2017, Vol.48, No.

The Perceptions and Description Patterns of the History of Ancient Korean Literature in Two Books on the History of Korean Literature Written in Japanese

Jung-sun Ryu | 2017, 48 | pp.1~30 | number of Cited : 4

PDF

The purpose of this study is to review two books on the history of Korean literature written in Japanese, taking special interest in ancient Korean literature, examining transcultural patterns between the history of North and South Korean literature and that of Japanese literature, and thereby identifying perceptions and description patterns of the history of Korean literature from the perspective of comparative literature. This study analyzes two books with the same title The History of Joseon Literature written in Japanese by Kim Dongwook and Byeon Jaesoo. The two books are not translations of Korean books but were written in Japanese for Japanese and ethnic Korean readers in Japan. The History of Joseon Literature (1974) by Kim Dongwook mainly compares Joseon literature with Japanese literature. The History of Joseon Literature (1985) by Byeon Jaesoo, an ethnic North Korean in Japan, was written from socialistic perspectives. The two books have different standards for evaluating value of the history of Joseon literature and different perceptions about it. Due to the division between North and South Korea, the history of literature is unfolding in different ways in the two Koreas, and the two books reflect such differences. However, they have several common features. For example, they highly regard the value of literature written in Chinese characters and originality of hangga (a folk song of Silla), Hangeul (the Korean alphabet), and pansori (a form of Korean folk music in which a singer accompanied by a supportive drummer sings and chants an epic story). In addition, they both demonstrated that literature written in Hangeul and that written in Chinese characters interacted with each other as the same Korean literature. When the two books were written, the history of Korean literature had been considered a subunit of the history of East Asian or Chinese literature. However, as this study found, Kim and Byeon wrote the two books from a perspective of departing from this view based on nationalism, re-establishing the value of Korean literature, promoting Japanese people’s understanding of the high quality of Korean literature, and imbuing ethnic Koreans in Japan with nationalistic pride.

Linguistic, Cultural, and Historical Momentums through History of Korean Literature -Focused on the Recognition and Descriptive Aspects of Korean Modern Literature in the History of Korean Literature Written in Japan-

Yoon, Song Ah | 2017, 48 | pp.31~66 | number of Cited : 4

PDF

This study examines ways of recognizing and aspects of describing Korean modern literature revealed by each literary history from the viewpoint of ‘transculturation', focusing on Lim Jeon-Hye’s 『History of Korean Literature in Japan until 1945』, Shirakawa Yutaka’s 『Footsteps of Korean Modern Literature』, and Saegusa Toshikatsu’s 『Taste of Korean Literature』 from the history of Korean literature written in Japan. First, Lim Jeon-Hye periodically examines Korean literature written in Japan, focusing on literary activities of Korean students in Japan and the proletarian literature movement, and addresses points of active cultural negotiation, mutual understanding and political solidarity between Korea and Japan. Shirakawa Yutaka focuses on the concurrency and connection of Korea, China, and Japan in the process of modern literary formation, covering Japanese language literature and pro-Japanese literature with great care, and describes the middle-layer position as a mediating researcher in the conflicting boundaries between Korea and Japan. Saegusa Toshikatsu provides interesting transcultural momentum in exploring internal logic and denotation of Korean literature via comparative literature review encompassing East Asia, implementation of literary forms and themes connecting tradition and modernity, and an out-of-boundary point of view to overlook ‘pro-Japanese literature’, etc. Transcultural aspects in this literary history to examine are as follow. First, the history of Korean modern literature based on ‘national literature history’ is catabolized in the magnetic field of the ‘colonial experience’ and ‘national nationalism’ and considered in multifaceted context. Second, they provide the possibility of three-dimensional and micro-narrative description of literature that complement the narrative aspect of existing Korean literature history. Third, they provide an opportunity to expand and open the description of literature history through acceptance of comparative literary perspectives encompassing East Asia. Fourth, through discovery of Korean-Japanese literature and Japanese language literature, they contribute to broadening the history of Korean modern literature and enriching foundations.

