從中國文學的視域看丁若鏞的文學觀點 -以總論爲主
Jeong Yak-yong’s Literary Opinion from the Chinese Literary Perspective: Focusing on the General Discussion
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The literary viewpoint of Jeong Ya-yong (known as Dasan)(茶山), like his thoughts, no longer stays within the scope of J Cheng Zhu(程朱)or Neo-Confucian scholars; rather, it has its own characteristics, including a time gap of about 250 years with Lee Hwang(李滉), Jo Sik(曺植), and Li Ye(李珥), so there is a natural gap in the academic environment in terms of his activities. His literary environment was the same. The missions of these individuals’ times and the stages of their personal lives were also different, thus contributing to Dasan’s academic and literary viewpoints. Beginning with Dasan’s literary background, several important points regarding his literary viewpoint are discussed. His view of literature seems ordinary and insignificant at first glance compared to that of traditional Confucian writers or Neo-Confucian scholars, but a closer look reveals that it is not so. What is noteworthy is that traditional literati and scholars with strong Confucian tendencies generally highly value Hanyu, Guyangsu, and Jeongju, but Dasan did not highly value Hanyu and Guyangsu.His views on poetry and prose were slightly different depending on their speaking positions (e.g., Zhu Xi (朱熹) and other Confucian scholars). For example, people generally tend to view Guyangsu (歐陽修)unfavorably, but when discussing font reform in the Song dynasty, this scholar was highly evaluated. In addition, he did not recognize Su Dong-po (蘇東坡) or Hwang Jeong-gyeon (黃庭堅) in terms of academic personality, but when he taught poetry and prose to his sons and disciples, he positively evaluated the literary value of their works. This viewpoint is completely different from Dasan’s belittling of Han (韓), Liu(柳), Ou(歐), and Su(蘇), citing Wen Tao(文道)with, “It’s a big hindrance to my Tao.” Another striking feature of his literary views is that his attitude toward writing differed from that of traditional writers. Although he was a Confucian figure and many of his views were similar to those of Cheng Zhu (程朱)Confucianism, he defended Confucianism while praising Yangzhu(楊朱), Mohism, and Buddhism and regarded Hanyu(韓愈)and Guyangsu(歐陽修)as inferior to them in terms of general Confucianism.
Abstract
The literary viewpoint of Jeong Ya-yong (known as Dasan)(茶山), like his thoughts, no longer stays within the scope of J Cheng Zhu(程朱)or Neo-Confucian scholars; rather, it has its own characteristics, including a time gap of about 250 years with Lee Hwang(李滉), Jo Sik(曺植), and Li Ye(李珥), so there is a natural gap in the academic environment in terms of his activities. His literary environment was the same. The missions of these individuals’ times and the stages of their personal lives were also different, thus contributing to Dasan’s academic and literary viewpoints. Beginning with Dasan’s literary background, several important points regarding his literary viewpoint are discussed. His view of literature seems ordinary and insignificant at first glance compared to that of traditional Confucian writers or Neo-Confucian scholars, but a closer look reveals that it is not so. What is noteworthy is that traditional literati and scholars with strong Confucian tendencies generally highly value Hanyu, Guyangsu, and Jeongju, but Dasan did not highly value Hanyu and Guyangsu.His views on poetry and prose were slightly different depending on their speaking positions (e.g., Zhu Xi (朱熹) and other Confucian scholars). For example, people generally tend to view Guyangsu (歐陽修)unfavorably, but when discussing font reform in the Song dynasty, this scholar was highly evaluated. In addition, he did not recognize Su Dong-po (蘇東坡) or Hwang Jeong-gyeon (黃庭堅) in terms of academic personality, but when he taught poetry and prose to his sons and disciples, he positively evaluated the literary value of their works. This viewpoint is completely different from Dasan’s belittling of Han (韓), Liu(柳), Ou(歐), and Su(蘇), citing Wen Tao(文道)with, “It’s a big hindrance to my Tao.” Another striking feature of his literary views is that his attitude toward writing differed from that of traditional writers. Although he was a Confucian figure and many of his views were similar to those of Cheng Zhu (程朱)Confucianism, he defended Confucianism while praising Yangzhu(楊朱), Mohism, and Buddhism and regarded Hanyu(韓愈)and Guyangsu(歐陽修)as inferior to them in terms of general Confucianism.
