본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

비교문화사의 관점에서 본 한국과 몽골의 민속

The Folklore of Korea and Mongolia in Perspective of Comparative Cultural History

2

조회

0

다운로드

5

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

The cross-cultural research premises understanding other cultures; yet improve and understand their own culture more deeply for now. The fundamental is finding out the identity of its mother culture. Indeed, the cultural identity is not only homogeneous of them but explore the characteristics of culture should be based on the cultural universality that can be seen throughout the other cultures. The research direction can be varied which way should we choose whether diachronic or synchronic perspectives in order to compare both Korean culture and Mongolian culture. Above all, the category of research can be varied the size of comparison. A couple of points to be considered when it comes to discussing in these manners; on account of space consideration according to writer’s ability, I decided to limit the main topics are the important traits of the succession of beliefs, language and behaviors. According to the fruitful results of comparison study of Korean and Mongolia, the original name of Mac tribe might be Khori which can be seen Wiryak(魏略) or Mongolbisa ; some relationships of the transliteration in Koryo(高麗) and Kuryo(句麗). In the late Koryo period, the international exchange between Koryo Dynasty and Imperial Mongolia(麗元) was concrete and practical. The historical relationships between two cultures were dynamically acculturated; consequently, it is highly probable that two countries may have identical culture and possessed simultaneously. Furthermore, this is one of the reasons that existing folk materials are very similar. The relations between Eowar [鄂博] and Seonangdang a pile of stones, also, the new year eve taboos which are related to folklore can be seen at the same time. Stone totem pole culture can be found as well, such as Stone Statue[Huncholro] and Grandpa Stone[Dolharbang]. Despite cultural tradition of shamans which is merely some phenomenal difference, we can differentiate it in many ways. We are able to understand culture more deeply and have a clue to look into two other cultures. However, it seems to me that it is an impossible task to compare and understand in diachronic per se, due to the lack of research material and data. We are looking at Korean and Mongolian culture more closely. It is the important task on the cross cultural research on Korean -Mongolian folktale, which is a stream of folk literature. In order to study on folktales both countries, we have to have texts. Early research was carried out with secondary data from Japan and China rather than the data from Mongolia. Therefore, the most research result was discussed outlines of folktales roughly, it concluded in the perspectives of diffusionism after all. Thanks to the publication of Mongolian books which are translated into Korean, we might have a chance to look up and find out folk literature perspective so that we can see some characteristics of Mongolia folktales in detail. There are many similarities in play as well which a sort of the succession of behaviors is. Especially, many board games were found whether it is identical or similar. It may be a deductive conclusion; this board game is reflected on characteristics of the nomad culture. This may be a frame of reference that we can discover the origin of our culture. In the historical context, we have to stress out the diachronic research, when we have a cross-cultural research on Korea and Mongolia. However, we should not ignore synchronic data, although the material is insufficient. If we suppose that the highland of Mongolia and the Lake Baikal is the origin of our culture, the qualitative result cannot be made out; the nostalgia of the original of homeland per se. It is the time that we have an eagle eye on approaching to Mongolia folklore in many ways. Through this effort, I expect to have a new horizon of the cross cultural research between Korea and Mongolia.