Recognition and Narrative Aspects of the History of Korean Classic Literature from Two Korean Literature History Works Written in China

LeeDeungYearn | 2017, 48 | pp.67~106 | number of Cited : 7

PDF

This study focuses on two specific history of Korean literature in Chinese: the outline of The History of Joseon Literature (2010) by Li Yan and The History of Joseon Literature (1988, 2008) by Wei Xu-sheng; it was conducted to compare narrative viewpoints to the history of South and North Korean literature and therefore identify distinguishable characteristics. As a result, the following was concluded. First, The History of Korean Literature by Cho Dong-il and The History of Korean Literature in North Korea (15 volumes) include thorough discussions on division of historical eras, concept of genres as well as individual literary works and applied such discussions on writing literary history. However, Wei Xu-sheng and Li Yan’s The History of Korean Literature did not illuminate theoretical discussion of South and North Korea. Li Yan’s outline of The History of Joseon Literature was published in 2010 and the first edition of Wei Xu-sheng’s The History of Joseon Literature was published in 1986 and later was published as revised editions in 2000 and 2008. Regarding published dates, it is a matter of course to reference Cho Dong-il’s The History of Korean Literature, published in the 1980s, or The History of Korean Literature in North Korea (15 volumes), published in the 1990s; nevertheless, neither Wei Xu-sheng nor Li Yan used those texts in their works. Their works were heavily influenced by the narrative tradition of the history of national literature and therefore, entailed unsophisticated discussion on the division of historical eras or the concept of genres. Second, those two texts also emphasized external factors such as politics, society, economy and culture and explicitly mention these factors in historical overview of each chapter. Such an approach is commonly used in narratives of literary history under socialist regimes, including The History of Korean Literature in North Korea (15 volumes). Accordingly, evaluations based on ‘political standards’ – stress of people, nationality, practicality and so forth – in main texts are particularly accentuated, akin to narratives of literary history under socialist regimes. Finally, since those two Korean literature history works are written by Chinese scholars, they focus on correlation between Chinese literature history and Korean literature history. However, several genre-related terminologies such as Xiaopin (a kind of essay), Yuefu (a kind of popular song/poem), Yuyan (fable), Shuochang (telling of popular stories with the interspersal songs), Shizhuan (biography or/and memoirs in history) were adopted directly from Chinese literature. In analyzing Korean literature using terminologies introduced from Chinese literature, differences between original and alternative definitions were not examined in detail. While some terminologies and concepts were adopted directly without further consideration as to state of the two nations, it is also interesting to note that dichotomy, mainly used in Korean literature history, was used to discuss the genre of Cheonki (romance tale), relevant to Suyichon and Keumosinhua, rather than follow traditions of Chinese literature history.

Transcultural Practice of the History of Modern Korean Literature Written in China

Lee Sun-Hee | 2017, 48 | pp.107~133 | number of Cited : 4

PDF

This study compares the history of modern Korean literature written in China with the history of South Korean literature, the history of North Korean literature and the history of national literature, explores aspects of narrative and therefore examines transcultural practice presented in such texts. There have hitherto been approximately 25 works on the history of Korean literature written in China, and 16 of 25 works are on the history of modern Korean literature. Regarding their purpose, the number of pedagogical works outstandingly exceeds the number of research works. In terms of perspective and contents, it can be divided into three categories; one that only embraces the history of South Korean literature, another embracing the history of North Korean literature only and the other embracing the history of South Korean and North Korean literature. This study has selected representative texts from each category and compared recognition and narrative aspects to that of the history of South Korean literature, the history of North Korean literature and the history of Chinese literature. It further examines loci of definitions’ transfer and formation as well. As a result, this study reveals valuable understanding of recognition and narration of the history of Korean literature. First, this study offers an introspective attitude, as the history of modern Korean literature accentuates influence of only Western literature, overlooking influence of Chinese literature. Second, this study proposes a new narrative perspective on the history of Unified Korean literature through independent and objective identification of the history of North Korean literature. Last, it emphasizes popularization of literature – aside from pure literary-centrism – and expands possibilities of embracing distinct works relevant to multimedia.

A Study on the Culture of the French Language

No-Kyung Kwak | 2017, 48 | pp.135~191 | number of Cited : 4

PDF

A Study on Chinese Characters Play of Edo Period in Japan by Comparison with the Pattern of Tungp'o(東坡体)'s Characters Play and Paza(破字), the Method to Make an Analysis of Chinese Characters; Focused Nanji and Iruiimyo

keumyoungjin | 2017, 48 | pp.193~222 | number of Cited : 4

PDF

Effects of Different Types of Chatbots on EFL Learners' Speaking Competence and Learner Perception

Kim, Na-Young | 2017, 48 | pp.223~252 | number of Cited : 19

PDF

The Multi-layered Context of the Ethnic Phenomenon: Focused on the Case of Asella Town, Ethiopia

