earticle

영어

Chosun’s dispatch of envoy were both friendly and competitive to Japanese literary men. These facts were clearly shown in『Jangmungyegapmunsa』which was written by Chosun and Japanese literary men through conversation by poetry writing on 11th(1763-4) dispatch of envoy while their coming and going. This conversation by poetry writing book dealt with phenomenon and literature of Jungjuhak and Gomunsahak so this work paid attention to the argument of Chosun and Japanese literary men and made progress. The point of an argument of Jungjuhak and Gomunsahak is as follows. Japanese literary men’s logic was definite but that of Chosun was extreme and careless in an argument of Jungjuhak and Gomunsahak so Jungjuhak was seemed to be oppressed by Gomunsahak. Chosun’s literery men didn’t answer clearly for Japanese literary men’s asking about Gomunsahak’s contrary part from the saint’s doctrine. So Chosun’s literary men were seemed to be defeated in logic. For the best value of governing a country and comfort of people, Japanese literary men didn’t care any religion if it’s practical and they denied the traditional viewpoint of dividing a civilized country and uncivilized country beyond the phenomenon and literature of Jungjuhak and Gomunsahak. On the other hand, Chosun’s literary men repeated the theory and self-centeredness and didn’t make any progress. Chosun’s literary men didn’t read all the Gomunsahak relating books and they read only part of them. They were poor in logic so they didn’t show concrete opinion about the similarity and the difference in the theory of Jungjuhak and Gomunsahak. A further study is needed about the conversation by poetry writing books focusing on an argument of Jungjuhak and Gomunsahak, other Gomunsahak relating works.

일본어

日本で出会った朝日文士は友好的でありながらも競争的であった. 11次(1763-4年) 使行の往路と帰路の時に長門州の赤間関で成った朝日文士の筆談唱酬を輯録した『長門癸甲問槎』にもそんな面貌が鮮明にあらわれる. この筆談唱酬集が程朱学と古文辞学という思想と文学を筆談の主な主題に扱っていて朝日文士の議論に注目して論議を進行した. 程朱学と古文辞学の議論を整理すると次の通りだ. 程朱学と古文辞学の議論で日本文士の論理が適実したことに対して朝鮮文士は極端的でも軽率な行動を示して程朱学が古文辞学に押される形勢を演出したし, 古文辞学が聖人の道を外れる部分を明確に提示してくれと叫んだ日本文士の要求に朝鮮文士がたりた答弁を出す得なかったから論理的な敗北を感じさせた. 程朱学と古文辞学という思想と文学を越えて‘国治民安’という最高の価値に対して日本文士が先に華夷観を否定して実用性があればどんな宗教にもかまわずの見解を示した後に, 朝鮮文士は原論的で自己中心的な意見を表明することからもっと進むことができなかった. 朝鮮文士が古文辞学に関した著述を全部読めなくて一部だけ読んで論理が困窮すれたし, そのために程朱学と古文辞学の同異を示すことができない限界があった. こんな問題を解決するため, 程朱学と古文辞学の談論を中心とするそのほかの筆談唱酬集と古文辞学に関する著述の研究を絶えず継続して同異を捜し出すつもりだ.