’āmâ and šipḥâ in the Hebrew Bible

Hong, Koog-Pyoung(홍국평) 한국구약학회 2017 구약논단 Vol.23 No.4

이 논문은 구약성서에서 여종을 뜻하는 두 개의 단어, ‘아마’와 ‘십하’를 비교하고 그 상관관계를 조사한다. 자료비평 이후 학자들은 이 두 단어가 비제사장계 자료(E와 J)를 구분하는 기준 중 하나로 사용해 왔다. 창세기 등에 기록된 옛이야기 속에는 족장과 그의 본처, 그리고 여종 사이의 긴장감 넘치는 역동이 고스란히 남아 있다. 여종은 때로 ‘십하’라 불리기도 ‘아마’라 불리기도 한다. 자연히 이 두 단어에 대한 학자들의 연구는 둘 사이에 어떤 사회적 지위나 기능상 차이가 있는지 찾아내는 데 집중되어 왔다. 하지만 구약성서 본문에는 두 단어가 동의어로 사용되고 있다는 증거가 곳곳에서 관찰되어 왔다는 점에서 자료비평의 영향을 부인하기 어렵다. 그러나 두 저자가 둘 중 하나를 선호했다 해도 그것이 반드시 둘 사이에 의미적, 어원적, 기능적 차이가 있음을 의미하지 않는다. 또한 한 저자가 두 개의 단어를 동의어로 사용했다는 가능성도 배제할 수 없다. 언어학적 측면에서도, 본디 어원이 다른 두 단어도 시간이 지나면서 동의어로 기능하는 경우가 빈번하다. 통시적 의미의 변천과 공시적 의미 사용을 구분해야 하는 이유이다. 본 연구는 제반 선입견을 배제한 상태에서 구약성서에 등장하는 ‘아마’와 ‘십하’의 용례를 기술적으로 분석하여 둘 사이에서 발견되는 유사성과 차이를 관찰하고, 그 결과 두 용어의 관계를 간단히 설명할 수 있는 하나의 기준은 존재하지 않음을 논증한다.

책임 있는 해석학을 위한 제언

홍국평(Koog-Pyoung Hong) 한국신학정보연구원 2012 Canon&Culture Vol.6 No.2

이 글은 역사 비평적 합의의 상실과 이를 대신하려는 최종 본문 읽기의 등장으로 현재 갈수록 심화되고 있는 성서 해석학의 양극화와 상호 협력의 부재 현상을 타개하려는 작은 시도이다. 최근 몇몇 학자들은 이런 난국을 극복하기 위해 소쉬르의 구조 언어학에서 공시/통시의 개념을 차용하여 이 두 양태의 읽기를 통합하려 하였다. 그러나 이런 공시적/통시적 읽기 모델은 분명 장점이 있지만 소쉬르가 사용한 공시와 통시가 어차피 시간성을 중심으로 구분되었기 때문에 이 둘이 모두 역사적 범주에 속한다는 주장에서 자유로울 수 없다. 공시/통시의 이러한 태생적 한계는 독자의 수용을 중심으로 역사적 영역 밖으로 급속히 확장되고 있는 현대 해석학의 흐름을 생각할 때 현 상황을 포괄하는 틀걸이로서 제약이 있음을 드러낸다. 대신 저자, 본문 독자의 삼중 구도를 제안한다. 현대 해석학의 다양한 지류를 이 삼중 구도로 분류하게 될 때 얻는 장점은 이들 읽기가 서로 다른 해석학적 영역을 전담하는 읽기로서 서로 상충하지 않는다는 사실이다. 도리어 이 중 어느 읽기도 다른 두 읽기의 도움 없이는 본문의 의미, 즉 저자와 독자와의 상호 작용 속에서 양산하는 의미의 다채로움을 온전히 담아낼 수 없다. 따라서 이 세 읽기 방법은 실질적으로 상호보완 관계에 있다고 주장하고 이 점을 크리스테바의 상호 텍스트 이론을 통해 보다 분명히 드러낸다. 궁극적으로 저자와 본문과 독자 모두에 책임 있는 읽기를 점차 다양성과 포용성이 강조되고 있는 우리 시대에 적합한 바람직한 해석의 모델로 제시한다. This study attempts to contribute in alleviating the ever-increasing gap among various branches in contemporary biblical interpretation and enhancing their mutual understanding. Some have tried to apply the Saussurean principles of synchrony and diachrony into biblical interpretation, but its applicability has been proven limited because both synchrony and diachrony are in nature rooted in the concept of temporality. This limitation is particularly pronounced in today’s biblical criticism in which the role of the reader is highlighted and the interpretive focus increasingly moves beyond the historical realm. Therefore, the synchronic/diachronic scheme is limited as an overarching scheme to encompass all the divergent trends in today’s biblical criticism. Instead, a tripartite structure of the author/text/reader is proposed as an alternative scheme. With this, the complementarity among different reading strategies becomes more evident. Insofar as each reading is designed to focus on a certain hermeneutic area-either author, text, or reader-which cannot be properly explored by other approaches, the only way for a critic to appreciate fuller dimensions of the meaning of the text is to listen to and learn from readings of other approaches. This complementarity is further articulated by Kristeva’s notion of intertextuality. The hermeneutics that remain responsible for the text, the author, and the readers is called for in our time of diversity.

