RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    노신의 <광인일기>와 나혜석의 <경희> 비교 연구 = 인습의 폐해와 그 극복 방한을 중심으로

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A101989894

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    This paper examines the criticism regarding the evil influence of conventionalism and inhumaneness in `Madman`s Diary by Rooshin and Gyeonghee by Na Hwe Seok. and on the basis of this study, it investigates the similarity and difference of two works. Rooshin recognized Confucianism as a convention and criticized it strongly, judging the cannibalism, which was the biggest problem of Chinese convention in the Madman`s Diary. In the Zhu-zi-xue dominated society, the being of woman was not admitted and thereby they became the object for cannibalism. The author thought that 4000 years` cannibalism was the revolutionary duty, which had to liquidate through the diary of leading character, which held the delusion of persecution, and he set up the problematic child as a main character of the novel. That is. he identified the cannibalism with an old fashioned Li-jiao, which paralyzed human characteristics and established it as an evil practice, which should liquidate. In the end, he argued the creation of new historythrough the sharp criticism. Na Hwe Seok accused the woman`s life like a slave of patriarchal society in Gyeonghee. and emphasized the necessity of education for the subjecthood of man rather than the marriage. The discourse of the new woman in this novel is not different from the reconstruction by Lee Kwang Soo. The concrete method and examples show the considerable difference in these. Rooshin criticizes the cannibalism, which is the most problematic convention of China and he recognizes the Confucianism as a sort of convention as well. Compared to him, Na hwe Seok accuses the life like a slave in the patriarchal society and she emphasizes the importance of education rather than marriage. Like this, both Rooshin and Na Hwe Seok shows the innovative tendency for the construction of new society, judging the established convention sharply. However, they have difference in the aspect of solving the problem.
    번역하기

    This paper examines the criticism regarding the evil influence of conventionalism and inhumaneness in `Madman`s Diary by Rooshin and Gyeonghee by Na Hwe Seok. and on the basis of this study, it investigates the similarity and difference of two works. ...

    This paper examines the criticism regarding the evil influence of conventionalism and inhumaneness in `Madman`s Diary by Rooshin and Gyeonghee by Na Hwe Seok. and on the basis of this study, it investigates the similarity and difference of two works. Rooshin recognized Confucianism as a convention and criticized it strongly, judging the cannibalism, which was the biggest problem of Chinese convention in the Madman`s Diary. In the Zhu-zi-xue dominated society, the being of woman was not admitted and thereby they became the object for cannibalism. The author thought that 4000 years` cannibalism was the revolutionary duty, which had to liquidate through the diary of leading character, which held the delusion of persecution, and he set up the problematic child as a main character of the novel. That is. he identified the cannibalism with an old fashioned Li-jiao, which paralyzed human characteristics and established it as an evil practice, which should liquidate. In the end, he argued the creation of new historythrough the sharp criticism. Na Hwe Seok accused the woman`s life like a slave of patriarchal society in Gyeonghee. and emphasized the necessity of education for the subjecthood of man rather than the marriage. The discourse of the new woman in this novel is not different from the reconstruction by Lee Kwang Soo. The concrete method and examples show the considerable difference in these. Rooshin criticizes the cannibalism, which is the most problematic convention of China and he recognizes the Confucianism as a sort of convention as well. Compared to him, Na hwe Seok accuses the life like a slave in the patriarchal society and she emphasizes the importance of education rather than marriage. Like this, both Rooshin and Na Hwe Seok shows the innovative tendency for the construction of new society, judging the established convention sharply. However, they have difference in the aspect of solving the problem.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 "韓國과 中國現代小說의 比較硏究" 國學資料院 1995

    2 宋賢鎬, "韓國現代文學의 批評的硏究論" 國學資料院 1996

    3 宋賢鎬, "韓國現代小說論" 民知社 173-209, 2001

    4 "韓國文學의 論理" 1974

    5 魯迅, "世界文學大全集 7" 同和出版公社 81-91, 1970pp

    6 Goldmann, "Towards a Sociology of the Novel" 1975

    7 Hauser, "The Social History of Art 1-4" 1962

    8 Watt, "The Rise of the Novel" Berkley & los Angels ; Univ 1974

    9 Scholes, "The Nature of Narrative" Oxford Univ Press 1979

    10 "Anatomy of Criticism" New Jersey ; Princeton Univ press 1973

    1 "韓國과 中國現代小說의 比較硏究" 國學資料院 1995

    2 宋賢鎬, "韓國現代文學의 批評的硏究論" 國學資料院 1996

    3 宋賢鎬, "韓國現代小說論" 民知社 173-209, 2001

    4 "韓國文學의 論理" 1974

    5 魯迅, "世界文學大全集 7" 同和出版公社 81-91, 1970pp

    6 Goldmann, "Towards a Sociology of the Novel" 1975

    7 Hauser, "The Social History of Art 1-4" 1962

    8 Watt, "The Rise of the Novel" Berkley & los Angels ; Univ 1974

    9 Scholes, "The Nature of Narrative" Oxford Univ Press 1979

    10 "Anatomy of Criticism" New Jersey ; Princeton Univ press 1973

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2026 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2020-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
    2017-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2013-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2010-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2008-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 FAIL (등재후보1차) KCI등재
    2006-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2003-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2002-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2000-07-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 0.6 0.6 0.6
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    0.6 0.63 1.017 0.15
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