• 한국비블리아학회지
• /
• 제11권2호
• /
• pp.25-38
• /
• 2000

지식 분류는 그 대상 목적 시대, 지역, 학자에 따라 각기 다른 지식 체계의 유형을 제시하고 있다. 그러나 지식분류의 내용을 살펴보면, 지식의 표현 방식이 다르고 지식표현의 배열이 우선 순위로 차이가 있을 뿐이지, 그 시대나 지역에서 내용의 류구분은 별다른 차이가 없음을 알 수 있다. 지식분류나 문헌분류는 그 시대의 사회적 구조를 반영하는 형태를 취하며 그 시대의 사회철학에 의하여 결정된다고 볼 수 있다. 과거의 지식 체계의 기본 골격은 고대에 형성된 후 계속해서 변화해 왔다. 이 변화의 과정에서 학문의 발전은 다른 학문 분야를 형성시켜 전체 학문 체계의 변천에 중요한 역할을 하였다. 앞으로도 이러한 발전은 계속해서 일어나 많은 새로운 분야의 지식이 나타날 것이며 지식분류의 한자리를 차지하게 될 것이다.

• 대한한의학원전학회지
• /
• 제22권1호
• /
• pp.35-59
• /
• 2009

The acupuncture documentary characteristics of the "Chimgugapeulgyeong" can be summarized into 7 parts such as the following. 1. After Imeok(林億)'s revised edition of the "Gapeulgyeong(甲乙經)" was printed during the Song dynasty, there were no reprints during the Southern Song, Geum(金) and Won(元) eras, and the first printed edition that remains today is the 'Uihakyukgyeong edition[醫學六經本]' published by Omyeonhak(吳勉學) during the Mallyeok(萬曆) era of the Myeong(明) dynasty. This publication was put into the "Uitongjeongmaek(醫統正脈)" collection in the 29th year of the Manlleok(萬曆) era(1601). Most of the remaining copies have been restored during the Cheong dynasty at bookstores, and we can see that much was restored because of damage and missing characters. Also, the 'Namgyeokcho edition[藍格抄本]' and 'Yukgyeong edition[六經本]' of the Myeong dynasty do not come from the same original document, which allows the correction of the former in many places. However, this edition was not copied well, so the order of contents is different, and there are many mistakes. The 'Sagojeonseo edition[四庫全書本]' and the 'Gajeong edition[嘉靖本]', which Yeounsu(余云岫) quoted from, coincide with each other, making them worth much reference. So, the "Gapeulgyeong" and 'Yukgyeong edition' should be seen as the original, with the 'Myeongcho edition[明抄本]' as the main revision, and the 'Sago edition[四庫本]' as a reference edition. The so-called 'Chojeongtong edition(鈔正統本)' has many problems and marks of forgery, so therefore cannot be used in revising the "Gapeulgyeong" through comparison. 2. The table of contents[序例] in the front of the current edition was in the original edition and was not added by Imeok. The structure of sentences quoted by medical books before the Song dynasty coincide with this 'table of contents'. The "Gapeulgyeong" of the Song dynasty also coincide with the 'table of contents' but the edition remaining differs much from this 'table of contents' so it was edited or erased by people from future generations, especially after the Song dynasty. 3. The remaining edition of "Gapeulgyeong" consists of at least 4 parts. The original edited by Hwangbomil(皇甫謐), annotations added by medicinal practitioners before the Song dynasty, Imeok's revisionary annotations during the Song dynasty, and annotations after the Song dynasty. 4. Expressions such as 'Somun says[素問曰]' 'Gugwon says[九卷曰]' and explanatory annotations like 'Hae says[解曰]' are old writings from the original text and were not added by someone later. 5. Almost all of the 'Double lined small letter annotations[雙行小字注文]' of the 'Yukgyoeng edition' was by people during the Song dynasty. 6. There are many omitted and wrong letters in the remaining edition and there are also many places where future generations edited and supplemented the text. The table of contents differ greatly from the original text. 7. The medical books that quote "Gapeulgyeong" a lot are "Cheongeumyobang(千金要方)", "Oedaebiyobang(外臺秘要方)", "Seongjaechongrok(聖濟總錄)", "Chimgujasaenggyeong(鍼灸資生經)", "Yuyusinseo(幼幼新書)", and "Uihakgangmok(醫學綱目)" and such. However, the method used in using the text differs between the medical books, so the quotation from the same book comes from a quotation used by a doctor from a different era in one("Cheongeumyobang"), or the quotation was taken from each medical book("Chimgujasaenggyeong") or the quotation was all taken from another book("Yuyusinseo"). The reason we need to know about this problem properly is because we must use medical books that quote the original text of the "Gapeulgyeong" when we are looking for text that we can use to revise through comparison.

