문학교육과 ‘담론’

Abstract

There is a tendency In Korean language education and research—a tendency of making indirect or direct reference to the concept of "discourse" such as "critical discourse analysis" and "critical literaryness". This research tendency is meaningful in that the concept of the "subject" and "meaning" is changed from a static one to a dynamic one as the "subject-language" composition of existing research is replaced with "subject-language-reality". This paper, while acknowledging its practical significance, sought to clarify that there is still a static element in the logic of "ideology" in such studies. The study also looked at Foucault and Habermas, as they provide main rationale and premise for the studies that discuss ideological analysis. Foucault and Habermas have conflicting positions with respect to subject/ reason, but both focus on the ideology as a discourse that defines each between subject and language, and between language and reality. On the other hand, when discourse and ideology are the issues, there is a contradiction: "How can we recognize and explain ideologies that are not linguistic or recognized?" The study examined how such a contradiction is expressed in literature education and research aimed at "liberation of the subject" through "ideology analysis", and pointed out the following two: first, the distinction between sentences and ideologies is ambiguous from the educational content. Second, they tend to define the text as a non-ideological place. The study also defined a school as a non-ideological place.