earticle

영어

The aim of this paper is to compare five different editions of Chinese Literary History with in terms of their treatment of Zuo Zhuan(左傳). This paper adopts as its method of comparison that of description in the original texts, one based on the distinction between 記 事(jishi, record of events and actions) and 記言 (jiyan, record of words). To be specific, this paper examines the selected five editions proceeding first from classifying jishi into “technique of description”, “treatment of warfare” and “characterization”, then moving onto examining jiyan. The intent of this paper does not lie in finding out similarities and differences in terms of writing literary history; rather, it is in identifying standardized manner of writing literary history and thereby determining a set of passages from Zuo Zhuan suitable for fruitful comparative analysis. Ultimately, I hope such endeavor would contribute to a greater understanding of the way in which Chinese Literature is handled within and without Korea. I start with clarifying the way these editions characterize Zuo Zhuan in general and the passages they select as representative. I then reassess my initial findings from the point of contemporary perspectives and in consideration of regional and national elements. Lastly, even if there are no explanations written directly in the five writings of literary history, I tried to open the possibility of access from a new perspective by suggesting several stories on my perspective that require new emphasis or active interpretation from the current perspective. But, it did not point out the influence of Zuo Zhuan on later narrative literature, so it is difficult to deny the one-sidedness of the discussions presented in this paper. By focusing on the narrative of literary history published in recent years, the field of view was limited. These problems should be reinforced through further and wider work.