중국 북방지역의 한국학 교육 연구 동향 분석

임명걸,이해영,주기 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2025 한국학연구 Vol.- No.77

중국 북방지역은 그 지리적, 역사적 관계로 하여 중국 내에서 한국학 교육과 연구가 가장 일찍 시작되었으며 현재 총 16개 성, 시의 591개 4년제 대학교 중, 한국학 전공이 개설된 대학은 총 69개이다. 북방지역의 한국학과는 1949년 8월, 원 국립동방어문전문학교와 통합하여 설립된 북경대학교 동방어문학부 조선어전공, 거의 동시기인 1949년 3월 설립된 연변대학 조선어문학과를 시작으로 개혁개방이전에는 해방군외국어대학, 대외경제무역대학, 중앙민족대학, 북경제2외국어대학 등 6개 대학에 설립되었다. 그후 한중수교를 기점으로 특히 2000년을 전후하여 북방지역 특히 북경지역과 산동성을 중심으로 한 각 성시의 대학교들에서 앞다투어 한국학과를 개설하고 2004년 무렵부터는 대학원 과정을 개설하기 시작하면서 2015년경까지 비약적인 발전을 이루었다. 그러나 2015년 이후부터 한중간의 정치적 파동, 경제적 변화 및 중국 대학교육 환경의 개혁 등으로 하여 현재 중국의 한국학은 심각한 위기와 도전에 직면하여 소강상태로 접어들게 되었다. 본고에서는 한국학과가 설립된 북방지역 대학 중, 사립대학 19개를 제외한 50개 대학 중, 38개 대학의 한국학과에 대해 교수진, 학부생 정원, 학부 교과과정, 대학원생 육성, 연구업적 등에 대한 상세한 조사를 통해 현재 위기의 상황에 놓여있는 중국 북방지역의 한국학 교육, 연구 현황과 현존하는 문제점을 점검해보고 나름대로 향후 발전방향을 제시하였다.

재영학자 제임스 그레이슨의 한국학 연구 및 교육활동과 그 의의

권의석 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2024 한국학연구 Vol.- No.74

본 논문은 재영학자인 제임스 그레이슨 교수의 연구 및 교육 성과를 살펴보고 그 의의를 평가하였다. 그레이슨 교수는 한국에서의 선교 생활을 통해 한국인과 한국문화에 관심과 애정을갖게 되면서 한국에 대해 더 알고 이해하고 싶다는 학술적 호기심이 동력이 되어 현재의 자리에이르게 된 한국학자이다. 그레이슨 교수는 인류학, 역사학, 종교학과 같은 다양한 분야를 넘나들며 학제간 연구를 수행할 관심과 역량을 갖추고, 한국종교사 및 민속학과 관련된 다양한 연구및 저술 활동을 통해 다른 한국학 연구와 차별되는 시선과 각도를 제공하였다. 특히 그레이슨 교수는 『한국종교학』, 『한국의 신화와 전설』과 같은 개론서의 편찬을 통해 영어권에서 한국학의 저변을 넓히고, 셰필드대학교 한국학 프로그램 운영을 통해 셰필드 대학교가 영국의 주요 한국학 연구 및 교육 중심 기관으로 자리 잡을 수 있도록 운영하면서 영국 내 한국학 연구 및 교육을 위한 기반을 구축하는 데에도 기여하였다. This paper examines the research and teaching achievements of Professor James Grayson, a Korean scholar, and evaluates their significance. Professor Grayson is a Korean studies scholar whose interest and affection for Korean people and culture was fuelled by his missionary experience in Korea and his academic curiosity to know and understand more about Korea. His interest and ability to conduct interdisciplinary research across fields as diverse as anthropology, history, and religious studies, as well as his various research and writing activities related to Korean religion and folklore, have provided a unique perspective and angle on Korean studies. In particular, his contributions to the field of Korean Studies in the English-speaking world through the compilation of introductory texts such as Korean Religion and Korean Myths and Legends, and his more in-depth research on the process of Protestantisation in Korea based on these texts, should be recognised as positive contributions. Professor Grayson, as the longest-serving director of the Korean Studies programme at the University of Sheffield, deserves much of the credit for establishing the University of Sheffield as a centre for research and teaching in Korean Studies with a compliant curriculum.

