계몽의 빈 틈, 근대적 주체성의 장소: 『소년』지에 나타난 문체의 혼종성의 의미

Abstract

The unity of speech and writing is the ideal standard in the establishment of modern language and literature, and this is closely related to how linguistic features contribute to national and ethnic boundaries. Generally, the conflict between Chinese and Korean characters is resolved by adopting a mixed style of Chinese and Korean, followed by generalization into pure Korean. If the writing style in Sonyŏn is regarded as the practice of mixing Chinese with Korean characters and the pioneering of a modern style, the hybrid style can be interpreted as the result of a transitional experiment. Since the unity of speech and writing involves the matching of motives with their written expressions, the inner world and language are exhibited at the same time. The “birth of modern subjectivity” is thus considered a premise of all styles of writing. However, in the writing style of Sonyŏn, the first-person narrator is presented as highly insecure. In Sonyŏn, Ch’oe Namsŏn uses the “deora[더라]” verb ending in most of his writings. He placed himself in the center because he wanted to share his extensive knowledge with others and create a platform of exchange. With Sonyŏn acting as an instance behind the platform, it is difficult for Ch’oe himself to be separated from the magazine. The modern subject who possesses an inner world is unable to assume the first-person pronoun of “I” under the assigned system of knowledge. Sentences with “I” as the subject and ending with “da[다]” appear only in a few travel essays. Ch’oe’s travel essays are not accounts of his personal experience. The pronoun “I” and the “da[다]” ending, intertwined with Chinese and pure Korean characters, scenic descriptions and a range of knowledge, can only be glimpsed in the gap between the hybrid writing styles. That is, the “da[다]” ending is employed at the point when further arrangement becomes impossible, and introduced in the occasion a lgap. “I,” which serves as the modern subject, appears in the remaining gaps. These small gaps are where the stage of enlightenment begins to crack, and epistemological dissemination occurred. “I” failed to have its own representation in the allocated language, resulting in the use of different names by Ch’oe Namsŏn. It was only under different names that “I” could have a place on the stage of enlightenment. From this perspective, “I” as a modern subject is seen as a “nameless place” existing in the gap between hybrid styles.