이문열 ｢금시조｣에 대한 기호학적 독서 - 행위의 의미구조와 도상을 중심으로 = Semiotic reading of Yi Mun-yeol's "Geumsijo" - Focusing on the semantic structure and iconicity of actions

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본고에서는 ｢금시조｣의 서사 문법을 추출하기 위해 심층 구조를 표면 구조로 전환시키는 과정을 탐구해보았다. ｢금시조｣의 등장인물들은 예술혼 혹은 획득하지 못한 것을 ‘찾기’위해 수련하고 방황하는 인물들이다. 핵심이 되는 단어는 ‘찾다’ 혹은 ‘찾으려하다’라는 동사이며, 이 ‘찾다’는 동사를 통해서, 명사와 동사의 결합인 가장 간단한 문장으로 변환시켜 심층 구조와 표면 구조를 살펴본 결과, 이 소설 텍스트는 ‘수련(고난) : 완성(성취)’이라는 행위의 의미론적 대립항으로 이루어진 심층 구조의 핵이 표면구조에서 다양하게 재현되고, 변형되면서 서사를 진행시켜나가고 있음을 알 수 있었다. 또한, ‘텍스트 표면’인 층위와 텍스트에 배치된 사건을 시간으로 재구성한 스토리 층위를 통해서 사건과의 관계로서의 행위들이, 대립적으로 제시되어 소설 텍스트 전체 구조에 유기적으로 작동하고 있음을 밝혔다. 그 대립항은 각각 헤어짐 : 해후, 수련(고난) : 완성(성취), 그리고 수수께끼 : 해결이었고, 그것들은 의미론적 변별적 자질을 지니며 작동하고 있었다. 이 변별적 자질들은 모순-대립 관계에 있던, 석담과 고죽의 예술론을 통합하는 ‘찾기’의 의미망이라고 설명할 수 있다. 그리고 ｢금시조｣의 금시조 그림을 도상으로 파악하였다. 도상은 주로 어떤 사물과의 유사성을 빌려 그 사물을 가리키는 기호로 정의할 수 있는데, 그것은 일차성, 즉 고유한 특징을 통해 의미작용한다. 그러나 고죽에게 있어서 금시조라는 한자어 도상은 고유한 특질을 얻어 낼 수 없는 추상의 대상이었다. 매체 형식에 의존하는 도상성(iconicity)을 바탕으로 하여 금시조가 지니는 도상성을 하위도상의 은유의 영역까지 발전시켜 해석해보았다. 고죽과 석담의 양항 대립은 결코 배타적인 것이 아니라, 서로의 영역으로 다가가고자 하는 통합의 ‘찾기’였던 것이다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In this article, we explored the process of converting deep structure into surface structure to extract the narrative grammar of “Geumsijo”. The characters in “Geumsijo” are people who train and wander in order to ‘find’ their artistic soul or something they have not acquired. The key word is the verb ‘to find’ or ‘to find’, and as a result of examining the deep structure and surface structure by converting the verb ‘to find’ into the simplest sentence that is a combination of a noun and a verb, the text of this novel It was found that the core of the deep structure, which consists of the semantic opposition of the act of ‘training (suffering): completion (achievement)’, is variously reproduced and transformed in the surface structure, advancing the narrative. In addition, through the layer that is the ‘text surface’ and the story layer that reconstructs the events placed in the text through time, it was revealed that the actions as relationships with events are presented in a confrontational manner and operate organically in the overall structure of the novel text. The opposites were separation: separation, training (suffering): completion (achievement), and riddle: solution, respectively, and they were operating with semantic discriminative qualities. These distinctive qualities can be explained as a semantic network of ‘finding’ that integrates the artistic theories of Seokdam and Gojuk, which were in a relationship of contradiction and opposition. And the painting of Geumsijo in ‘Geumsijo’(novel) was understood as an icon. An icon can be mainly defined as a sign that refers to an object by virtue of its similarity to that object, and it acts as a signifier through primaryity, that is, unique characteristics. However, for Gojuk, the Chinese character icon called Geumshijo was an object of abstraction that could not obtain its own characteristics. Based on the iconicity that depends on the media format, the iconicity of Geumsijo was developed and interpreted into the realm of sub-iconic metaphors. The two-way conflict between Gojuk and Seokdam was by no means exclusive, but was a ‘search’ for unity to approach each other’s territory. The characters in “Geumsijo” are people who train and wander in order to ‘find’ their artistic soul or something they have not acquired. The key word is the verb ‘to find’ or ‘to find’, and as a result of examining the deep structure and surface structure by converting the verb ‘to find’ into the simplest sentence that is a combination of a noun and a verb, the text of this novel It was found that the core of the deep structure, which consists of the semantic opposition of the act of ‘training (suffering): completion (achievement)’, is variously reproduced and transformed in the surface structure, advancing the narrative. In addition, through the layer that is the ‘text surface’ and the story layer that reconstructs the events placed in the text through time, it was revealed that the actions as relationships with events are presented in a confrontational manner and operate organically in the overall structure of the novel text. The opposites were separation: separation, training (suffering): completion (achievement), and riddle: solution, respectively, and they were operating with semantic discriminative qualities. These distinctive qualities can be explained as a semantic network of ‘finding’ that integrates the artistic theories of Seokdam and Gojuk, which were in a relationship of contradiction and opposition. And the painting of Geumsijo in ‘Geumsijo’(novel) was understood as an icon. An icon can be mainly defined as a sign that refers to an object by virtue of its similarity to that object, and it acts as a signifier through primaryity, that is, unique characteristics. However, for Gojuk, the Chinese character icon called Geumshijo was an object of abstraction that could not obtain its own characteristics....

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 이상신, "｢메밀꽃 필 무렵｣의 기호론적 분석" 문학과 비평사 (창간) : 255-, 1987
• 2 이문열, "이문열 중단편 전집2" 도서출판 둥지 1994
• 3 히라가 마사코, "은유와 도상성" 연세대학교 출판부 70-71, 2009
• 4 김인경, "예술가소설에 나타난 예술관의 특징과 지향점" 한국현대소설학회 (36) : 199-217, 2007
• 5 시모어 채트먼, "영화와 소설의 서사 구조" 민음사 55-, 1990
• 6 리먼-케넌, "소설의 시학" 문학과 지성사 23-, 1985
• 7 양선규, "소설을 보는 관점-｢금시조｣ 재독" 한국현대소설학회 (8) : 193-, 1998
• 8 장양수, "소설로 쓴 예술･예술가론" 한국현대소설학회 (6) : 188-190, 1997
• 9 대니얼 챈들러, "미디어 기호학" 소명출판 86-87, 2006
• 10 송효섭, "문화기호학" 민음사 111-114, 1997
• 11 김희영, "기호학적 비평의 이론과 실제-그레마스의 기호학을 중심으로" (창간) : 140-, 1987
• 12 김경용, "기호학이란 무엇인가" 민음사 41-, 1994
• 13 안정오, "기호학으로 세상읽기" 소명출판 321-, 2002
• 14 Charles Hartshorne, "the icon, index, and symbol" Charles Sanders Peirce 276-279,
• 15 Shlomith Rimmon-Kenan, "Narrative Fiction : Contemporary Poetics" Routledge 13-, 2002