은유와 환유에 대하여: 개념의 수용 양상 및 확장적 이해를 위한 시론(試論)

Abstract

The problematic consciousness of this study was derived from the followings: first, what one can obtain by examining the patterns and contexts of modern rhetoric being accepted including the metaphor concept? Answers to the question can be answered by looking into the patterns of the traditional concepts of thinking and transmission being combined together in the acceptance process of concepts of modern transitional period. The process would also allow one to demonstrate the reasons why the original meanings of concepts were restricted or fixated and the circumstances behind metaphor and simile claiming a literary status by making a concept pair for many years. Second, why does one convert the concept pair learned in metaphor and simile into metonymy for questioning? What does such a question mean? Trying to answer the question, the study mainly demonstrated that when two concepts establish a single concept pair, it can enable a contemplation over the essence of language and further broaden the understanding and perception of the world. In addition, such discussions can read the meanings of modern Korean literature at the conceptual level and make a contribution to the education of core concepts. It was in Shinmisahak by Shimamura Ryutaro that the influences of Japanese rhetoric became apparent in Joseon. Shimamura, of course, introduced the theories and concepts of rhetoric based on English literature in the name of "Misahak." The ways of understanding hybrid concepts that were not smooth reflect the history of modern rhetoric in Joseon and also that of modern writing studies. It was after Kim Gi-rim established contemporary rhetoric after Liberation that the framework of trope concept category changed. What was important was that they changed the concept of rhetoric or systemized the concept categories according to the situation of Joseon even though it was inevitable to accept it through Japan. The concept pair of simile and metaphor was the product of that process. The homologous pair concept of metaphor and metonymy is on the premise of differences in thinking ways. The differences in the principle and structure of homologous pair were systemized by Jakobson. One of the most important advantages brought by that way of understanding was that the concept pair of metaphor and metonymy originated in linguistics but could expand to a thinking structure beyond the contemplation over the essence of language. Most debaters from Jakobson to David Lodge overcame the simplicity of metaphor-centricism since Aristotle and established the diversity of trope and thinking in two axes. One of the critical points raised by the concept pair of metaphor and metonymy is the re-perception of metonymy, which involves the expansion of thinking aroused by the concept of metonymy and applicability provided to the prosaic reality. Under the current curriculums and authorized textbooks system, the understanding of concept pair of metaphor and simile and the concept categories is completed in the middle school curriculum. The present study maintained that the concept pair of metaphor and simile, which is explained with the principle of similarity and absence and presence of explicitness, should be replaced with that of metaphor and metonymy, which operates in the principles of similarity and adjacency, and that it should move toward the expansive understanding of metonymy concept whose need had been raised today. The study particularly emphasized the manifestation of cases of metaphor and metonymy and metonymical imagination in the world of prose.