Abstract

The cross-cultural research premises understanding other cultures; yet improve and understand their own culture more deeply for now. The fundamental is finding out the identity of its mother culture. Indeed, the cultural identity is not only homogeneous of them but explore the characteristics of culture should be based on the cultural universality that can be seen throughout the other cultures. The research direction can be varied which way should we choose whether diachronic or synchronic perspectives in order to compare both Korean culture and Mongolian culture. Above all, the category of research can be varied the size of comparison. A couple of points to be considered when it comes to discussing in these manners; on account of space consideration according to writer’s ability, I decided to limit the main topics are the important traits of the succession of beliefs, language and behaviors. According to the fruitful results of comparison study of Korean and Mongolia, the original name of Mac tribe might be Khori which can be seen Wiryak(魏略) or Mongolbisa ; some relationships of the transliteration in Koryo(高麗) and Kuryo(句麗). In the late Koryo period, the international exchange between Koryo Dynasty and Imperial Mongolia(麗元) was concrete and practical. The historical relationships between two cultures were dynamically acculturated; consequently, it is highly probable that two countries may have identical culture and possessed simultaneously. Furthermore, this is one of the reasons that existing folk materials are very similar. The relations between Eowar [鄂博] and Seonangdang a pile of stones, also, the new year eve taboos which are related to folklore can be seen at the same time. Stone totem pole culture can be found as well, such as Stone Statue[Huncholro] and Grandpa Stone[Dolharbang]. Despite cultural tradition of shamans which is merely some phenomenal difference, we can differentiate it in many ways. We are able to understand culture more deeply and have a clue to look into two other cultures. However, it seems to me that it is an impossible task to compare and understand in diachronic per se, due to the lack of research material and data. We are looking at Korean and Mongolian culture more closely. It is the important task on the cross cultural research on Korean -Mongolian folktale, which is a stream of folk literature. In order to study on folktales both countries, we have to have texts. Early research was carried out with secondary data from Japan and China rather than the data from Mongolia. Therefore, the most research result was discussed outlines of folktales roughly, it concluded in the perspectives of diffusionism after all. Thanks to the publication of Mongolian books which are translated into Korean, we might have a chance to look up and find out folk literature perspective so that we can see some characteristics of Mongolia folktales in detail. There are many similarities in play as well which a sort of the succession of behaviors is. Especially, many board games were found whether it is identical or similar. It may be a deductive conclusion; this board game is reflected on characteristics of the nomad culture. This may be a frame of reference that we can discover the origin of our culture. In the historical context, we have to stress out the diachronic research, when we have a cross-cultural research on Korea and Mongolia. However, we should not ignore synchronic data, although the material is insufficient. If we suppose that the highland of Mongolia and the Lake Baikal is the origin of our culture, the qualitative result cannot be made out; the nostalgia of the original of homeland per se. It is the time that we have an eagle eye on approaching to Mongolia folklore in many ways. Through this effort, I expect to have a new horizon of the cross cultural research between Korea and Mongolia.

참고문헌 (44)

