• Title/Summary/Keyword: 격조사

Search Result 32, Processing Time 0.02 seconds

The Origin of the Square-Shaped Jangmyeongdeung of Jeongneung Royal Tomb and Its Stylistic Development -In Comparison with the Buddhist Temple Stone Lanterns- (조선 정릉(貞陵) 사각 장명등(四角長明燈) 양식의 원류와 전개 -사찰 석등과의 비교를 통해 -)

  • Kim, Ji Yeon
    • Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
    • /
    • v.43 no.4
    • /
    • pp.24-55
    • /
    • 2010
  • Jangmyeongdeung Lantern (貞陵長明燈) refers to the stone lantern placed in front of the royal tomb. It serves both symbolic and decorative purposes; symbolic because it is supposed to guard and illuminate the buried, and decorative because it is a work of sculpture that adorns the entire graveyard. The Jangmyeongdeung of Jeongneung was the earliest stone lantern to be produced during the Joseon period. Its square shape is unique among those from the early to mid-Joseon period. The three major parts of Jangmyeongdeung - the stand, the lantern, and the roof-shaped cover parts - are square in shape, differing from the octagonal shaped Jangmyeongdeung. The stand consists of three single stone blocks, the Hadaeseok(下臺石), Ganjuseok(竿柱石), and Sangdaeseok(上臺石). The Hwasaseok(火舍石), or the lantern part, is also a single stone block. Jangmyeongdeung of Jeongneung succeeds the style of those of Hyeon-neung and Jeongneung(玄正陵) of the Goryeo period and is of a better artistic quality. As the first Jangmyeongdeung lantern, it is a refined work of art that marks the foundation of the Joseon Kingdom. This paper tries to ascertain the stylistic origin of the square-shaped Jangmyeongdeung of Jeongneung and compare it with those of Buddhist temples. Consequently, similarities were found among the stone lanterns of Zen priests 'Jigong'(指空) and 'Nawong'(懶翁) in the Hweamsa Temple(檜巖寺) site from the late Goryeo period, those of Zen priest 'Muhak'(無學) of the Hweamsa Temple site, and those of national priest 'Bogak'(普覺) of Cheongnyongsa Temple(靑龍寺) from the early Joseon period. Primarily, this is because the three components(the stand, the lantern part, and the roof-shaped cover) are essentially square-shaped. Second, as the Ganjuseok(one of the components of the stand) became shorter, the stand took a more stable form. Third, the Hwasaseok(the lantern part) consists of two stone blocks joined together. Fourth, the roof-shaped cover is also in square in shape. Similarly, the Jangmyeongdeung of Jeongneung contains Buddhist elements as well. The three-bead pattern that decorates the Ganjuseok stand is an example. The three-bead pattern is one of the symbolic elements related to Tantric Buddhism. It is found on the diadems worn by Bodhisattvas from the Goryeo and early Joseon periods. The Jangmyeongdeung of Jeongneung in early Joseon directly influenced the production of the square-shaped stone lanterns used to decorate the tombs during the Joseon period. After the latter half of the 15th century, however, the octagonal-shaped Jangmyeongdeung style began to prevail. The Jangmyeongdeung of Jeongneung reflects the succession of the tradition of royal tombs from Goryeo to Joseon, the introduction of square-shaped stone lanterns to Buddhist temples, and the influence of the Buddhist philosophy of the time. It is a living testimony to various elements of each time and corresponding cultural trends.

A study on the Greeting's Types of Ganchal in Joseon Dynasty (간찰(簡札)의 안부인사(安否人事)에 대한 유형(類型) 연구(硏究))

  • Jeon, Byeong-yong
    • (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
    • /
    • no.57
    • /
    • pp.467-505
    • /
    • 2014
  • I am working on a series of Korean linguistic studies targeting Ganchal(old typed letters in Korea) for many years and this study is for the typology of the [Safety Expression] as the part. For this purpose, [Safety Expression] were divided into a formal types and semantic types, targeting the Chinese Ganchal and Hangul Ganchal of modern Korean Language time(16th century-19th century). Formal types can be divided based on whether Normal position or not, whether Omission or not, whether the Sending letter or not, whether the relationship of the high and the low or not. Normal position form and completion were made the first type which reveal well the typicality of the [Safety Expression]. Original position while [Own Safety] omitted as the second type, while Original position while [Opposite Safety] omitted as the third type, Original position while [Safety Expression] omitted as the fourth type. Inversion type were made as the fifth type which is the most severe solecism in [Safety Expression]. The first type is refers to Original position type that [Opposite Safety] precede the [Own Safety] and the completion type that is full of semantic element. This type can be referred to most typical and normative in that it equipped all components of [Safety Expression]. A second type is that [Safety Expression] is composed of only the [Opposite Safety]. This type is inferior to the first type in terms of set pattern, it is never outdone when it comes to the appearance frequency. Because asking [Opposite Safety] faithfully, omitting [Own Safety] dose not greatly deviate politeness and easy to write Ganchal, it is utilized. The third type is the Original position type showing the configuration of the [Opposite Safety]+Own Safety], but [Opposite Safety] is omitted. The fourth type is a Original position type showing configuration of the [Opposite Safety+Own Safety], but [Safety Expression] is omitted. This type is divided into A ; [Safety Expression] is entirely omitted and B ; such as 'saving trouble', the conventional expression, replace [Safety Expression]. The fifth type is inversion type that shown to structure of the [Own Safety+Opposite Safety], unlike the Original position type. This type is the most severe solecism type and real example is very rare. It is because let leading [Own Safety] and ask later [Opposite Safety] for face save is offend against common decency. In addition, it can be divided into the direct type that [Opposite Safety] and [Own Safety] is directly connected and indirect type that separate into the [story]. The semantic types of [Safety Expression] can be classified based on whether Sending letter or not, fast or slow, whether intimate or not, and isolation or not. For Sending letter, [Safety Expression] consists [Opposite Safety(Climate+Inquiry after health+Mental state)+Own safety(status+Inquiry after health+Mental state)]. At [Opposite safety], [Climate] could be subdivided as [Season] information and [Climate(weather)] information. Also, [Mental state] is divided as receiver's [Family Safety Mental state] and [Individual Safety Mental state]. In [Own Safety], [Status] is divided as receiver's traditional situation; [Recent condition] and receiver's ongoing situation; [Present condition]. [Inquiry after health] is also subdivided as receiver's [Family Safety] and [Individual Safety], [Safety] is as [Family Safety] and [Individual Safety]. Likewise, [Inquiry after health] or [Safety] is usually used as pairs, in dimension of [Family] and [Individual]. This phenomenon seems to have occurred from a big family system, which is defined as taking care of one's parents or grand parents. As for the Written Reply, [Safety Expression] consists [Opposite Safety (Reception+Inquiry after health+Mental state)+Own safety(status+Inquiry after health+Mental state)], and only in [Opposite safety], a difference in semantic structure happens with Sending letter. In [Opposite Safety], [Reception] is divided as [Letter] which is Ganchal that is directly received and [Message], which is news that is received indirectly from people. [Safety] is as [Family Safety] and [Individual Safety], [Mental state] also as [Family Safety Mental state] and [Individual Safety Mental state].