동아시아학 속의 한국학-미국 UC 버클리의 사례를 중심으로-

장재용,Rachel Min Park 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2022 한국학연구 Vol.- No.67

While the discipline of Korean Studies has grown increasingly popular and widespread in recent years, there is often an assumed homogeneity between the “Korean Studies” practiced across different countries, eliding the specific sociohistorical contexts that led to its various disciplinary formations. In particular, there is a need to distinguish between the Korean Studies as practiced in South Korea proper and the United States. This article examines how the development of Korean Studies in the United States was inextricably linked to the broader context of East Asian Studies, using the specific case of the University of California, Berkeley to consider how early research institutions (such as the Institute of Pacific Relations), global events such as World War II and the Vietnam War, and federal-level education policies influenced the direction and tenor of research on Korea within the United States. By reassessing the genealogy of Korean Studies in the United States and demonstrating its sociohistorical differences with its development in South Korea, this article ultimately aims to provide a productive framework in reconsidering research methodologies, promoting cross-country exchange in terms of scholarship, and future promising directions for the framing of Korean 최근 몇 년 동안 세계 각국에서 한국학의 성장세는 뚜렷하지만, 한국 안에서의 한국학과한국 밖, 특히 미국의 한국학은 구분할 필요가 있다. 이 논문은 미국에서 한국학의 발전이동아시아 연구라는 좀 더 넓은 맥락과 어떤 불가분의 관계가 있었는지를 미국 UC 버클리대학교의 사례를 통해서 알아보고자 한다. UC 버클리대학교 한국학의 성장은 미국이 참가하였던두 차례의 국제전, 태평양 전쟁과 베트남 전쟁 수행과정에서 연방정부의 지역 전문가의 육성차원애서 이루어졌다. 또한 이 글은 궁극적으로는 한국학의 연구 방법론을 재고하고 학문적 차원에서 국가 간 교류를 촉진하여 한국학 연구의 생산적인 틀을 새롭게 제시하고자 한다.

동아시아한국학의 심화ㆍ확산과 해외 한국학의 집단전기학

장윤희 ( Jang Yoonhee ) 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2021 한국학연구 Vol.- No.61

The Prosopography of Korean Studies abroad is the way to deepen and spread East Asian Koreanology. The perspective of East Asian Koreanology corrects the view of regarding Korean Studies abroad as the periphery of domestic Korean Studies. By examining Korean Studies in each region abroad with this methodology, we can see that Korean Studies abroad is in an equal relationship that allows domestic Korean Studies to coexist and communicate with each other. And the Prosopography of Korean Studies abroad is a way to escape from the problems of previous research of East Asian Korean, that is, temporal and spatial constraints and abstractness of discourse-oriented research, to further develop. For this, it is necessary to divide Korean studies abroad into three regions: Korean studies in Japan, Korean studies in the West, Korean studies in socialist region. And then, Each region’s prosopography should be described centering on the subject, institution and ideological(or cultural) aspects of Korean studies. In addition, in terms of time, it is necessary to distinguish between before and after the Cold War to reveal the characteristics of the development process of local Korean studies in each period. Through this, it will be possible to grasp the identity of domestic Korean Studies as well as Korean Studies in each region abroad, which exists as a ‘Korean studies in multitude’. This research will be a way to develop and deepen East Asian Koreanology as well as to develop Korean Studies as one of the most revered global academics.