창세기 27장의 장면전환 기법 분석을 통한 ‘베-X-카탈’ 구문의 기능에 관한 연구

홍국평(Koog-Pyoung Hong) 연세대학교 신과대학(연합신학대학원) 2014 신학논단 Vol.75 No.-

This study aims to clarify the discourse function of the we-x-qatal construction in biblical Hebrew narrative. It argues that in addition to other well-known functions of this construction, the function of the scenic transition must be acknowledged, particularly in the setting of a multi-scenic narrative, which I define as a story that consists of multiple scenes and thus features frequent scenic changes. It is argued that the traditional notion of mainline/off-the-line division is unsatisfactory in uncovering the complex dynamic in which forms like we-x-qatal function within a complex narrative. Instead, it is proposed that, in the context of a multi-scenic narrative, multiple narrative linesare present, and each scene possesses its own mainline. It is also demonstrated that the mainline/off-the-line scheme is not fixed one throughout the narrative but is a fluid one, which ultimately dependent upon the vantage point of the narrative flow. All in all, it is suggested that there is no fundamental difference between the two main types of the we-x-verb construction, i.e., one that provides comments(usually, we-x-participle) and the other that functions as a scenic change marker (usually, we-x-qatal). This study aims to clarify the discourse function of the we-x-qatal construction in biblical Hebrew narrative. It argues that in addition to other well-known functions of this construction, the function of the scenic transition must be acknowledged, particularly in the setting of a multi-scenic narrative, which I define as a story that consists of multiple scenes and thus features frequent scenic changes. It is argued that the traditional notion of mainline/off-the-line division is unsatisfactory in uncovering the complex dynamic in which forms like we-x-qatal function within a complex narrative. Instead, it is proposed that, in the context of a multi-scenic narrative, multiple narrative linesare present, and each scene possesses its own mainline. It is also demonstrated that the mainline/off-the-line scheme is not fixed one throughout the narrative but is a fluid one, which ultimately dependent upon the vantage point of the narrative flow. All in all, it is suggested that there is no fundamental difference between the two main types of the we-x-verb construction, i.e., one that provides comments(usually, we-x-participle) and the other that functions as a scenic change marker (usually, we-x-qatal).