• 한국의사학회지
• /
• 제17권1호
• /
• pp.105-118
• /
• 2004

The four precious results are beard below after thorough study of Jeoneul(錢乙)'s descended piece and main citation reference from Song(宋) era. 1. Jeoneul(錢乙)'s historical period seems that he finished his life in the age of 82, from Cheonseong(天聖) 10years(Year 1032) to Jeonghwa(政和) 3years(Year 1113) in North Song(北宋) era. However, it also seems that his life terminated Seonhwa(宣和)元年in 1119. The title of "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)" was reflected in "Sagojeonseo(四庫全書)" as "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)", however according to various of previous descended references and citations indicate that "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)" is more appropriate than "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)". Furthermore, the name, Yeomhyochung(閻孝忠), who edited the reference "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)" was appeared as Yeomgyechung(閻孝忠) in many different old references. Thus, even though, Sagogoan(四庫館) and Juhakhae(周學海) looked as Yeomgyechung(閻孝忠), but it seems Yeomhyochung(閻孝忠) in "Songsa(宋史)" Yemunji(藝文志) is more authentic than others. 2. When first edition of "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)" was published, Yeomhyochung(閻孝忠)'s the first book of "Yeomssisoabangnon(閻氏小兒方論)" and the first chapter of Yugi's "Jeonjungyangjeon(錢仲陽傳)" were attached in one book. Not long after of the first edition, Donggeup(董汲)'s first book of "Soabanjinbigeupbangnon(小兒斑疹備急方論)" and Jeoneul(錢乙)'s additional attachment was added in prescription reference. Among these references which were published in Song era, the original copy which Jinsegeol(陳世傑) published in Chung era in Ganghi(康熙) 58years (Year 1719) was remained and the first edition that Yangsugyeong(楊守敬) collected in Japan was published in "(lbonbangseoji(日本訪書志)" called Seonhwabon(宣和本). 3. Ungjonglip(熊宗立)'s "LyujeungjuseokJeonssisoabanggyeol(類證注釋錢氏小兒方訣)", Seolgi(薛己)'s "Gyojeongjeonssisoayakjeungjikgyeol(校正錢氏小兒藥證直訣)" Muyeongjeon-Chuijinbon(武英殿聚珍本) were followed Yangsugyeong(楊守敬)'s called Seonhwabon(宣和本) theory, in addition Yubang(劉昉)'s "Yuyusinseo(幼幼新書)" and "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)" quoted from Chosun "Euibangyuchui(醫方類聚)" also followed Yangsugyeong(楊守敬)'s called Seonhwabon(宣和本) theory. On the other hand, Jinsegeol(陳世傑)'s Gisudangbon(起秀堂本) and reprinted Juhakhaebon(周學海本) belong to parts of Songbokganbon(宋復刊本). 4. In major references and citation materials descended from "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)", Yubang(劉昉)'s "Yuyusinseo(幼幼新書)" and "Soauisaengchongaminonbang(小兒衛生總微論方)" were cited in Song era and some related parts in "Yeongnakdaejeon(永樂大典)", "Soayakjeungjikgyeol(小兒藥證直訣)" related sections, Ungjonglip(熊宗立)'s reedited and annotated part of "Lyujeungjuseokjeonssisoabanggyeol(類證注釋錢氏小兒方訣)", Seolgi(薛己)'s proof reading and annotated "Gyojujeonssisoayakjeungjingyeol(校注錢氏小兒藥證直訣)", "Euibangyuchui(醫方類聚)"'s quotation. In Chung(淸)era, Jinsegeol(陳世傑)'s re-published reference, Gisudangbon(起秀堂本), which was simply printed in Song and proof read and republished Juhakhaebon(周學海本), Muyeongjeonchuijinbon(武英殿聚珍本) compiled from "Yeongnakdaejeon(永樂大典)", Yangsugyeong(楊守敬)'s "Jeonssisoayakjeungjikgyeol(錢氏小兒藥證直訣)" mentioned in "Ilbonbangseoji(日本訪書志)", Jangsui's annotation, "Soayakjeungjikgyeoljeonjeong(小兒藥證直訣箋正)" and Simgeumo(沈金鰲)'s "Yuguaseokmi(幼科釋謎)" which was applied Jeoneul(錢乙)'s theory and prescription.

• 한국철학논집
• /
• 제32호
• /
• pp.337-370
• /
• 2011

청초의 학술계는 "사고제요"의 편찬이라는 사건을 계기로 한학(漢學) 중심의 학술사조가 새롭게 형성되었으며, 춘추학 분야에서도 새로운 변화가 모색되었다. 본 논문에서는 "사고제요"의 춘추관(春秋觀), 그 중에서도 특히 전통적인 춘추학(春秋學)의 전개 과정과 양상에 대한 "사고제요"의 이해와 평가를 살펴보았다. "사고제요"에서는 공양학(公羊學)과 곡량학(穀梁學), 그리고 송학(宋學) 계열 학자들의 "춘추"해석에 대한 비판적 분석을 시도했는데, 그것은 춘추학의 새로운 연구방법론을 구축하기 위한 사전 사업의 성격을 띤다. "사고제요"에서는 "좌씨전"의 중요성을 주장하면서도 그 단점을 과감하게 지적하고, 그것의 보완을 위해 "공양전"과 "곡량전"의 장점을 적극적으로 수용할 것을 요구한다. 심지어 주요 비판의 대상인 송대 춘추학 분야에 대해서도 학파적 편견을 최대한 배제한 채, 객관적이고 합리적으로 평가하려고 노력하였다. "사고제요"에서 이와 같은 세밀하고 객관적인 분석이 선행되었기 때문에 춘추학 분야는 "사고제요"의 편찬을 기점으로 새로운 전환점을 맞이할 수 있었다. 역사적 사실에 대한 고증과 의리 담론을 종합적으로 판단하는 새로운 연구방법론은 청초 한학 중심의 학술계에서 발굴한 주요 성과의 하나라고 할 수 있다.