『退溪集』의 編刊 經緯와 그 體裁

서지정보

ㆍ발행기관 : 영남퇴계학연구원 ㆍ수록지정보 : 퇴계학논집 / 2권
ㆍ저자명 : 鄭錫胎

목차

Ⅰ. 序論
Ⅱ. 『退溪集』의 編刊 經緯
Ⅲ. 庚子本의 體裁와 그 편집상 문제점
Ⅳ. 結論
참고문헌

한국어 초록

『退溪集』은 退溪가 서거한 한 해 뒤인 辛未年(1571년)에 遺文을
輯錄하기 시작하여 庚子年(1600년)에 처음 간행되기까지 무려 30
년이라는 긴 기간 동안 輯錄本인 初本 『退陶先生集』에서 문집 草
稿本인 中本 『退溪先生集』 원 텍스트, 中本 『退溪先生集』 원 텍스
트에서 中本 『退溪先生集』 重校本, 中本 『退溪先生集』 重校本에서
문집 中草本, 문집 中草本에서 문집 定稿本, 곧 定本 『退溪先生文
集』이 만들어지는 참으로 복잡한 편집 과정을 거쳐 간행되었다.
詩에 있어서는 退溪가 직접 刪節까지해둔 手錄本이 존재했기 때문
에, 그것에 의거해서 문집을 內集·別集·外集으로 나누어 저작 순서
대로 편집하는 방침이 그 편찬 초기부터 이미 정해졌다. 그리고
문집의 체재와 편차는 『朱子大全』의 것을 준용하되, 書簡만은 『朱
子大全』의 內容中心의 분류 편집 방식을 따르지 않고, 그것에서
한발 진전된 人物中心의 분류 편집 방식, 다시 말하면 書簡의 與
答人物을 그 內容도 함께 고려해서 時(時賢)·知(知舊)·門(門人)·家
(家人)의 네 부류로 나누어 편집하는 방식을 택하였다. 이러한 편
집 방식은 重校작업을 주관한 鶴峯金誠一과 西厓柳成龍이 처음
적용하였고, 최종 편집자였던 月川趙穆도 그대로 따랐다. 그 점이
『退溪集』이 『朱子大全』과 가장 차이를 보이는 부분이고, 『退溪集』
간행 이후 그 체재와 편차를 따른 우리나라 고문집의 주요한 특징
이기도 하다. 이처럼 書簡에서 진전된 편집 방식을 마련하고서도,
『退溪集』은 정작 西厓柳成龍이 草本을 가지고 판각했다고 비판할
만큼 그 초간본인 庚子本은 편집상 많은 문제를 안고 간행되었다.
전란을 겪은 뒤라서 출간을 서둘렀다면, 수정 보각 과정에 의당
바로잡았어야 한다. 하지만 그렇게 하지 못하여 추후의 改刊과정
에도 여전히 수정되지 못했고, 기존의 체재와 편차를 고수하려는
강한 관성 때문에 그대로 남겨진 채 계속 유통되었다.

영어 초록

The material for the Collected Works of T'oegye began to be
collected and recorded in 1571, one year after Yi Hwang(1501-1570)'s
death. It was first published some thirty years later in 1600(the official
Gyeongja Edition), after undergoing years of painstaking efforts at
complicated editing and revising. The records of the Master were first
collected in the original manuscript of 1579, named the Collected Works of
Master T'oedo, which gave rise to the second draft in anthology form
named the Collected Works of Master T'oegye(Original Text Version) in
1586. This second draft(original text version) underwent revision to form
the Collected Works of Master T'oegye(Revised Version) in 1588. This
revised version of the second draft then gave rise to the second critical
anthology edition in 1590. From this second anthology edition the officially
sanctioned decisive contemporary critical edition was made in 1599, known
as the Collected Works of Master T'oegye(Standard Version).
The decision to divide the works of Yi Hwang into the Inner
Chapters, the Miscellaneous Chapters and the Outer Chapters in
accordance with the date of composition of the respective works by the
author was made early in the process of editing. This decision was
facilitated by the existence of hand-written versions of Yi Hwang's poems,
which the author had personally edited. The Collected Works of T'oegye
follows the overall layout and systemic structure of the Complete Works of
Master Zhu(Zhu Xi), with the exception of the section on letter
correspondence, which does not follow the latter work's content-oriented
classification in its editing strategy. Rather, the classification of letters in
the Collected Works of T'oegye is based on personalities to whom the
correspondence is addressed in addition to their content. Thus, the letters
are classified according to four types of corresponding personalities,
namely Contemporary Worthies, Old Acquaintances, Fellow Scholars and
Students, and Family Members, respectively.
The above style of classification in the process of editing was first
adopted by Kim Seong-il ("Hakbong":1538-1593) and Yu Seong-ryong
("Seo'ae":1542-1607), who supervised the correction and revision of the
original manuscripts. It was also adopted in turn by the final editor, Jo
Mok ("Wolcheon":1524-1606). This differing style of classification is the
most marked difference between the Collected Works of T'oegye and the
Complete Works of Master Zhu. After the publication of the Collected
Works, its layout and classificatory system influenced the editing of the
works of other contemporary scholars in Joseon-dynasty Korea.
However, in spite of the innovation in the classificatory system in the
editing of the letters, when published the first official edition of the
Collected Works of T'oegye, or the Gyeongja Edition, was beset with
many editorial problems. In fact, Yu Seong-ryong is said to have been
critical of it as being an edition that represented an engraving of the draft
version of the text. If the publishing had been rushed due to the War with
Japan(1592-1598), there ought to have been a rigorous process of
correction afterward, including supplementary engravings. The fact that
this was neither followed through at the time, nor addressed in later
re-publication efforts has meant that the problems have remained to the
present day, due to the conservative tendency in scholastic circles to
adhere stubbornly to existing tradition.

참고 자료

없음