先秦시기 有指와 無指의 논전 - 公孫龍子 指物論을 중심으로

• Published in: 중국학보, 0(71) pp. 467 - 492
• Main Author: 염정삼
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: Korean
• Published: 한국중국학회 01.02.2015
• Subjects: 중국어와문학
• ISSN: 1226-850X; 2671-8286

The objective of this research is to investigate ancient china’s language theory, ‘Mingxue名學, study on Names’, based on the interpretation of Gongsunlongzi公孫龍子's linguistic theory. Among relevant studies of Mingxue, Gongsunlongzi is the document that has been most frequently cited in explaining western conceptual theory. Although this idea, that the western logical structure has a certain universality that transcends west and east, is highly debatable, the basic stance of this research is that in order to accurately comprehend Gongsunlongzi, a representative figure among the Mingjias名家 of the Xianqin先秦 era, it needs to be done through own understanding of the linguistic structure and expressions of ancient Chinese, as well as the context of Gongsunlongzi. Based on documents of the Xianqin era, the figure that established the theory of zhengming正名 can be easily concluded to have been Kongzi孔子. This paper focuses on the influence this zhengming theory would have had on Gongsunlongzi. Therefore this research accommodates in accordance with Hanshu漢書 Yiwenzhi藝文志’s perspective regarding Gonsunlongzi. In other words, it does not exclude the possibility of Mingjias, including Gongsunlongzi, of having been members of the bureaucracy that specialized in Li禮. Particularly in Gongsunlongzi’s Mingshilun名實論(Theory of Names and Things), there are evidences to have theoretically succeeded Kongzi in terms of Li. Therefore we may assume that Gongsunlongzi has never denied the relations of Ming名(name) and Wei位(status). In particular, regarding Gonsunlongzi has refused liangming兩明(disorder) between king and officer君臣, we rather see a close resemblance with Kongzi’s Mingfen名分 theory (theory of moral obligations on names). However, the two also show a clear difference: while Kongzi’s Theory of Zhengming is an affirmative approach requiring the father to behave ‘like a father’, Gongsunlongzi’s Mingshilun is a negative approach stating the father, fu父 can only be revealed by clarifying the process of establishing feifu非父, ‘what is not father-like’. According to Mingshilun, zhengwei正位(rectification of status) and the strict differentiation of bi彼 and feibi非彼 can be the bases to mark the beginning of zhengming. Therefore Gongsunlongzi’s Zhiwulun指物論, ‘Theory of pointing things’ was a work that further developed the theory of Mingshilun. KCI Citation Count: 2