글로버메뉴 바로가기 본문 바로가기 하단메뉴 바로가기

논문검색은 역시 페이퍼서치

인문논총검색

Seoul National University the Journal of Humanites


  • - 주제 : 인문과학분야 > 기타(인문과학)
  • - 성격 : 학술지
  • - 간기: 계간
  • - 국내 등재 : KCI 등재
  • - 해외 등재 : -
  • - ISSN : 1598-3021
  • - 간행물명 변경 사항 :
논문제목
수록 범위 : 37권 0호 (1997)

"문화연구"를 통한 문학연구의 확장 가능성에 대한 고찰

김성곤 ( Seong Kon Kim )
6,200
키워드보기
초록보기
Established in higher education as a dominant discourse, literary study has exercised a powerful hegemony in the academy since the early twentieth century. It proclaimed that it could provide the core for a modern education in the humanities by practicing the old ideal of humanist education, that is to say, producing a gentleman and a scholar in a Christian society. In the meantime, the institution of literary study has rested on an relatively secure and unchallenged foundation of literary canon and highbrow culture of the elite. Recently, however, literary study as a privileged canon was challenged, fell into crisis, and finally collapsed. And it is now being transformed into the so-called broader Cultural Studies which incorporates both canonical literary texts and non-canonical cultural texts. Cultural studies suggests that literary study embrace popular culture, such as film, television, video, advertizing, pop songs, comics, and popular novels, all of which as a social document faithfully registers the Zeitgeist of the times and permeates everyday experience and life. As a result, the distinction between canonical texts and non-canonical ones became eroded. As the binary opposition between high and popular culture on which literary study is founded becomes under attack, Cultural Studies steps aside from elite literature and includes the texts of everyday life in its object of study, considerably broadening the horizon of the field of literary study. In the past, literary study dismissed popular texts as something that seriously lacks imagination and unity. Cultural Studies argues, however, that it is also possible to apply a system of ``deep`` or ``close`` reading previously practised only on canonical texts to popular non-canonical texts. Cultural Studies thus opens up a whole new possibility for studying and teaching literature and culture even though it entails some unsolved methodological problems in practice. Opening up the canon by Cultural Studies seems to be inevitable in this age of popular culture and so does the collapse of the old paradigm of literary study based on the privileged center of canonical texts and highbrow literature. Cultural Studies, then, could be a new paradigm for the future of literary study, which would significantly enlarge the scope of literary study.

『황무지』의 언어 무의식

이정호 ( Chong Ho Lee )
5,800
키워드보기
초록보기
The Waste Land has been read from different approaches and in diverse ways. The body of criticism on this poem from a psychoanalytic viewpoint, however, is not as copious as that of other approaches. One reason why there is very scanty body of criticism on this poem from a psychoanalytic approach is that Eliot himself has evinced a strong aversion to psychoanalysis. In my opinion, the fact that Eliot himself did not like psychoanalysis will be the stronger reason for us to read it form such an approach. Jacques Lacan``s psychoanalytic theory, however, can be a great help in reading The Waste Land in this respect, because Lacanian approach emphasizes the linguistic aspect of the unconscious. The Waste Land is very amenable to the Lacanian psychoanalysis because Lacan basically considers the unconscious to be structured like a language. The poem demonstrates that it is a text of the linguistic unconscious from the beginning by its two quotations -one of the sybil, and the other for Ezra Pound. These two quotations show that the unconscious of the poem is situated at the locus of the conflict between the imaginary and the symbolic. Many gaps in the poem itself prove that this assumption is not far from the truth.

라틴어에서 불어로의 언어 변화 과정에서 나타난 음성적 변화의 몇몇 지배적 양상 연구

장재성 ( Chae Seong Chang )
6,100
키워드보기
초록보기
Le francais appartient au groupe des langues romanes. II est, dans son fond essentiel, une transformation du latin. Alors que le latin, ancetre du francais, etait une langue flexionnelle, le francais moderne ne connalt plus la dedinaison. A Rome, une distinction s``etablit avec le temps entre le latin classique(sermo urbanus) dont se sont servis les ecrivains et le latin vulgaire(sermo plebeius) dont usait le peuple. Ces deux formes du latin en sont venues a diverger assez profondement entre elles par leur prononciation, leur syntaxe. C``est du latin vulgaire que sont sorties les langues romanes dont le francais s``est developpe dans la region Gaule. Mais le latin vulgaire, importe dans la region Gaule, a subi l``influence de nouveaux envahisseurs germaniques, et en particulier celle des Francs. En parlant le latin avec leur accent germanique, les Francs de la region parisienne ont modifie l``apparence de cette langue et contribue a donner son allure generale au parler de l``lle-de-France, qui est a la source du francais actuel. Du latin au francais, le point de depart des changements etait le changement phonetique dont la diphtongaison et le syncope, que nous avons analyses, se sont produits du premier siecle au sixieme siecle. Nous pretons attention a six facteurs dans les changements phonetiques du latin au francais : accent du latin (il etait originellement accent de hauteur, mais il est devenu accent d``intensite), position des segments dans un mot, environnement des segments, caractere des changements, elements changes (au sens de la theorie de Kaye, Lowenstamm, Vergnaud), temps ou se sont produits des changements. Avec ces six facteurs, nous avons analyse deux changements vocaliques d``apres la theorie de KLV, qui a pour but d``expliquer tous les phenomenes phonologiques par des compositions et des decompositions des ele Cette theorie nous fait voir qu``il y a une unite dominante d``une certaine forme en relation avec une ou plusieurs unites subordonnees dans tous les phenomenes phonologiques. KLV appellent cette relation le gouvemement. II est defini comme la relation binaire et asymetrique, maintenue entre deux segments adjacents. Cette relation gouvemementale est consideree comme le motif principal des processus phonologiques. Ce qui veut dire que tout processus phonologique comporte toujours la motivation pertinente par laquelle on eliniine la relation arbitraire entre le processus phonologique et l``environnement clans lequel il se produit. En analysant les deux changements vocaliques, diphtongaison et syncope, nous avons verifie que le processus des changements diachroniques depend aussi de la relation entre le gouvemeur et le gouveme dans la structure inteme des mots. Nous avons aussi essaye de repondre a la question: pourquoi les segments subissent sans cesse des changements. C``est pour obtenir la stabilite de la structure inteme des mots qui ont subi l``influence des environnements historiques et sociaux,