참고문헌 (45)
- "與猶堂全書"[URL]
- 丁若鏞, "《詩經講義》《詩經講義補遺》(合刊本)", 韓國經學資料集成, 79 (1995), 成均館大學校
- 丁若鏞, "與猶堂全集" (2008), 廣西師範大學出版社
- 宋·朱熹, "朱文公文集", 四部叢刊本, ~
- 宋, "朱子語類" (1994), 中華書局
- 郭紹虞, "中國文學批評史" (1979), 上海古籍出版社
- 馬積高, "宋明理學與文學" (1989), 湖南師範大學出版社
- 廖可斌, "明代文學復古運動研究" (1990), 上海古籍出版社
- 陳來, "宋明理學" (1991), 遼寧教育出版社
- 金彥鍾, "朝鮮丁若鏞論語說之精義" (1992), 生活.讀書.新知三聯書店出版社
- 安贊淳, "明代理學家文學理論研究", 博士, pp.1999
- 莫礪鋒, "朱熹文學硏究" (2000), 南京大學出版社
- 蔡振豐, "朝鮮儒者丁若鏞的四書學:以東亞為視野的討論" (2010), 臺灣大學出版
- 李士金, "朱熹文學思想研究" (2013), 人民文學出版社
- 丁奎英, "丁茶山全書-年譜" (1961), 文獻編纂委員會出版部
- 李乙浩, "丁茶山의 生涯와 思想" (1991), 博英社
- 崔益翰, "實學派와 丁茶山" (1996), 한국문화사
- 白閔政, "丁若鏞의 哲學" (2007), 이학사
- 蔡茂松, "韓儒丁茶山反朱學內容之研究", 國立成功大學歷史學報, 4, pp.131~217 (1977)
- 黃愛平, "論淸代乾嘉時期的經世思潮", 中國哲學史, 4, pp.92~101 (1997)
- 蔡振豐, "丁若鏞的四書學", 臺大文史哲學報, pp.171~188 (2005)
- 單江東, "禮失而求諸野--評韓國碩儒丁若鏞的《與猶堂全書》", 漢學研究, pp.512~518 (2015)
- 高在錫, "茶山丁若鏞思想的脫性理學特性--以天觀和性論為主", 哲學與文化, pp.139~153 (2017)
- 鄭令媛, "丁若鏞《詩經講義》與朱子《詩》說對比研究", 朱子學年鑑, pp.284~285 (2018)
- 金玟, "丁若鏞哲學本體論研究:當代新儒家與天主教思想之比較為中心", 哲學與文化, pp.131~145 (2020)
- 蔡慧崑, "《詩經》諷諭精神之傳承--朝鮮詩人丁若鏞「三吏」對杜甫「三吏」的接受與轉化", 東海大學圖書館館刊, 56, pp.21~39 (2021)
- 崔信浩, "〈丁茶山 文學觀〉 - 그의 書簡을 통해 본 思想의 단면 -", 한국한문학연구, 1, pp.119~133 (1976)
- 金相洪, "茶山의 文學思想", 동양학, 10, pp.1~28 (1980)
- 宋載邵, "茶山 丁若鏞의 文學論", 대동문화연구, 18, pp.139~150 (1984)
- 金彥鐘, "〈丁茶山의 中國歷代文人에 대한 評價〉 - 한 (漢) , 당을 (唐) 중심으로 -", 한국한문학연구, 7, pp.191~219 (1984)
- 채미화, "茶山 丁若鏞의 文學思想 硏究", 한문학논집, 10, pp.193~204 (1992)
- 李先漢, "丁茶山 文學觀의 考察", 인문학연구, 25, pp.123~150 (1995)
- 田京源, "茶山 丁若鏞의 四言詩와 詩經論 및 詩認識의 상관성", 우리어문연구, 28, pp.223~252 (2007)
- 김종서, "「詩經講義總論」에 보이는 茶山의 詩經 인식", 漢文學報, 19, pp.1201~1237 (2008), 우리한문학회
- 김상홍, "茶山의 蘇洵ㆍ蘇轍 論", 한국한문학연구, (43), pp.225~252 (2009), 한국한문학회[DOI]
- 신두환, "茶山의 유배 漢詩에 나타난 屈騷의 美의식", 한문학논집(漢文學論集), 28, pp.125~152 (2009), 근역한문학회[DOI]
- 정일남, "茶山 丁若鏞의 “屈騷” 수용 양상", 한국한문학연구, (46), pp.387~415 (2010), 한국한문학회[DOI]
- 윤인현, "茶山의 儒家 문학관과 詩文學", 한문학논집(漢文學論集), 36, pp.187~219 (2013), 근역한문학회[DOI]
- 윤석화, "茶山의 四言古詩에 나타난<詩經>의 수용 양상", 한문학논집(漢文學論集), 40, pp.109~138 (2015), 근역한문학회[DOI]
- 류소진, "丁若鏞의 유배 시기 和蘇詩에 나타난 심리적 기제", 중국문학, 93, pp.235~253 (2017), 한국중국어문학회[DOI]
- 류소진, "丁若鏞의 시와 생활에 투영된 蘇軾", 중국어문학, (76), pp.61~92 (2017), 영남중국어문학회[DOI]
- 안찬순, "朱熹和陳獻章文學觀點之比較", 中國散文硏究集刊, 8, pp.136~168 (2018), 한국중국산문학회
- 안찬순, "從與朱熹的比較看李滉的文學觀點", 중국어문학논집, (118), pp.423~447 (2019), 중국어문학연구회
- 金彥鍾, "漢宋實用文章與朝鮮丁茶山文學論之研究", 碩士, pp.1980
- 南明鎮, "清初學術與韓儒丁茶山實學思想之研究", 博士, pp.1985