프랑스에서의 한국문학 연구와 번역 출판-장-클로드 드크레센조의 한국학을 중심으로-

강동호 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2024 한국학연구 Vol.- No.75

본 연구의 목적은 프랑스 한국문학 연구의 형성 과정을 살펴보고 동시대 프랑스 한국학의 현황과 그 가능성을 조명하는 것이다. 해외에서 성장ㆍ발전해 온 한국학의 역사에 있어 한국문학에 대한 프랑스 지식장의 관심은 중요하게 거론될 필요가 있다. 프랑스는 한국문학이 서구에 소개되는 핵심 통로 가운데 하나이자, 한국문학이 글로벌한 층위에서 그 가치를 인정받는 데 있어중추적인 역할을 담당하는 상징적인 장소였기 때문이다. 실질적으로 프랑스 한국문학 교육과 연구는 타 분야에 비해 상대적으로 늦은 시기인 1990 년대부터 본격적으로 시작되었다. 특정 국가의 문화를 이해하는 데 있어 문학이 중요한 역할을차지함에도 불구하고, 타 학문 분야에 비해 40년가량 지체된 이유는 문학 교육ㆍ연구에 있어서직면할 수밖에 없는 언어적 장벽 때문이었다. 이러한 맥락에서 프랑스에서 한국문학이 적극적으로 번역 출판되기 위한 토대가 형성되는과정에서 해외 한국학자의 노력과 헌신은 거듭 강조될 필요가 있다. 특히 장-클로드 드크레센조 교수의 한국문학 번역과 연구는 특별히 주목될 수 있다. 그는 2010년대 프랑스 내 한국문학번역ㆍ연구를 선도하며, 당대의 해외 한국학의 새로운 전환기를 마련한 인물이기 때문이다. 특별히 강조되어야 할 것은 드크레센조 교수의 한국학이 번역ㆍ출판ㆍ교육ㆍ연구ㆍ기획 등 전방위적으로 이루어졌다는 사실이다. 본 연구는 프랑스 한국학의 역사의 맥락에서 드크레센조의한국학이 차지하는 의의를 조명하고, 프랑스라는 타자의 시선에서 오늘날 한국문학의 동시대성이 어떻게 받아들여지고 있는지를 살펴보고자 한다. The aim of this study is to shed light on the formation process of Korean literature studies in France and to shed light on the current status and possibilities of contemporary French Korean studies. The interest of the French intellectual community in Korean literature is important in the history of the growth and development of Korean studies abroad. This is because France was one of the key channels through which Korean literature was introduced to the West and a symbolic place that played a pivotal role in the recognition of Korean literature on a global level. In fact, the teaching and study of Korean literature in France only began in earnest in the 1990s, relatively late compared to other disciplines. Despite the important role of literature in understanding a country's culture, the 40-year lag compared to other academic fields was due to the language barrier that is inevitably faced when teaching and studying literature. In this context, the efforts and dedication of Korean scholars abroad are worth reiterating as the foundation for the active translation and publication of Korean literature in France is being laid. In particular, the work of Professor Jean-Claude DeCrescenzo in translating and researching Korean literature deserves special attention. He led the translation and research of Korean literature in France in the 2010s, marking a new turning point for Korean studies abroad at the time. What should be especially emphasized is the fact that Prof. DeCrescenzo's Korean studies have been carried out in all aspects of translation, publication, teaching, research, and planning. This study aims to shed light on the significance of DeCrescenzo's Korean studies in the context of the history of Korean studies in France and to examine how the contemporaneity of Korean literature is perceived today from the perspective of the French.

몽골학과 한국학의 접점

이용규 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2007 한국학연구 Vol.16 No.-

베트남에서의 인문 한국학

Ly, Kinh Hien 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2007 한국학연구 Vol.16 No.-

동아시아 인문한국학 방법의 모색 ― 한국사 연구에 있어서의 ‘근대’를 중심으로

쓰키하시다쓰히코 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2007 한국학연구 Vol.17 No.-

