한국 한문학 연구에 대한 해외로부터의 학적 요구

Abstract

The concept of “Sino-Korean Literature” refers to not only Korean classical literature written in classical Chinese in a narrow sense, but also traditional humanities in a broad sense. “Sino-Korean Literature” in a narrow sense is based on traditional humanities i.e. Sino-Korean Literature in a broad sense, and Sino-Korean Literature in general has developed based on philology. It is needed to exmaine the relationship between them to consider “Sino-Korean Literature” in a narrow sense and to sketch the phase of development of it as they keep close relationships. The traditional meaning of the term “literature” or “letters” (文) in premodern Korea as elsewhere in East Asia encompassed a wider scope than the modern concept of “literature” (文學). It refers not only to refined writing in Literary Chinese, but also to more utilitarian public and private writings in Literary Chinese composed in the context of daily life. Thus, “Sino-Korean literature” includes not only literary writings but also historical records, scholarly essays, public documents such as diplomatic correspondence, and private texts such as correspondence in Literary Chinese. Works in Literary Chinese with interspersed vernacular expressions also belong under the purview of Sino-Korean literature. It is needed to understand the meaning of Sino-Korean literature in this broad sense and to reconstruct its historical development in its own context. This reflection is raised from foreign academic world with the request for reviewing the study of Sino-Korean literature. This article focuses to the following matters among the requests from foreign academic world. ① to understand the concept of chinese character cultural area in East Asia and its circumstances ② to introduce the methodology of comparative literature and culture ③ to reconstruct the context of writing and to write biographies ④ to construct history of controversies and thoughts ⑤ to reflect on the environment in which the concept of traditional 文 was established, and on the relationship between traditional 文 and political power It is true that there was a invisible boundary that limited the research area concerning its era and subject etc. in studying Sino-Korean literature and it was rather neighboring country scholars who achieved lots of research results concerning literature in North South States Period and Koryo Period. There are also several attempts to understand the culture and literature in Chinese character cultural area in a broad sense by understanding the term “literature” in premodern period not with the modern Western concept of “literature” but with a concept with wider scope: History of Japanese literature edited by Komine Kazuaki, History of Japanese ‘literature’ edited by Kono Kimiko and Wiebke Denecke, Oxford Handbook of Classical Chinese Literature edited by Wiebke Denecke, Wai-Yee Li, Xiaofei Tian. These attempts correspond to that of professor Zhang Bo-wei that comprehends the culture and literature in Chinese character cultural area in a broad sense with the concept of “the cultural area of Chinese literature”. It is needed that Sino-Korean literature study scholars overcome the limitations of regionalism and reconstruct the history of classical Chinese literature in East Asia with their own approach.