http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
개별검색 DB통합검색이 안되는 DB는 DB아이콘을 클릭하여 이용하실 수 있습니다.
통계정보 및 조사
예술 / 패션
<해외전자자료 이용권한 안내>
- 이용 대상 : RISS의 모든 해외전자자료는 교수, 강사, 대학(원)생, 연구원, 대학직원에 한하여(로그인 필수) 이용 가능
- 구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색 및 등록된 대학IP 대역 내에서 24시간 무료 이용
- 미구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색을 통한 오후 4시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용
※ 단, EBSCO ASC/BSC(오후 5시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용)
The field of modern Korean history had to overcome premodern perspectives and systems of historiography as well as the colonial historiography from the Japanese colonal period. It attempted to discard chronologies and other earlier methods of historiography for narratives that were oriented more towards human relationships where the nation and people were the subject of history. Those peopie the base of modern historical studies were ‘reformed Confucianists’ (kaesin yuhak cha) who were active during the time of the Great Han Empire. Their modern reform theories could be called pyonbop ron(變法論) or legal reform theories. They attempted to modernize by adopting modern political theories that they then applied to a foundation based on traditional culture informed by Confucianism. In this respect,although they were inclined towards complete Westernization, their ideas of modernization differed from other enlightenment theories Their compromise between new learning and old learning, which formed the basis of their reform ideas, also attached great importance to the writing of history. At the time, this system of modern historiography was presented as ‘new history’(sinsa).They pointed out the deficiencies of historical methods as they compiled numerous histories written by Japanese. The Japanese perspective on Korean history permeated these works. Advocates of pyonbop theories who believed in the need for a nationalist approach to historical writing were harshly critical of this aspect and instead turned their focus to the historical studies of sirhak (‘practical learning’) scholars. Critical of Sino-centric approaches to history, they stressed ‘national history’ (kuksa) and carried on a tradition of evidential analysis using primary documents. The kyemong enlightenment movement that unfolded after 1905 was a movement that targeted serf-strengthening and the reclamation of national rights. Although education and industrial development was deemed necessary for self-strengthening, they also emphasized mental and spiritual elements, such as concepts of a fatherland (choguk chongsin), national spirit (kukhon), and national characteristics (kuksu). They attempted to develop national spirit and patriotism through the writing of national history, a kind of historiography that was spearheaded by none other than pyonbop theorists such as Pak Un-sik(朴殷植, 1859-1925), Sin Chae-ho(申采浩, 1880-1936) and others. Criticizing the historical writing that held China in such high esteem, they promoted the importance of national history, with particular emphasis its heroes and historical writing about heroes who triumphed over foreign invasion. By 1910, the limitations to self-strengthening and productivity theories were increasingly apparent, causing a rift within the enlightenment movement itself. Among those, Pak Un-sik and Sin Chae-ho arrived at their own distinct interpretations of the true nature of Social Darwinist theories and the despotic nature of imperialism, and came to view the new citizen (sin kungmin) and the people (kungmin) as the subjects of history. While also pointing out the mistakes of Confucianism, upon which they had been dependant, they instead emphasized Tangun and traditional religions that put forth a new historical paradigm centered on Tangun, Koguryo and Parhae. Actively pursuing such historical research in the 1910s, they presented nationalism in terms of preservation of national characteristics while they groped for new alternatives to the national movement. Into the 1920s, as theories of national spirit and national characteristics were fused together with new concepts, a modern nationalist historiography emerged. Stressing humanism and equality among citizens, they viewed the masses as a solution to the national problem. Even though Pak Un-siks The Bloody History of the Korean Independence Movement(『韓國獨立運動之血史)), written in 1920, continued to advocate national spirit, after World War I and the Russian Revolution, his historical writings focused increasingly on worldwide changes and the issue of nation and the people. Sin Chae-ho also presented a historical theory based on the struggle between the self(我) and the non-self(非我), claiming that indigenous morals was a foreign concept and arguing that the national problem had to be understood from the perspective of the masses. This ultimately formed the foundation of modern Korean historiography.