국어의 사잇소리 형상

문양수 ( Moon Yang Soo )
5,800
키워드보기
초록보기
This paper aims to clarify what the underlying form of the ``sais-sori`` (epenthetic sound) of Korean is and by experimenting phonetically, to find traces of the ``sais-sori`` that do not reveal the phonetic values on the surface. The underlying form of the ``sais-sori`` of Korean is represented as /s/ (/ㅅ/) in i) the reception of foreign languages that take [t] as the final sound, ii) the cognition of speakers who are non-proficient in orthography, and iii) the reference to the phonetic values of the ``sais-sori`` which is presumed in Middle Korean. Since /s/, as the ``sais-sori`` of Korean, is realized as a surface form by applying the existing rules in Korean phonology such as the unreleased rule, the automatic tensification rule and the consonant cluster simplification rule, it does not complicate the Korean grammer. The experiment for revealing the traces of the ``sais-sori`` of Korean is briefly accomplished by measuring the utterances of three Korean native speakers. Here it is anticipated that the length of the fortis achieved in the ``voiced sound(including vowels) # lenis consonant`` environment and in the ``obstruent # lenis consonant`` sequence of compound nouns in which the ``sais-sori`` is considered to be inserted, will appear to be longer than the length of another fortis unrelated to the ``sais-sori``. However, the former turned out to be the longest while the latter did not show any difference from the length of the fortis unrelated to the ``sais-sori``. I think in the former case, the ``sais-sori`` is being reflected as the length of the fortis, whereas the latter case is due to the application of the consonant cluster simplifiction rule. Hence we can tell that the current spelling system of adding the /s/ when the preceding segment ends in a vowel is perfectly adequate.

토대론적 해석이론: 의도주의와 형식주의

김진엽 ( Jin Yup Kim )
5,700
키워드보기
초록보기
Foundationalism is an idea found not only in metaphysics and epistemology but also in diverse areas such as ethics, social science, natural science, culture, and so on. I define foundationalism as the idea that there is some foundation which is the ultimate source of justification for our world, knowledge, rationality, culture, goodness and so on. In the theory of interpretation as well, to search for such a foundation of the meaning of a text is the main tradition. We have seen the modem root of foundationalism of interpretation in Schleiermacher. Before him, however, the philological and biblical hermeneutics tried to find the foundation which determined the meaning of a text, The foundationalism of interpretation is currently developed in two directions. One is Intentionalism, the other is Fomialism The idea that the author is the origin or the privileged arbiter of the meaning of a text has dominated interpretive theory since the notion of author came into being. According to this idea, the meaning of a text is to be identified with or found in the intention of an author, and the aim of interpretation is to find the intention of an author. Although the problem of how to decode the intention of an author is itself the subject of extensive critical debate this idea has had powerful influence on the theory of interpretation. In the current era, E. D. Hirsch is the representative of Intentionalism. By claiming that the intention of an author determined the meaning of a text, Hirsch tries to overcome the views which deny the existence of a normative principle for judging the validity of interpretation. Nan Stalnaker applies this theory to Edouard Manet``s Luncheon in the Studio. Intentionalism is criticized by several theories in the twentieth century. One of them is Formalism, and one of leading theorists of Formalism is Monroe Beardsley. Beardsley calls Hirsch``s thesis "the identity thesis," and defines it as claiming that what a literary work means is identical to what its author meant in composing it. Beardsley claims that this identity thesis can be conclusively refuted by three arguments. From these arguments, he concludes that in order to know the meaning of text we have to look into the text itself, neither into its origin(author) nor into its resuits(reader). It is in its language that the text happens. A text contains all the information necessary for its interpretation in the text on the page, and the aim of interpretation is to find what the sequence of words in the text itself means. Roger Fry applies Formalism to Cezanne``s Le Compotier. Despite this difference, both of Hirsch and Beardsley share common assumptions. First, both of them agree that there is a foundation which is the ultimate source of justification for the meaning of a text. Second, since the meaning of the text is already given and determined by the foundation, our interpretation is to passively find what the author intends or what the sequence of words means, not to actively construct or constitute it. Third, both of them try to set up the objectivity of interpretation, refuting scepticism and relativism. Finally, both of them agree that two incompatible interpretations cannot be both true, that at least one of them must be wrong. Therefore, despite the difference of their interpretive foundation, both of them agree that interpretation is to find one objectively true meaning of a text through a foundation. But these assumptions can be criticized as follows. First, the meaning of text is not straightly determined by some foundation, but circularly determined by several components. According to Gadamer, the meaning of text is determined in a whole relationship of interpreter, text, unity, and consensus. Second, since the interpreter plays an important role in a whole relationship, the meaning of text is not passively found, but actively constructed by interpreter. Third, there are plural aims with which interpreter can approach to the text. Interpretation can aim at the intention of an author or the linguistic structure, but this aim is only one of plurality of possible aims. Both Hirsch and Beardsley err in their privileging their specific interpretive aim as the only one right aim. Fourth, there can be plural true interpretations on the same text, and sometimes they can be incompatible with each other.
1