『신문학사』와 『한국문학사』의 서술 방법론 비교 연구

Abstract

New Literary History and History of Korean Literature are bound to reflect the spirit of the times, given to writers in contemporary literature, and were the result of practical work trying to do the challenges. Framed by the literature procedure described in the literature to face ‘crisis of the fundamental concepts’ will be tried to break into a practical, the authors of Hisrory of Korean Literature framed the notorious graft’s tradition of literary theory, and 1950s to break the implicit theory on the basis of development theory In theory, would logically have to overcome. However, as already seen that the surface graft development theory literature and the inherent heterogeneity and in-depth structural homology with the other carrying a ‘twin’ could be evaluated as such. Two kinds of discourse, all the Western model of modernization was conscious and will directly or indirectly, through the similarities between Western universality somehow crippled South Korea in the 20th century and the historical process of modernization of Korean attempt was trying to do is explain. The meaning of four of the 1970s literary mission to perform, as is the meaning of the 2000s as a historical fact that we early flowering and literary events to give new meaning to network, to another point of view of literary history should be able to provide. Coming in the future, we do not know about the literature on the rash can not say so, but the basic approach of the future literature be submitted, in writing As you can see above, more than anything data based on empirical facts. This needs to be done on the basis of the description shall be considered. And it assumes that Western modernity is a universal history of the specificity of attitude rather than trying to explain the dialectic, complexity of the modern concept of the sorrow, the approach to explain the specificity of Korea and the Arts is to be expected explain the universal identity(universal singurarity).