chinese scholars, who made a friendship with Mr. Hong Yang Hu, and also mad close friendship with Kim Jung Hee and Kim Sun Shin who visited in Peking before. These scholars also made a friendship with the descendents from Chinese scholars in Qing dynasty. Most of them worked as governc. t's officers at Hanlim Academy as they had a special condi, givthat made a friendship with foreign scholars. Most of them came from same hometown, Shandong, the relationship of teacher and students or acquaintance. thus they have common sociality amongst them. Through the academic debate between Chineses classics of Han-Song dynasties's literatures through the exchange of letters made an outstanding effort to discover the critical activities of through the understanding of the Chinese literatures how Chosun Korean scholars critical attitude expressed their relation to Song dynasty's literatures. In addition, this showed that academic debate and these Chosun-Qing literary exchange even came across the borders between Chosun(Korea) and Qing(China). This way of Chosun-Qing literary exchange through the exchange of letters was the media of academic dabate, which became the common form for knowledge communication amongst East Asian scholars. 洪良厚(1800~1879)是朝鮮後期文人洪大容(號湛軒,1731~1783)之孫。朝鮮純祖二十六年(1826)洪良厚跟隨其外叔父申在植一行前往淸朝。在京期間洪良厚積極尋找與祖父有交流關係的淸人潘庭筠的後人潘恭壽等人,也與淸學者汪喜孫、帥方蔚、李伯衡、李璋煜、王筠等人建立了交流關係並有大量的書信交流。本論文以迄今爲止所能確認的韓、中、日三國的≪淸朝文化東傳的研究≫、≪汪喜孫著作集≫、≪古稱燕士≫、≪中士尺牘≫、≪寬居外史≫、≪左海交游錄≫等文獻中所收錄洪良厚與淸人的來往書信爲考察對象。從洪良厚和淸人往來書信中可知:洪良厚和淸人李鈞等十三人有書信往來。他們之間的往來書信中,洪良厚接收的淸人書信共有四十四封。洪良厚發給淸人的書信一共十八封。洪良厚在京期間的1827年的一月至二月初和淸人來往的書信數量較多。洪良厚和淸人交往時期最頻繁的時間是1827年春到達北京後,截止到1834年4月下旬。洪良厚和淸人的來往書信,其中在京時所來往的書信主要是見面之前的邀請函或拜訪之前的預約內容。回國之後和淸人之間的交往書信內容較爲詳實,主要表達離別後的思念之情,向摯友轉達問候;相互之間贈送禮物,其中洪良厚和淸人之間相互贈送詩文集,對這一時期兩國文人之間的詩學交流和批評,以及兩國之間書籍流通的研究具有重要的意義。和洪良厚有書信來往的淸人大部分是和之前來京的朝鮮使臣金正喜、金善臣有一定的交流淵源。他們大都在翰林院任職,有很好的與外國使臣交往的有利條件。這些淸人之間大部份是同鄉(山東出身居多)、師生或親族關係,和朝鮮學人交往的這些淸人也都具有一定的“群體性”。洪良厚通過書信作爲媒介和淸人之間展開的“漢宋之學”的論爭,可以很淸楚地了解到他和當時朝鮮學界一部分士大夫對漢學所持有的批判態度一樣,堅持“宗宋”立場。洪良厚和淸人之間所進行學術交流的書信特征則可以看作是學術討論的“著作”。朝鮮和淸人之間通過書信所展開的學術討論,既說明了在19世紀初期韓中學術討論已經跨越了國界。而通過書信作爲學術論爭的媒介,不只是淸人之間的學術討論形式,也是東亞漢文化圈中的學人之間進行知識疏通的共有形式。

