본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

校正廳本 『書傳諺解』의 經學的 고찰

A Study on the Gyojeongcheon Version of 『Seojeon Eonhae』 from the Perspective of Confucian Classics

0

조회

0

다운로드

1

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류기타인문학

초록

The Gyojeongcheong version of 『Seojeon Eonhae』 was lost during the Imjinwaeran, and reproduced. From the perspective of Confucian classics, 『Seojeon Eonhae』 has main features, especially in terms of structure and interpretation, such as being either scriptural or historic, some scriptural statements that may seem to be fake, others that are difficult to understand and different theories. These features were influenced by the characteristics of 『Seogyeong』. Thoroughly following 『Seojipjeon』, 『Seojeon Eonhae』 consisted of chapters and sections. In particular, some scriptural statements that 『Seojipjeon』 found wrong were included in 『Seojeon Eonhae』 after corrected. This was due to little trust in some such statements of 『Seogyeong』. Unlike 『Saseo Eonhae』, 『Seojeon Eonhae』 put its priority on the honorific system of language depending on situational logics rather than the theory of Taotong since 『Seogyeong』 is a classical sculpture and simultaneously a historical literature. 『Seojeon Eonhae』 mainly followed 『Seojipjeon』 in interpreting sculptural statements, but sometimes accepted minor or ancient annotations. It also strongly tended to follow conventional wisdom while negotiating all theories by local scholars, in an attempt to reduce any interpretational errors of 『Seogyeong』.

Abstract

The Gyojeongcheong version of 『Seojeon Eonhae』 was lost during the Imjinwaeran, and reproduced. From the perspective of Confucian classics, 『Seojeon Eonhae』 has main features, especially in terms of structure and interpretation, such as being either scriptural or historic, some scriptural statements that may seem to be fake, others that are difficult to understand and different theories. These features were influenced by the characteristics of 『Seogyeong』. Thoroughly following 『Seojipjeon』, 『Seojeon Eonhae』 consisted of chapters and sections. In particular, some scriptural statements that 『Seojipjeon』 found wrong were included in 『Seojeon Eonhae』 after corrected. This was due to little trust in some such statements of 『Seogyeong』. Unlike 『Saseo Eonhae』, 『Seojeon Eonhae』 put its priority on the honorific system of language depending on situational logics rather than the theory of Taotong since 『Seogyeong』 is a classical sculpture and simultaneously a historical literature. 『Seojeon Eonhae』 mainly followed 『Seojipjeon』 in interpreting sculptural statements, but sometimes accepted minor or ancient annotations. It also strongly tended to follow conventional wisdom while negotiating all theories by local scholars, in an attempt to reduce any interpretational errors of 『Seogyeong』.

참고문헌 (17)

  1. "선조실록", ~
  2. "광해군일기", ~
  3. "인조실록", ~
  4. "승정원일기", ~
  5. 최석기, "韓國經學 硏究의 回顧와 展望", 대동한문학(大東漢文學), (19), pp.153~213 (2003), 대동한문학회 (구.교남한문학회)
  6. 崔錫起, "晦齋의 『大學章句』 改訂과 後代의 論辨", 정신문화연구, 21(2) (1998)
  7. 유영옥, "교정청본 사서언해의 경학적 연구", 박사, 한문학, pp.2010
  8. 유영옥, "校正廳本 『書經諺解』의 존대법", 동양한문학연구, 44, pp.283~309 (2016), 동양한문학회[DOI]
  9. 이영경, "사서삼경(四書三經)의 언해 양상과 표기상의 특징", 우리말글, 57, pp.29~53 (2013), 우리말글학회[DOI]
  10. 李忠九, "經書 諺解 연구", 박사, 국어국문학, pp.1990
  11. 김항수, "16세기 경서언해의 사상사적 고찰", 奎章閣, 10, pp.40~ (1987)
  12. 윤용선, "諺解 자료의 역사와 언어 양상에 대한 검토", 우리말글, 56, pp.139~168 (2012), 우리말글학회
  13. 양현정, "다산 정약용의 상서 연구와 『매씨서평』", 석사, 역사교육, pp.2010
  14. 劉國忠, "『尙書』与朱子的政治观", 율곡학연구, 17, pp.127~155 (2008), (사)율곡학회
  15. 유영옥, "校正廳本 四書諺解의 존대법과 道統論", 대동한문학(大東漢文學), (31), pp.245~276 (2009), 대동한문학회 (구.교남한문학회)
  16. 이은호, "조선 전기의 서경학書經學과 『서석의書釋義』", 국학연구, (25), pp.99~136 (2014), 한국국학진흥원[DOI]
  17. 이은호, "조선전기 서경 해석 연구 : 양촌과 퇴계를 중심으로", 박사, 유교철학, pp.2011

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (11건)