한국에서의 미국학: 『미국학논집』에 대한 정량 분석

Abstract

This paper aims to reveal how American studies in Korea has evolved since 1969, focusing on the American Studies Association of Korea’s Journal of American Studies (ISSN: 1226-3753). This paper does not introduce or evaluate the qualities of American studies in Korea. Rather, from a statistical point of view, it provides a quantitative evaluation over the academic orientations and trends of American studies in Korea, based on all the published articles and miscellaneous papers of Journal of American Studies from 1969 to 2014. The total number of articles and paper amounts to 935. We classified the 935 samples according to their languages (Korean and English), affiliations (institutions in Korea and institutions in foreign countries), academic topics (literature, popular culture, and social science), and types of writing (article, presidential addresses, reviews, etc). And, where relevant, we visualized our research results chronologically so as to foreground any historical change in the research trends of American studies in Korea. The major findings are as follows: 1) Despite few contributions from foreign scholars, from the 1970s to 1990s, the English language was the dominant academic language for American studies in Korea; 2) Our analysis of the author affiliations reveals that American studies in Korea is predominantly centered on the Seoul Capital Area; 3) The proportion of social science studies in the journal was higher than literature and popular culture until 1990; 4) The major academic research interests of American studies in Korea are oriented to literature, political science and history. In short, since 1969, American studies in Korea has been led and dominated by Korean scholars in the Seoul Capital Area whose academic interests are mainly literature, political science or history, and the majority of those scholars published their articles in English. Since its beginning in 1969, the American Studies Association of Korea’s Journal of American Studies has contributed greatly to the quantitative and qualitative growth of American studies in Korea. When provided with quantitative evaluation of the journal’s publications, we can have a more balanced understanding not only of the journal’s academic orientation but also of American studies in Korea in general.