Byung-Soo Seol | 2017, 48 | pp.253~287 | number of Cited : 0

PDF

The Narrative Discourse of the Novel and the Film L’Espoir

Oh se-jung | 2017, 48 | pp.289~323 | number of Cited : 0

PDF

L’Espoir, a novel by Andre Malraux, contains traits of the genre of literacy reportage that depicts the full account of the Spanish Civil War as non-fiction based on his personal experience of participating in war; the novel has been dramatized into a semi-documentary film that corresponds to reportage literature. A semi-documentary film is the genre of film that pursues realistic illustration of social incidents or phenomenon. Despite difference in types of genre of the novel and the film L’Espoir, such creative activities deserve close relevance and considerable narrative connectivity. Therefore, Gérard Genette’s narrative discourse of novel and film based on narrative theory carries value of research. Every kind of story, in a narrative message, has duplicate times in which story time and discourse time are different. This is because, in a narrative message, one event may occur before or later than another, told lengthily or concisely, and aroused once or repeatedly. Accordingly, analyzing differing timeliness of the actual event occurring and of recording that event is in terms of order, duration, and frequency. Since timeliness of order, duration, and frequency indicates dramatic pace that controls the passage of a story, it appears as an editorial notion in the novel and the film L’Espoir. It is an aesthetic discourse raising curiosity and shock, the correspondence of time in arranging, summarizing, deleting the story. In addition, Genette mentions notions of speech and voice to clearly distinguish position and focalization of a narrator or a speaker in text. The necessity to discriminate ‘who speaks’ and ‘who sees’ comes from difference in views of the narrator of text and the text. The matter of ‘who speaks’ is about who portrays narrator of the story. However, ‘who sees’ is related to from whose stance the story is being narrated. In the novel L'Espoir, change of focalization was ushered through zero focalization and internal focalization, and pertains to the multicamera in the film. Also, the frame story was commonly taken as metadiegetic type of voice in both film and novel of L'Espoir. In sum, narrative discourse in the novel and the film L'Espoir is the dimension of story communication among text, the narrator, and recipient.

On Franco Moretti’s World Literature: Seen from the Perspective of Periodical Studies

Lee Jae Yon | 2017, 48 | pp.325~359 | number of Cited : 10

PDF

Unchosen Cohabitation of Hannah Arendt and Precarity Politics of Judith Butler: Based on Body Politic and Ethical Obligation

Cho Scarlet Hyun June | 2017, 48 | pp.361~389 | number of Cited : 2

PDF

This essay examines ‘precarity politics’ by Judith Butler, a well-known gender theorist and queer philosopher, in Notes Towards a Performative Theory of Assembly (2015) focused on concepts as unchosen cohabitation of Hannah Arendt and unwilled proximity of Emmanuel Levinas. Butler’s precarity politics is the condition of our dispossessed political beings with fundamental vulnerability and interdependency that cannot choose with whom we will live on this Earth. Butler’s political ethics is twofold: on one hand, she examines significance of ‘action’' the most significant vita activa in the public area, and ‘plurality’' the condition—not only the necessary condition but the possible condition—for a political life suggested by Hannah Arendt in Human Condition; on the other hand, Butler reflects upon global precarity based on a diasporic precarious life in the social world towards freedom and equality. Unchosen cohabitation of plural humans on Earth, and global pervasion of precarity, that indicates “politically induced condition in which certain populations suffer from failing social and economic networks of support and become differentially exposed to injury, violence, and death,” so called “differential distribution of precariousness,” are practical possibilities of ethical and equal cohabitation of different ethnic groups in the social world. Ethical obligations or ethical demand to respond to others’ suffering in distance and proximity originated from precarity politics, mentioned in Precarious Life, Parting Ways, and Frames of War, could be non-foundational joint of plural people living together globally. We should presume the ‘reversibility’ of distance and proximity in others’ suffering, based on responsiveness and responsibility of others, if we want to stay attuned to the pain of others we never chose to live together. That is the significance of Butler’s ‘precarity politics’ with ‘ethical obligation’ to accept ‘unchosen plurality’ of living population on Earth, and ‘reversibility between of distance and proximity,’ in her ‘new plural and embodied body politics’ or ‘new corporeal ontology’, through human primary vulnerability, fundamental interdependency, being exposed and responsive to suffering of others.

A Study on the Vowel System Universals of Southeast Asian Languages: The Cases of Tagalog, Malay and Thai.

Heo Yong | 2017, 48 | pp.391~417 | number of Cited : 1

PDF

KJCKorea
Journal Central

Cross-Cultural Studies 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 0.52

2017, Vol.48, No.