경전해석방식으로서의 賦比興論 ― 王夫之의 ≪詩經≫ 해석방식 분석을 중심으로
Analysison Fu, Bi, Xing as Modes of Interpretation of Confucian Classics ― Focused on the Interpretive Structure of Shihjing(≪詩經≫) by WangFu-zhi(王夫之)
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The main idea of this essay begins with raising two questions: the one is that why Wang Fuzhi did not mention Fu, Bi, Xing in Shiguangzhuan, the relatively liberal version of his commentary on Shihing, while he highlighted Fu, Bi, Xing or Xing of Xing Guan Qun Yuan in his other texts related to poetic criticism. The other one is that is there any effective study methods to grasp the characteristics of Wang Fu-zhi's interpretation for Shihjing. For answering these questions, we may borrow the hermeneutic theory of interpretation as a method of analysing commentary of Classical Chinese texts from Wang Nian-en and try to apply Fu, Bi, Xing as modes of interpretation to analyze Wang Fu-zhi's interpretation of Baizhou, a poem from Shihjing as an experimental example, which we think as one of the most typical and multiple layers of interpretation in Wang's commentary. This research suggests that Wang's commentary contains the aspects of Fu, Bi, Xing as modes of interpretation and it reveals the characteristics of Wang's interpretation in a more effective way. The result further shows that there are positive possibilities that we could detect other characteristics through applying Fu, Bi, Xing as modes of interpretation to analyze commentaries of Shihjing.
Abstract
The main idea of this essay begins with raising two questions: the one is that why Wang Fuzhi did not mention Fu, Bi, Xing in Shiguangzhuan, the relatively liberal version of his commentary on Shihing, while he highlighted Fu, Bi, Xing or Xing of Xing Guan Qun Yuan in his other texts related to poetic criticism. The other one is that is there any effective study methods to grasp the characteristics of Wang Fu-zhi's interpretation for Shihjing. For answering these questions, we may borrow the hermeneutic theory of interpretation as a method of analysing commentary of Classical Chinese texts from Wang Nian-en and try to apply Fu, Bi, Xing as modes of interpretation to analyze Wang Fu-zhi's interpretation of Baizhou, a poem from Shihjing as an experimental example, which we think as one of the most typical and multiple layers of interpretation in Wang's commentary. This research suggests that Wang's commentary contains the aspects of Fu, Bi, Xing as modes of interpretation and it reveals the characteristics of Wang's interpretation in a more effective way. The result further shows that there are positive possibilities that we could detect other characteristics through applying Fu, Bi, Xing as modes of interpretation to analyze commentaries of Shihjing.
참고문헌 (29)
- 紀 昀, "四庫全書總目提要" (1999), 海南出版社
- 毛 公, "毛詩鄭箋" (1979), 新興書局
- 朱 熹, "四書章句集注⋅孟子" (1996), 中華書局
- 朱 熹, "朱子全書 上" (2002), 上海古籍出版社⋅安徽教育出版社
- 王夫之, "詩經稗疏⋅詩廣傳" (1996), 嶽麓書社
- 王夫之, "古詩評選⋅唐詩評選⋅明詩評選" (1996), 嶽麓書社
- 王夫之, "薑齋詩話" (1996), 嶽麓書社
- 김근, "賦·比·興의 개념과 기능에 대한 현대적 재조명", 중국어문학지, (25), pp.255~285 (2007), 중국어문학회
- 김의정, "《詩經》‘興’ 연구의 성과와 전망- 최근 10년간 한국과 중국의 논의를 중심으로 -", 중국어문학지, (45), pp.87~111 (2013), 중국어문학회
- 이종무, "船山詩學에 나타난 詩學範疇 ‘興’에 관한 小考", 중국학, (37), pp.167~194 (2010), 대한중국학회
- 조성천, "王夫之 시가 사상과 예술론" (2008), 도서출판 역락
- 納秀豔, "“以詩解詩”與≪詩經≫的祛魅—王夫之≪詩經≫研究方法管窺＞", 中南大學學報(社會科學版), 20(1) (2014), 中山大學
- 納秀豔, "王夫之≪詩經≫學研究", 박사, pp.2014
- 羅金燕, "王夫之＜詩廣傳＞闡釋思想和闡釋方法研究", 석사, pp.2008
- 龐飛, "王夫之‘興’的美學意義", 석사, pp.2002
- 袁愈宗, "＜詩廣傳＞詩學思想研究", 박사, pp.2006
- 劉毓慶, "詩義稽考 第2冊" (2006), 學苑出版社
- 劉懷榮, "賦比興與中國詩學硏究" (2007), 人民出版社
- 李健, "比興思維研究-對中國古代一種藝術思維方式的美學考察" (2003), 安徽教育出版社
- 李鍾武, "王夫之詩學範疇硏究", 박사, pp.2003
- 張萬民, "中西詩學的匯通與分歧: 英語世界的比興研究", 文化與詩學, (1) (2011), 北京師範大學文藝學研究中心
- 趙沛霖, "興的源起" (1987), 中國社會科學出版社
- 錢鍾書, "管錐編(一)⋅毛詩正義(60則)⋅一五柏舟" (2008), 三聯書店
- 陳麗虹, "賦比興的現代闡釋" (2002), 中國美術學院出版社
- 崔海峰, "王夫之詩學範疇論" (2006), 中國社會科學出版社
- 崔海峰, "王夫之詩學思想論稿" (2012), 中國社會科學出版社
- 彭 鋒, "詩可以興: 古代宗敎⋅倫理⋅哲學與藝術的美學闡釋" (2003), 安徽敎育出版社
- Ming Dong Gu, "Fu-Bi-Xing: A Metatheory of Poetry-making", Chinese Literature: Essays, Articles, Reviews, 19 (1997)
- Wang Nian En, "The xing: a comparative approach to Chinese theories of the literary symbolic", pp.1992