지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2004.9
- 수록면
- 3 - 28 (28page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This paper examines how concepts of nation and state were understood in East Asian folklore studies in the period between the end of the 19th century and the early 20th century when East Asian countries began to build modem states. Folklore studies began originally in western European societies in the early 19th century with the building of modem states. In Britain, studies on popular antiquities became the starting point of an academic discipline that eventually became folklore studies whereas in Germany, 'Volkskunde,' a science of studying nation was introduced. When such ethnocentric folklore studies was introduced in East Asia where the experience of modernity found in western Europe was missing, the concept of folklore was translated as various customs that were passed down by an imagined homogeneous community like minjok(民族), sangmin(常民), and minjung(民衆).
Especially in the early 20th century when Taiwan and Korea were under Japanese colonial rule while China was in a semi-colonial state, folklore studies in East Asia took on an academic propensity to promote nationalism or ethno-nationalism. East Asian folklore studies were developed within the framework of the modem state and understands nation and state to be different but similar concepts. Therefore, they are closely linked to histories of founding and development of modern states in East Asia.
In japan, which has set the strategy of 'leaving Asia and entering the West'(脫亞入歐) after the 1920s contrary to the 'leaving the West and entering Asia(脫歐入亞) strategy used in the Meiji(明治) Restoration period, a concept of 'one nation folklore studies' was pushed as a political strategy to separate nation and state. In other words, japanese imperialism that controlled Taiwan, Korea, and Manchuria understood "nation" in terms of ethnos and "state" in terms of nation. Accordingly, ethnology in japan gained political influence and carried out research on the ethnos of Taiwan and Korea, the colonies excluded in the concept of nation.
In China since the concept of ethnos in Han, Man, Meng, Hui, and Zang(漢滿蒙回藏) sought to establish one nation-state, folklore studies concentrated on researching Han(漢), the main nationality, while studies of minorities were delegated to ethnology. This is the main reason why folklore studies did not develop into a main academic discipline in Taiwan, which had the dual political structure of japanese colonialism and domination by Han(漢). However, in Korea, Korean scholars who assisted japanese scholars of folklore studies in publishing Joseonminsok(朝鮮民俗) in the early 20th century understood folklore studies as tosokhak(土俗學, indigenous studies). In other words, Korean scholars approached folklore as ethnos distinguished from the nation of Japan.
Therefore, in the early 20th century, ethnocentric folklore studies were only possible in japan. With China wanting to build a modem state uniting different nationalities, ethnology was emphasized more than folklore studies. However, in colonial states like Taiwan and Korea, concepts of nation and state did not exist. In this sense, native scholars of folklore studies in these two countries had to study nations without a state. This is similar to doing research on public morals(風俗) by scholars under the authority of a colonial government.
Especially in the early 20th century when Taiwan and Korea were under Japanese colonial rule while China was in a semi-colonial state, folklore studies in East Asia took on an academic propensity to promote nationalism or ethno-nationalism. East Asian folklore studies were developed within the framework of the modem state and understands nation and state to be different but similar concepts. Therefore, they are closely linked to histories of founding and development of modern states in East Asia.
In japan, which has set the strategy of 'leaving Asia and entering the West'(脫亞入歐) after the 1920s contrary to the 'leaving the West and entering Asia(脫歐入亞) strategy used in the Meiji(明治) Restoration period, a concept of 'one nation folklore studies' was pushed as a political strategy to separate nation and state. In other words, japanese imperialism that controlled Taiwan, Korea, and Manchuria understood "nation" in terms of ethnos and "state" in terms of nation. Accordingly, ethnology in japan gained political influence and carried out research on the ethnos of Taiwan and Korea, the colonies excluded in the concept of nation.
In China since the concept of ethnos in Han, Man, Meng, Hui, and Zang(漢滿蒙回藏) sought to establish one nation-state, folklore studies concentrated on researching Han(漢), the main nationality, while studies of minorities were delegated to ethnology. This is the main reason why folklore studies did not develop into a main academic discipline in Taiwan, which had the dual political structure of japanese colonialism and domination by Han(漢). However, in Korea, Korean scholars who assisted japanese scholars of folklore studies in publishing Joseonminsok(朝鮮民俗) in the early 20th century understood folklore studies as tosokhak(土俗學, indigenous studies). In other words, Korean scholars approached folklore as ethnos distinguished from the nation of Japan.
Therefore, in the early 20th century, ethnocentric folklore studies were only possible in japan. With China wanting to build a modem state uniting different nationalities, ethnology was emphasized more than folklore studies. However, in colonial states like Taiwan and Korea, concepts of nation and state did not exist. In this sense, native scholars of folklore studies in these two countries had to study nations without a state. This is similar to doing research on public morals(風俗) by scholars under the authority of a colonial government.
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가는 말
Ⅱ. ‘一國諸民族論’과 중국민속학
Ⅲ. ‘一國民俗學’과 일본민속학
Ⅳ. ‘조선민속학’에서의 민족과 국가
Ⅴ. 나가는 말
참고문헌
English Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
Folklore and Thought
Korea Journal
1976 .06
-
야나기타(柳田國男) 민속학과 식민주의 : ‘조선민속학’에의 관여 문제와 관련하여
지방사와 지방문화
2006 .11
-
중국 현대민속학 개론서의 기본 사상과 그 영향
비교민속학
2016 .04
-
鍾敬文과 중국민속학
비교민속학
1998 .05
-
중국민속학계의 동향과 한국 민속학의 설 자리 모색
한국민속학
2010 .05
-
역사민속학 관점에서 본 한국민속연구의 나아갈 방향
비교민속학
2016 .04
-
Folklore, Fakelore, Folklorism: 소비에트 시대 민속과 민속학 연구 경향
슬라브학보
2008 .06
-
現代 民俗學의 對象과 課題 : 構造變化와 階層에 대한 獨語圈의 展開
한국민속학
1971 .06
-
민속학의 연대와 그 가능성
실천민속학연구
2016 .08
-
중국의 민속학개론서를 통해 본 민속학
비교민속학
2016 .08
-
비교민속학의 방법론 재론 : 일본민속학의 경우를 중심으로
비교민속학
2014 .04
-
2000년 이후 민속연구의 양상과 향후 민속연구의 보완 과제 모색
한국민속학
2020 .05
-
공공민속학 담론의 현황과 과제 : 미국 민속학계의 논의를 통해 본 한국 민속학계의 과제설정을 중심으로
한국민속학
2018 .05
-
Korean Folklore Reader
Korea Journal
1965 .05
-
중국민속학이 걸어온 70년
한국민속학
1990 .09
-
도시마을 현대민속의 역동성과 진정성
민속연구
2013 .08
-
연구사를 통해 본 조선 민속학의 성과
한국민속학
2020 .05
-
러시아 민속(학) 강좌의 필요성과 효과적인 강의 방법론 연구
슬라브학보
2008 .09
-
비교민속학의 방법론 재고
실천민속학연구
2012 .02
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-151-001730606