In the late Chosun period, Poongsan Ryu were one of the most prestigious families of Yeongnam province. As the descendants of Ryu Woon-ryong(柳雲龍, 1539~1601) and Ryu Sung-ryong(柳成龍, 1542~1607), their academic genealogy was formed by passing down family scholarship based on Toegye(李滉, 1501~ 1570)’s scholastic mantle. In spite of Noron(Old Doctrine)’s political hindrance, a sizable number of Poongsan Ryu family served as government officials. Having Yeonguijeong(Chief State Councillor) Ryu Sung-ryong as an ancestor, Poongsan Ryu were proud to be hereditary royal subjects; and this influenced on their family scholarship, governance theory and political decision. Poongsan Ryu developed scholarship that morally and practically carries out Toegye’s teachings, and also focused on assisting King to study Sage Learning and to become a Sage king. In the late 19th century, Taewongun appointed Ryu Hoojo, a member of Namin(Southerners), as Jwauijeong(Second State councillor) in consequence of the policy of balancing the power of Andong Kim and Pungyang Cho clans. This led Yeongnam Namin, including Poongsan Ryu to politically support Taewongun’s policies. Whereas, Yeongnam Namin were divided into two different schools; Seoae school(Poongsan Ryu, or Byeongyu) and Hakbong school(Hoyu). Poongsan Ryu and Hoyu disagreed upon certain issues according to their academic affiliation. While Poongsan Ryu tepidly opposed to the removal of sowon, they eagerly participated in making petition to bring back Taewongun. Moreover Poongsan Ryu did not completely reject the government policy of modernization even while they maintained the position of ‘Reject Heterodoxy’ (chuksa). Also, they were not very enthusiastic about participating in petitions against 『Chosun Chaengnyak』 or the Righteous army’s movements. Nor did they convert to the Enlightment movement, while some of Namin did. The main factors that influenced their political behavior were the family scholarship which regarded individual’s moral practice very highly, and their consciousness as the hereditary royal subjects; because of these factors, Poongsan Ryu could not help but be cautious about expressing ideas or taking collective action against the government. 조선 후기, 풍산 류씨는 영남을 대표하는 문중이었다. 이들은 謙庵 柳雲龍과 西 厓 柳成龍의 후예들로 퇴계학통 안에서 家學을 전수하면서 학맥을 형성하였다. 이들은 노론의 영남 남인에 대한 견제 속에서도 지속적으로 정부의 관료로 진출하였다. 영의정을 지낸 류성룡의 후손이라는 점에서 그들은 ‘世臣’의 자손이라는 자부심을 가지고 있었고, 이는 그들의 가학이나 경세론, 처신론에서 큰 지침이 되었다. 그들은 이미 체계화된 퇴계학문을 도덕적, 현실적으로 실천하는 학문에 더 힘을 기울였으며, ‘世臣’의 자손으로서 임금의 聖學, 聖化를 보필하는 일을 중시하였다. 19세기 후반, 대원군의 남인 등용 정책에 따라 柳厚祚가 좌의정에 올랐다. 이 후 ‘屛儒’를 위시한 영남 남인들은 주로 대원군과 그 정책을 지지하는 정치활동을 전개하였다. 물론 영남 남인 사이에는 ‘병호시비’에 따라 그 처신 여하에 차이가 있었다. 서원 철폐에 대해서는 한 목소리로 반대하면서도 병유들은 다소 소극적이었고, 그 반대로 대원군 실권 후에 전개된 봉환 상소에는 적극적이었다. 또한 서양과 일본의 침략 앞에서 왕조를 지키려는 척사론은 견지하고 있었지만, 병유들은 정부의 근대화 정책을 전면적으로 반대하지 않았으며, 또한 『조선책략』을 반대하는 상소운동이나 의병항쟁에서 다소 소극적이었다. 게다가 虎儒 일각에서 일어난 계몽운동으로의 노선 전환 같은 극적인 변화도 보이지 않았다. 이런 모든 ‘처신’에 영향을 미친 것이 개인의 도덕적 실천을 중시하던 가학과 ‘세신의 후손’이라는 점이었다. 그들은 정부를 상대로 의견 표명이나 집단 행동에 소극적이었던 것이다.
Kato Hiroyuki(加藤弘之) published "The Competition of the Rights of the Strong" (1893) to both German books and Japanese books. This German book was actually published in Germany, and has since been reviewed in several local newspapers. Approximately the evaluation was not very high, but Kato left several pieces of refutation claiming originality of his theory. Particularly noteworthy is the dispute with Gumplowicz. He pointed out two points: one was a discussion of 'tolerance' in his theories, and the other was a discussion of 'the country of the right wing', and Gato refuted this. In this paper, the difference between the positions of them is due to the difference in the viewpoint of the society, that is, the difference between seeing the driving force of social evolution as 'competition with room for compromise' or 'struggle without compromise' and tried to explain its meaning. 가토 히로유키는 『강자의 권리의 경쟁』(1893)을 독일어판본과 일본어판본의 두 가지로 동시에 출간했다. 이 독일어판본은 실제 독일에서 출판되었고, 이후 몇몇 신문들에 서평이 실리기도 했다. 대부분의 평가는 그다지 좋지 않았으나 가토는 자기 이론의 독창성을 주장하며 반박하는 글을 몇 편 남겼다. 특히 그 중에서도 굼플로비치와의 논쟁은 주목할 만하다. 굼플로비치는 두 가지 점을 지적했는데, 하나는 그의 이론에 나오는 ‘인허’에 대한 논의, 다른 하나는 ‘우내통일국’에 대한 논의였고, 가토는 이에 대해 반박하는 글을 남겼다. 본 논문에서는 두 사람의 입장차이가 무엇보다도 사회를 바라보는 시선, 즉 사회 진화의 원동력을 타협의 여지가 있는 ‘경쟁’으로 보는가, 타협의 여지가 없는 ‘투쟁’으로 보는가의 차이에서 기인한 것임을 확인하고 그 의미를 살펴보고자 하였다.
The Kallmann's syndrome is the most common form of isolated hypogonadotropic hypogonadism in which anosmia or hyposmia resulting from agenesis of hypoplasia of the olfactory lobes is associated with LHRH deficiency, This syndrome is genetically heterogeneous and can be trans-mitted as an X-linked, autosomal dominant or autosomal recessive trait. The hypogonadotropic hypogonadism results in absent or incomplete pubertal development and may be associated with anosmia or hyposmia, mid-line defect(color blindness, cleft-lip or -palate, unilateral renal agenesis, nerve deafness), cryptorchidism and skeletal abnormalities. The slipped capital fernoral epiphysis is the condition in which the femoral head slips downward and backward on the femoral neck at the epiphyseal plate. The clinical association between slipped capital femoral epiphysis and endocrine disorder. We experienced a case of the slipped capital femoral epiphyis associated with Kallmanns syndrome in a 17 years old male(J Kor Soc Endocrinol 11:318-323, 1996).