미드라쉬 악가다

홍국평(Koog-Pyoung Hong) 연세대학교 신과대학(연합신학대학원) 2014 신학논단 Vol.78 No.-

This paper attempts to demonstrate Midrash Aggadah as Rabbis’ intellectual entertainment that takes place in the mental space of rabbinic hypertext. The interpretive value of Midrash Aggadah has been widely downplayed, even within the Jewish circle, due to its liberal interpretive strategies. In the modernistic perspective in which a single, mostly historical, meaning in the text is pursued, it is highly unlikely that one can find a meaningful interpretation in a reading like Midrash Aggadah. In a postmodern atmosphere, however, in which a polyphony of meaning is sought after, and even celebrated, one can reassess the value of Midrash Aggadah. The potential appears most conspicuous in relation to contemporary literary criticism in which the role of the reader in meaning production receives ever more attention by critics, insofar as Midrash Aggadah is characterized most aptly by the active involvement of the reader in its reading. Particularly promising in this regard is the recent development of the hypertext theory, which offers a valuable language and tools to analyze and describe the mechanism in which a midrashist seeks after meanings within the highly interconnected web of textual and interpretive tradition. This paper explores the way in which the hypertext theory helps us better assess the interpretive characteristics and value of Midrash Aggadah. This paper attempts to demonstrate Midrash Aggadah as Rabbis’ intellectual entertainment that takes place in the mental space of rabbinic hypertext. The interpretive value of Midrash Aggadah has been widely downplayed, even within the Jewish circle, due to its liberal interpretive strategies. In the modernistic perspective in which a single, mostly historical, meaning in the text is pursued, it is highly unlikely that one can find a meaningful interpretation in a reading like Midrash Aggadah. In a postmodern atmosphere, however, in which a polyphony of meaning is sought after, and even celebrated, one can reassess the value of Midrash Aggadah. The potential appears most conspicuous in relation to contemporary literary criticism in which the role of the reader in meaning production receives ever more attention by critics, insofar as Midrash Aggadah is characterized most aptly by the active involvement of the reader in its reading. Particularly promising in this regard is the recent development of the hypertext theory, which offers a valuable language and tools to analyze and describe the mechanism in which a midrashist seeks after meanings within the highly interconnected web of textual and interpretive tradition. This paper explores the way in which the hypertext theory helps us better assess the interpretive characteristics and value of Midrash Aggadah.

기억의 윤리

홍국평(Koog-Pyoung Hong) 연세대학교 신과대학(연합신학대학원) 2015 신학논단 Vol.79 No.-

This paper raises a question as to how to read a theologically distorted text. It focuses on Dtr’s indictment on Manasseh that he personally holds responsibility for the fall of Judah and raises an issue of the ethics of the reader. The Deuteronomistic History is known for its explicit influence of the Deuteronomistic viewpoint of retribution, which governs the entire course of history it relates. In this strict cause and effect worldview, any misfortune cannot come without a cause. One of the cardinal features of the present form of the DH is to account for the fall of Jerusalem despite Josiah’s successful cult reform. The answer given by the text is no secret. It blames the sins of Manasseh, the grandfather of Josiah, which nullified Josiah’s heroic effort. In this sense, Manasseh provides a unique opportunity to raise question about whether he actually was a sinner, or was a scapegoat of the Deuteronomistic worldview that needed to hide the serious theological problem of divine absence and vulnerability in time of the greatest need. While some scholars have acknowledged that Manasseh was scapegoated by the text, its theological implications have seldom been spelled out. This paper attempts to move further and discuss the role of the interpreter as to how to deal with the violence of the text by rewriting the contexts of the text by means of intertextuality. Using the book of Job and the Gospel of John, it is argued that an intertextual networking provides a new way to cope with a textual violence by providing a means to overcome its original context. This paper raises a question as to how to read a theologically distorted text. It focuses on Dtr’s indictment on Manasseh that he personally holds responsibility for the fall of Judah and raises an issue of the ethics of the reader. The Deuteronomistic History is known for its explicit influence of the Deuteronomistic viewpoint of retribution, which governs the entire course of history it relates. In this strict cause and effect worldview, any misfortune cannot come without a cause. One of the cardinal features of the present form of the DH is to account for the fall of Jerusalem despite Josiah’s successful cult reform. The answer given by the text is no secret. It blames the sins of Manasseh, the grandfather of Josiah, which nullified Josiah’s heroic effort. In this sense, Manasseh provides a unique opportunity to raise question about whether he actually was a sinner, or was a scapegoat of the Deuteronomistic worldview that needed to hide the serious theological problem of divine absence and vulnerability in time of the greatest need. While some scholars have acknowledged that Manasseh was scapegoated by the text, its theological implications have seldom been spelled out. This paper attempts to move further and discuss the role of the interpreter as to how to deal with the violence of the text by rewriting the contexts of the text by means of intertextuality. Using the book of Job and the Gospel of John, it is argued that an intertextual networking provides a new way to cope with a textual violence by providing a means to overcome its original context.

