중국학계의 단군 연구와 그 비판
Tangun Studies Achieved by Chinese Academic World
10
조회
0
다운로드
8
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper examined Tangun studies achieved by Chinese academic world. Chinese scholars’ studies on Tangun began at 1950’ and get into its stride from 1990’. So scholars who participate in Tangun studies are more than 50 and outcomes are presented over 70 at this time. Major of scholars are very diverse, i.e. history, literature, anthropology, politics. so directions and conclusions of studies are also diverse. Topics of Tangun studies are as follows. Establishment and development of Tangun myth, totemic characters of bear and tiger, influence of Tangun myth on later ages, cultural origins of Tangun myth. Chinese scholars contribute to Tangun studies in some points, for example extend chinese materials to make possible comparative studies on Tangun myth. But there are no denying the facts that they have many problems. First, chinese scholars' understanding on Korean historical materials were not sufficient. Second, chinese scholar interprets proper nouns appears on Tangun myth as chinese language in spite of they are Korean languages. Third, there are many logical jump and not positive studies to historical evidence. Fourth, Chinese scholars are stand on Chinese ethnocentrism. I hope to studies on Tangun myth in mutual help between Korean and Chinese academic world.
Abstract
This paper examined Tangun studies achieved by Chinese academic world. Chinese scholars’ studies on Tangun began at 1950’ and get into its stride from 1990’. So scholars who participate in Tangun studies are more than 50 and outcomes are presented over 70 at this time. Major of scholars are very diverse, i.e. history, literature, anthropology, politics. so directions and conclusions of studies are also diverse. Topics of Tangun studies are as follows. Establishment and development of Tangun myth, totemic characters of bear and tiger, influence of Tangun myth on later ages, cultural origins of Tangun myth. Chinese scholars contribute to Tangun studies in some points, for example extend chinese materials to make possible comparative studies on Tangun myth. But there are no denying the facts that they have many problems. First, chinese scholars' understanding on Korean historical materials were not sufficient. Second, chinese scholar interprets proper nouns appears on Tangun myth as chinese language in spite of they are Korean languages. Third, there are many logical jump and not positive studies to historical evidence. Fourth, Chinese scholars are stand on Chinese ethnocentrism. I hope to studies on Tangun myth in mutual help between Korean and Chinese academic world.