In an effort to search for proper methods(and methodologies) that could be applied to East Asian Koreanology studies in the Humanities area, this article concentrates upon examining how the Korean modern historical studies have defined and recognized the concept of 'modernity', ever since the renowned academic argument which suggested the determinative presence of internal developments in Korean history had first been presented by a group of researchers. After 1945, the theory of the so-called 'Capitalist Buds', which suggested that there had indeed been Capitalist elements budding in the Korean economy and society, and the theory of 'Buds of Bourgeois philosophy', which was suggested in the same vein, both surfaced among scholars and researchers in Japanese and North Korean societies. The intention of the presenters of such theories, were to remedy the damages that had accumulatively been done by the so-called 'Colonial historical studies' and the individuals behind them. And in the meantime, inside South Korea, the so-called 'People Nationalism', or historical studies concentrating upon 'people' issues, were proposed and advocated by scholars like Kim Yong Seob and Gang Man Gil. Then again, since the 1980s, scholars such as Miyajima Hiroshi and Jo Gyeong Dal have started and continued to criticise the concept of 'modernism' implied in aforementioned theories and studies, which allegedly was basically designed with the Western version of modernity in mind. This kind of attempts eventually led to the beginning of the well-known controversy inside the society of Korean historians, which grew considerably larger during the 1990s among scholars discussing the issue of 'modernization achieved, during the colonial period'. Yet 'both' of the perspectives mentioned above, were essentially created in the same vein, as they both emphasized the quality of Nationalism, and valued the factor of 'modernity'. Coming into the 21st century, a new theory, critically discussing the 'modernity(or modern facets)' concept itself that reportedly surfaced during the colonial period, entered the academical arena. Through such efforts, it became possible to objectively and critically assess the nature of modernity that existed in the colonial era as well. Now, a perspective that would allow us to critically examine the concept of 'modernity' from the beginning, in a more consistent fashion, should be established in Korean modern historical studies as well.

일본의 한국학 및 한국문학 연구

사나다 히로코 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2007 한국학연구 Vol.16 No.-

미국 ‘제1세대 한국학자’의 해방 전후 한국 인식-조지 맥아피 맥큔의 Korea Today를 중심으로-

김서연 ( Kim Seo-yeon ) 인하대학교 한국학연구소 2020 한국학연구 Vol.0 No.58

This article examines George McAfee McCune’s view on Korea through his book Korea Today. After WWⅡ, McCune wanted to establish himself as a first-generation Korean scholar in American academia based on his academic expertise. Around war time, he put a lot of effort to make U.S. get interested in Korea. Although researches in the U.S. Area Studies had little interest in Korea, McCune tried to secure his own territory as a Korean scholar. He suggested to the Far Eastern Bureau in the State Department to open a new program for training experts in Korean issues, and lectured on Korean history, Far East diplomatic history, and Korean for three years before his death at his alma mater University of Berkeley. He also contributed many articles to the journal(FEQ, FES, and PA) on various topics related to Korea. Meanwhile, he published a book dealing with Treaty of Peace, Amity, Commerce and Navigation, United States-Korea Treaty of 1882. The publication of Korea Today was not only for as a historian, but also related with the interest of American institutional academia in Area Studies in the 1940s. In Korea Today he analyzed the political and economic situations of Korea, which was divided after after liberation. Even though the structure of the book requires a symmetrical analysis of the South and the North, overall, the analysis of the situation is mainly about the South Korea and the policy of the U.S. military administration. It was McCune’s limitation as an “American intellectual” that the contents were disproportionate because resources from the Soviet Union and North Korea were inaccessible for him. McCune argued that the economic exploitation of Japanese colonial rule on Korea was based on the assumption that the underdeveloped Korean politics was preventing economic development. According to McCune, however, if missionaries had lived in Korea long enough to analyze analyzed the divisiveness of Korean politics by linking it to the temperament of Koreans, it would be clear that it was not a lack of ability but a lack of experience. Regarding the political and economic system to be established on the Korea, he maintained his belief that ultimately, after the introduction of capitalism, the transition to industrialization and the establishment of American-style free democracy should be established, which shows the aspect of intellectuals from the America’s institutions. Meanwhile, McCune argued that unification would be essential for Koreans to be happy, reflecting his emotional sympathy for them. Korea Today was published in the early 1950s when the U.S. academic interest in Korea was low, raising people's interest and filling the gap in Korean Studies. It also solidified its status as a “History book written by the Korean expert” in terms of the use and verification of historical materials. In addition, the publication of Korea Today suggests that the starting point of Korean studies in the U.S. will be moved from early 1950 to right after the end of the WWⅡ. McCune’s view on Korea shows a multi-layered aspect of the thoughts of intellectuals in the American institutional academia and the emotional sympathy for Korea and Koreans. Judging from the fact that the unique features of McCune’s view on Korea derived from his experience in Korea when he was young, it is necessary to analyze comprehensively the views on Korea of other first-generation Korean scholars who have similar experiences with McCune is necessary. This article to look beyond the existing dichotomy between pro-Korean and anti-Korean, and to examine the various identities of characters like McCune.