명재 윤증의 수양론을 통해 본 선비정신

황수영 ( Hwang Su-young ) 한국동서철학회 2017 동서철학연구 Vol.0 No.84

지금의 한국 사회는 공직자들의 부정부패, 대학의 입시 비리, 기업의 경영권 불법 승계 등 여러 비도덕적인 문제들이 다양하게 표출되고 있다. 부정부패, 비리 등 사회문제를 해결하고 정의를 구현하기 위해서는 무엇보다도 지도층에게 있어서 올바른 가치관의 내면화가 필요한데, 이러한 가치관을 참된 선비정 신에서 찾아보고자 한다. 조선시대에 형성되고 실천되었던 선비정신은 조선시대 이상적인 인간상이었을 뿐 아니라, 한 시대 인간이 걸어가야 할 이정표 역할을 하기도 하였다. 따라서 선비정신은 흘러간 과거의 유산이 아니라, 병든 현대화를 치유하고 올곧은 사회를 만들어가는 정신유산으로 활용할 가치가 있는 중요한 우리의 자산이 될 수 있다고 생각한다. 본고의 목적은 명재 윤증의 선비정신과 현실 대응을 검토하고, 어떤 내적 연관성을 지니고 있는가, 또 선비정신의 성격 내지 특성은 무엇인가를 살펴보는데 있다. 또한 선비정신의 내용과 특성을 밝히고, 명재 윤증의 수양론을 통해 21세기 우리가 만들어 가야 할 선비정신의 방향성에 대해 살펴보고자 한다. 윤증에게 있어 선비의 도는 관직에 나아가서는 경세의 실질이 있어 구체적으로 나라와 백성에게 유익함이 있어야 하고, 물러나서는 학문과 교육을 통해 후세의 모범이 되고 정신적 교훈이 되어야 한다는 것이다. 또한 시대적 과제를 해결해 나아가는 책임 자이며 지도자였다. 물질문명이 지배하고 있는 오늘을 사는 지식인들은 정신적 가치의 중요성을 다시 부활시킴으로써 혼탁한 사회의 정화에 앞장서야 할 것이다. 지식인들의 도덕성이 회복될 때 비로소 우리 사회의 정의구현을 기대할 수 있다는 점에서 윤증의 애민의식에 바탕을 둔 선비정신은 커다란 교훈을 주고 있다. 우리 사회의 정의구현 에 앞장서야 할 지식인들마저도 물질지상주의에 빠져 물질의 노예로 전락하고 있는 것이 오늘의 현실이며, 이를 극복하기 위해서는 올곧은 선비정신의 내면화가 절실하다. Currently, Korean society is showing various corrupt issues such as corruption of public officials, corruption scandals and corporate tax evasion. In order to solve social problems, such as corruption, corruption, and injustice, we need to find the right values for the leadership of the elite, and we need to find these values in the true sense of the spirit of classical scholars. Spirit of classical scholars, which was formed and practiced during the Joseon Dynasty, was not only an ideal ideology during the Joseon Dynasty, but also served as a landmark for humans. Therefore, I believe that the Spirit of classical scholars can be a valuable asset that deserves to be used as a mental legacy, rather than a lapsed legacy, but to heal the ailing modernization and create a decent society. The purpose of this study is to look into the spirit of classical scholars of Myungjae Yun Jeung and harmony with present time, inner connection, and characteristic and property of the spirit of classical scholars. Also, this study intends to figure out contents and property of spirit of classical scholars, and direction of the spirit of classical scholars that we need to make in the 21th century through the theory of moral cultivation of Myungjae Yun Jeung. To Yun Jeung, moral of classical scholars is about providing benefit to the country and its people in government office in terms of substance of the awakening of the people, and needs to set an example and provide moral lesson to posterity through discipline and education after withdrawing from his office. Also, he was the leader and was in charge of solving tasks of the time. Intellectuals of today when it is dominated by material civilization will have to take the initiative in purifying corrupt society by restoring the importance of spiritual value. Spirit of classical scholar based on humane spirit of Yun Jeung is giving an important lesson in that realization of our society can be expected when morality of intellectuals gets restored. Intellectuals, who need to take the lead in the realization of social justice, degrading to the slave of material by falling into materialism is the reality of today, and internalization of upright spirit of classical scholars is desperately needed in order to overcome this reality.

‘TaLK 국내대학 장학생(Korean TaLK Scholars)’의 인식을 통해서 본 TaLK 영어수업 성과 연구

전영주,강혜영 미래영어영문학회 2013 영어영문학 Vol.18 No.3

The purpose of this study is to analyze English language acquisition and achievement earned by Korean TaLK (Teach and Learn in Korea) Scholars in order to further upscale the program and satisfy Korean TaLK Scholars' expectations. To this end, questionnaires were distributed to 33 Korean TaLK scholars who participated in the K province of Korea from September 2012 to August 2013, and collected for the analysis. The result of this study shows that Korean TaLK scholars oft-mentioned positive changes and advancement have been made regarding their English communication skills, cross-cultural understandings, as well as their English teaching and learning abilities after participating in the TaLK Program. Due to participating in the TaLK Program as Korean TaLK Scholars, and thereby gaining valuable time and access to native English speakers, the Korean TaLK Scholars were able to improve their teaching, cultural, and learning abilities teaching English. In conclusion, TaLK program can greatly assist the English communication gaps by region, improve cross-cultural understandings, and increase interest for English learning in elementary schools inside South Korea. Yet needs more time for practical orientation examples and possibly, further time in training for the TaLK Program to continue to improve, building upon its current success, and grow. In particular, prospective teachers amongst the Korean TaLK scholars expressed their gratitude in that they were given many opportunities for improving their English teaching skills, along with an improved sense of cultural understanding resulting from assisting TaLK native scholars teaching English classes. This study is expected to illuminate the process of selection and importance of Korean TaLK Scholars; more extensive analysis in terms of the overall research is required in order for the TaLK Program to reach a higher standard of success.