Journal for History of Mathematics (한국수학사학회지)

The Korean Society for History of Mathematics (한국수학사학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Diagrammatic Reasoning in Joseon Mathematics Book 'JuseoGwangyeon'

조선 산학서 《주서관견》의 도해적 추론

  • CHANG Hyewon (Dept. of Math. Edu., Seoul National Univ. of Edu. )
  • Received : 2023.05.30
  • Accepted : 2023.06.21
  • Published : 2023.08.31
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

By virtue of the characteristics inherent in diagrams, diagrammatic reasoning has potential and limitations that distinguish it from general thinking. It is natural that diagrams rarely appeared in Joseon mathematical books, which were heavily focused on computation and algebra in content, and preferred linguistic expressions in form. However, as the late Joseon Dynasty unfolded, there emerged a noticeable increase in the frequency of employing diagrams, due to the educational purposes to facilitate explanations and the influence of Western mathematics. Analyzing the role of diagrams included in Jo Taegu's 'JuseoGwangyeon', an exemplary book, this study includes discussions on the utilization of diagrams from the perspective of mathematics education, based on the findings of the analysis.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the 2022 Research Fund of Seoul National University of Education.

References

  1. J. ALSHWAIKH, Diagrams as communication in mathematics discourse: A social semiotic account, For the Learning of Mathematics 38(2) (2018), 9-13. 
  2. O. BYRNE, The first six books of the elements of Euclid: In which coloured diagrams and symbols are used instead of letters for the greater ease of learners, London: William Pickering, 1847. 
  3. CHANG H., Study on the Teaching of Proofs based on Byrne's Elements of Euclid, The Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics 23(2) (2013), 173-192.
  4. C. M. DIEZMANN, Enhancing students' problem solving through diagram use, Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom 7(3) (2002), 4-8. 
  5. W. DORFLER, Diagrams as means and objects of mathematical reasoning, In Developments in mathematics education in German-speaking countries, Selected papers from the annual conference on didactics of mathematics (pp. 39-49), 2001. 
  6. W. DORFLER, Mathematical reasoning and observing transformations of diagrams, In Mathematics and Language, Proc. MADIF (Vol. 4, pp. 7-19), 2004. 
  7. DiffereneceBetween.com, Difference between thinking and reasoning, 2016. https://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-thinking-and-vs-reasoning/ 
  8. V. GIARDINO, Diagrammatic reasoning in mathematics, In Springer handbook of model-based science (pp. 499-522). Springer, Cham, 2017. 
  9. E. HAMMER, Reasoning with sentences and diagrams, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 35(1) (1994), 73-87.  https://doi.org/10.1305/ndjfl/1040609295
  10. A. HJELTE, M. SCHINDLER, P. NILSSON, Kinds of mathematical reasoning addressed in empirical research in mathematics education: A systematic review, Education Sciences 10(10) (2020), 289. 
  11. HONG S. S., HONG Y. H., KIM Y. W., Liu Yi and Hong Jung Ha's Kai Fang Shu, The Korean Journal for History of Mathematics 24(1) (2011), 1-13.
  12. HONG S. S., HONG, Y. H., KIM C. I., Jo Tae-gu's JuseoGwangyeon and JiheYuanben, Journal for History of Mathematics 31(2) (2018), 55-72. https://doi.org/10.14477/JHM.2018.31.2.55
  13. M. JAMNIK, Mathematical reasoning with diagrams, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001. 
  14. JO T., JuseoGwangyeon, 1718.
  15. J. H. LARKIN, H. A. SIMON, Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words, Cognitive Science 11 (1987), 65-100.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6708.1987.tb00863.x
  16. C. MORGAN, Writing mathematically: The discourse of investigation (Vol. 9), Falmer Press, 1998. 
  17. R. NETZ, The shaping of deduction in Greek mathematics: A study in cognitive history (No. 51), Cambridge University Press, 2003. 
  18. Onlilne Etymology Dictionary, Diagram. https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=diagram&type=0 
  19. M. OTTE, Mathematical epistemology from a Peircean semiotic point of view, Educational Studies in Mathematics 61(1) (2006), 11-38.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-0082-6
  20. C. S. PIERCE, Collected papers of Charles Sanders Pierce, reproducing Vols. I-VI ed. Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1931-1935), Vols. VII-VIII ed. Arthur W. Burks (same publisher, 1958), 1994. https://colorysemiotica.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/peirce-collectedpapers.pdf 
  21. G. POLYA, How to solve it, Princeton University Press, 1945. 
  22. L. RADFORD, Diagrammatic thinking: Notes on Peirce's semiotics and epistemology, PNA, Revista de Investigacion en Didactica de la Matematica 3(1) (2008), 1-18.  https://doi.org/10.30827/pna.v3i1.6192
  23. L. J. RIPS, F. G. CONRAD, Folk psychology of mental activities, Psychological Review 96(2) (1989), 187-207. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.96.2.187 
  24. W. W. ROUSE BALL, Mathematical recreations and essays, Fourth Edition, https://www.gutenberg.org/files/26839/26839-pdf.pdf 1905. 
  25. S. J. SHIN, The forgotten individual: Diagrammatic reasoning in mathematics, Synthese 186(1) (2012), 149-168.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-012-0075-1
  26. M. SOCHANSKI, What is diagrammatic reasoning in mathematics?, Logic and Logical Philosophy 27(4) (2018), 567-581.  https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2018.001
  27. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Diagrams, 2018. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/diagrams/#CogRolDia 
  28. K. STENNING, O. LEMON, Aligning logical and psychological perspectives on diagrammatic reasoning, Artificial Intelligence Review 15 (2001), 29-62.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006617525134
  29. K. TYLEN et al, Diagrammatic reasoning: Abstraction, interaction, and insight, Pragmatics & Cognition 22(2) (2014), 264-283. https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.22.2.06tyl