  1. 고광민, "돌의 민속지" (2006), 각
  2. 고려대학교 민족문화연구소, "한국민속대관(세시풍속․전승놀이편)" (1982)
  3. 김태곤, "한국민간신앙연구" (1983), 집문당
  4. 박소현, "몽골 서사가의 음악적 연구", 박사, pp.2004
  5. 박소현, "한국과 몽골의 서사가 비교, In 신을 부르는 노래 몽골의 토올" (2005), 민속원
  6. 박원길, "고대 몽골의 금기에 대하여 - A.D. 13C 동서양의 문헌을 중심으로", 민속학연구, (13), pp.41~73 (2003), 국립민속박물관
  7. 박원길, "몽골의 오보 및 오보제, In 몽골민속현장답사기" (1998), 민속원
  8. 박원길, "몽골의 문화와 자연지리" (1996), 두솔
  9. 박원길, "한민족의 기원과 형성에 관한 북방 기원설", 고대아시아의 문명이동과 한민족의 형성(국제심포지움 발표요지문) (2001)
  10. 박종성, "한국․만주․몽골의 창세신화 변천의 의미", 구비문학연구, 11 (2000), 한국구비문학회
  11. 박환영, "몽골의 가축과 유목문화, In 몽골의 유목문화와 민속 읽기" (2005), 민속원
  12. 배영동, "아시아 의식주생활의 비교연구를 위한 모색", 비교민속학, (34), pp.9~31 (2007), 비교민속학회
  13. 서대석, "구비문학의 비교문학적 연구과제", 구비문학연구, 1 (1994), 한국구비문학회
  14. 민속학분야 답사보고, 한몽 공동학술조사-동몽골 1차년도 보고서, "설성경", 한몽학술조사연구협회․몽골과학원, ~ (1992)
  15. 성기열, "민담 <선녀와 나뭇꾼>의 한․일 비교", 인문과학연구소 논문집, (8) (1982), 인하대 인문과학연구소
  16. 손진태, "조선의 누석단과 蒙古의 鄂博에 就하여, In 조선민족문화의 연구" (1948), 을유문화사
  17. 손진태, "한국민족설화의 연구" (1947), 을유출판사
  18. 신종한, "벤스설화의 미학적 특성에 관한 고찰", 몽골학, (9) (2000), 한국몽골학회
  19. 이선아, "몽골 영웅서사시의 전개와 변모-신화에서 인터넷게임까지", 석사, pp.2004
  20. 이안나, "금기를 통해 본 몽골의 민속-생활 예법과 의례를 중심으로", 중앙민속학, (12) (2007), 중앙대학교 한국문화유산연구소
  21. 이안나, "몽골인의 생활과 풍속" (2005), 첫눈에
  22. 이평래, "몽골의 차강 사르(신년) 오보제", 민속학연구, (10), pp.141~168 (2002), 국립민속박물관
  23. 이평래, "몽골인의 사냥 전통", 생활문물연구, 18 (2006)
  24. 장장식, "고려 만월대 출토 참고누판 연구", 한국암각화연구, 11 (2008), 한국암각화학회
  25. 장장식, "몽골 ‘호리 투메드 메르겐 신화’의 문화사적 의미-한국․만주의 ‘나무꾼과 선녀형 설화’와의 비교를 통해", 동아시아 문화와 예술, 4 (2007), 동아시아문화학회
  26. 장장식, "몽골 금기어의 원리와 몇 가지 특징", 몽골학, (9) (2000), 한국몽골학회
  27. 장장식, "몽골의 ‘어머니나무’신앙과 한식맞이굿", 한국무속학, (4), pp.101~130 (2002), 한국무속학회
  28. 장장식, "생태적 관점에서 본 몽골 유목민의 금기와 의미", 비교민속학, (41), pp.41~70 (2010), 비교민속학회
  29. 장장식, "한․몽 ‘나무꾼과 선녀 설화’의 비교 연구", 민속학연구, (9) (2001), 국립민속박물관
  30. 장장식, "한국과 몽골 설화의 비교연구", 비교민속학, (33), pp.199~228 (2007), 비교민속학회
  31. 장장식, "한몽 ‘고누’놀이 비교연구, In 한몽 민속문화의 비교" (2002), 비교민속학회
  32. 장장식, "몽골민속기행" (2002), 자우출판사
  33. 장장식, "한국과 몽골의 판놀이 연구-고누형 판놀이를 중심으로-", 비교민속학, (38), pp.205~240 (2009), 비교민속학회
  34. 전경욱, "한국의 전통연희" (2004), 학고재
  35. 최남선, "不咸文化論, In 육당최남선전집 2" (1951), 현암사
  36. 최남선, "외국으로서 귀화한 조선 고담, In 육당 최남선전집 5" (1973), 현암사
  37. 최래옥, "한국과 몽골의"사신과 수문답 설화(手問(說話)"비교, In 소암 권오성박사화갑기념 음악학논총" (2000), 민속원
  38. 최원오, "한국과 중국소수민족의 구비서사시 비교연구", 구비문학연구, 12 (2001), 한국구비문학회
  39. 이병도, "삼국사기" (1986), 을유문화사
  40. 유원수, "몽골비사" (2004), 사계절
  41. 데. 바이에르, "몽돌석인상의 연구" (1994), 혜안
  42. 오.푸렙, "몽골 무교의 신령, 엉거트의 특징", 몽골과 한국 민속의 비교 심포지엄-개교 95주년 기념 국제학술회의 발표 요지 (2000), 고려대학교 민족문화연구원 민속학연구소
  43. 하이시히, "몽골의 종교" (2003), 소나무
  44. Seitel,P, "Proverbs: A Social Use of Metaphor, In Folklore Genres" (1976), University of Texas Press

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (12건)