• Sijohaknonchong
• /
• v.25
• /
• pp.5-27
• /
• 2006

This paper aims at examining how sijo works, including ancient sijo works, those published before the 1960s, those written by China-residing Koreans, and those published in the 2000s, convey the poetic meaning in terms of sentence structure. Firstly, ancient sijo works, those published before the 1960s, and those written by China-residing Koreans, have sentences. whose meaning the readers can easily grasp, with simple structures and little rhetoric words. But moderns works published In the 2000s (modern sijo works after) are mingled with too many rhetoric expressions, sometimes misused. Secondly, ancient sijo works, those published before the 1960s, and those written by China-residing Koreans, having a clarified subject-verb context. are easily understood by the readers. But, in modern sijo works, there are many cases with an unclarified subject-verb context and redundant rhetoric words, which will cause misunderstanding of the meaning of the work. Thirdly, in ancient sijo works. those published before the 1960s and those written by China-residing Koreans, each of the three statements (called in) in a stanza is separate from the others in context. But, in some modern sijo works, the first and second statements (called chojang and jungjang) fall into just rhetoric parts for the last statement (called jongjang), and each of them is not read as an independent statement. Fourthly, there are some cases whose forms are distant from those of siio works. but are written in three statements like traditional sijo works. Regular poems, though written in regular rhythm, should be also acoustically regular. Sijo works should be easily understood when recited. If not, they are basically far from sijo works. If modern sijo works should overcome their easy expressions and simplicity of themes, they should be composed through using not complicated sentence structures but brand-new metaphors, clear images, and fresh themes.

• Sijohaknonchong
• /
• v.30
• /
• pp.165-188
• /
• 2009

This paper is an analysis about Ahn, Jasan's theory of Sijo. He comprehended that Korean classical poetry is not a literary genre written in letters but a music genre sung orally, because he minutely investigated old books under the situation without preconceptions. Ahn, who had a thorough knowledge on our native music or literature, had an exact recognition about Sijo. He had analyzed existence of Sijo after commenting Sijo's true nature, whenever he discuss. His attitude was possible for his recognition like that. The first step of Ahn, Jasan's theory of Sijo is source of Sijo searched for identity of Sijo. Generic source, metrics, poetical idea, and history are written well in the paper. Establishment of Sijo's poetic identity is second step's discourse about Ahn's theory of Sijo, the contents are integrated in his book Poetics of Sijo poetry. He became to discuss Sijo as a regular poetry, even in this book. Especially a minute discussion about theory of Sijo's phrase and lines was accomplished in this time, theory of metrics based on meter and rhythm was a core discussion of this time too. Although his scholarly opinions are not refined comparing to the scholars of later ages, we can say that his opinions clearly worked a role of exemplary precedent. His opinions were other scholars ahead, nevertheless he had been neglected by researchers for not belonging to major group against his will. For this reason, I think Ahn's status in history of Sijo study has to be readjusted.

• Sijohaknonchong
• /
• v.23
• /
• pp.161-188
• /
• 2005

The purpose of this study was to delve into the morphological types of Sijo in an effort to determine the morphological structure of Sasul-sijo, and it's also attempted to present standard about how to discriminate Pyong-si, Eos-sijo and Sasul-sijo from one another from a morphological standpoint. It's suggested that Si with tee Jangs, six verses and 12 stanzas or more, with three Jangs, seven verses and 14 stanzas or more, and with three Jangs, eight verses and 16 stanzas or more should respectively be called Pyong-sijo, Eos-sijo and Sasul-sijo. After what Sijo was and what's not were discussed, how to distinguish Eos-sijo from Sasul-sijo was described, and finally, the structure of Sasul-sijo was presented. As for Sijo and non-Sijo, the types of works that consisted of tee Jangs, like Sijo, yet didn't suit its framework and Yuljo and were written in Chinese characters were regarded as non-Sijo. Concerning discrimination between Eos-si and Sasul-sijo, the type of Sijo that included one more or higher number of verse(s) and two more or higher number of stanzas in one of three Jangs was defined as Eos-sijo, and the type of Sijo that involved two more or higher number of verses and four more or higher number of stanzas in one of three Jangs was called Sasul-sijo. In other words, Eos-sijo contained one more verse in one of tee Jangs, and Sasul-sijo included one more Jang in one tee Jangs. The sort of Sijo that contained one more Jang in one of three Jangs could be viewed as Sasul-sijo. Regarding the structure of Sasul-si, there should be three Jangs, eight verses and 16 stanzas in one piece of Sasul-sijo. Any type of Sijo that contained two more or higher number of verses and four more or higher number of stanzas could be called Sasul-sijo. Such an addition of verse and stanza could done in various ways. The examples were (1) adding stanzas the first Jang, 2) adding stanzas to the second Jang, (3) adding stanzas to the final Jang, (4) adding stanzas to both the first and Second Jangs, (5) adding stanzas to th the second and final Jangs, and (6) adding stanzas to all the first, second and third Jangs at the same time. Besides, there was an extremely broad gap between the numbers of verse and stanza in Sasul-sijo, which ranged from a low of eight stanzas to a high of 87 ones in one of three Jangs.

• Sijohaknonchong
• /
• v.26
• /
• pp.243-261
• /
• 2007

In this study, I have looked though the Sijo made by Sowol and Jiyoung who were the frontiers of the Korean modern poetry. Through this study, I've tried to research the relationship between the free verse and their versifying Sijo. Sowol made the eight Sijo : six Sijo made in his early days. and the others made in later days. Sowol's early free verse tended to show the regular form. Although his 6 Sijo maintained the traditional form, he tried to make the formal changes. But the subject of those were in the way of view points of old Sijo. But the rest two Sijo strongly showed the problem of reality. Jiyoung made the 9 Sijo in his early days. But Jiyoung's is different from Sowol's. Jiyoung tried to make a new way of expressing the poetic images while Sowol was focused on the formal changes. Also, his final work 'Eun' had the feature of fixed form of verse. Through the research mentioned above, I confirmed that their tries to make the fixed form of verse were the background of developing and pioneering their free verse.