출애굽기 3장

홍국평(HONG Koog-Pyoung) 장로회신학대학교 기독교사상과 문화연구원 2015 장신논단 Vol.47 No.4

본고는 학자들이 치열하게 논쟁을 벌여 온 출애굽기 3장의 성격을 고찰하고 그 방법론적 함의를 반추하는 연구이다. 본고는 출애굽기 3장을 구성하고 있는 세 단락을 중심으로 각 단락에서 제기되어 온 비평적 쟁점에 대해 논의한다. 3장 1-6절은 신명의 교차 사용이 두드러지는 부분으로 두 자료의 수합 모델이 비교적 적합하고, 7-8절/ 9-10절의 중복 단락은 자료 모델보다는 편집비평의 단계적 발전 모델이 상대적으로 본문의 특성에 더 부합하지만, 두 본문 모두 하나의 모델로 설명하기 어려운 복잡한 본문임에 주목한다. 13-15절은 상충하는 세 의견을 모아둔 것 같은 양상의 본문으로, 그 복잡성은 자료나 편집의 단일 모델로 설명이 어렵다. 본문이 하나의 질문에 대한 토론의 결과를 모아둔 것 같은 양상을 보이기 때문에 ‘저자’의 입장에 치우쳐 있는 전통적인 자료, 편집 모델 보다 저자, 편집자, 수용자의 입장을 종합적으로 고려할 수 있는 ‘미드라쉬적 확장’이라는 개념이 더 적합할 수 있다고 제안한다. 이를 통해 본고는 출애굽기 3장은 하나의 본문 단위내에서 서로 다른 세 가지 특성을 보이는 단락이 있음을 부각시키고, 나아가 이런 복합성을 띠는 본문을 연구할 때 하나의 모델을 본문에 투사하는 것은 바람직하지 않으며 본문의 특성에 충실한 기술적 연구가 선행되어야 함을 주장한다. This paper examines the complex nature of the text of Exodus 3 that has been a subject of intense debate among critical scholars. It examines three sections of Exodus 3 and their critical agenda in an attempt to shed light on its methodological implications. Exodus 3:1-6 shows a cardinal example of the interchange of the divine names YHWH and Elohim. A text-linguistic observation of this section demonstrates that the use of divine names in these verses, particularly in 3:4, is peculiar, if not unusual, compared to the usual way of participant reference in Hebrew narrative. Exodus 3:7-8 and 9-10 are a fitting example of doublets. Although several recent studies highlighted the literary unity of this section, this paper finds that the inconsistency in language and thoughts between the two sections implies a complex literary prehistory behind the final form of the text. The European redaction model that construes this section as a result of successive development does more justice than the source model, but its limitations are also pointed out. Concerning 3:13-15, it is argued that the complexity of the text is not properly accounted for by either the source or redaction model. Rather, it is proposed that the nature of the text is better explained as a midrashic expansion. In the end, it is suggested that no single model alone can embrace the complexity of Exodus 3 and thus a more flexible methodological stance is required to tackle such complex texts.