查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 由「東洋」到「東亞」,從「儒教」到「儒學」:以近代日本為鏡鑑談「東亞儒學」=The Changing Face of Confucian Studies in East Asia: An Investigation of Japanese Sinological Terminology |
---|---|
作 者 | 陳瑋芬; | 書刊名 | 臺灣東亞文明研究學刊 |
卷 期 | 1:1 2004.06[民93.06] |
頁 次 | 頁201-232 |
分類號 | 131.3 |
關鍵詞 | 東洋; 東亞; 亞洲主義; 漢學; 儒教; 儒學; 支那學; 孔子教; 近代日本; East Asia; Sinology; Confucianism; Modern Japan; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 日本近代(1868-1945)使用了「東洋」、「東亞」、「東方」、「東亞細亞」、「亞洲」等詞來表達英文“the East”或“oriental”的意涵;而「儒學」、「儒教」、「漢學」、「支那學」則是用來稱呼「儒學」這個外來思想體系的用語。這些漢字詞指涉了不同的意義,其所對應的文明概念、及所面對的時代課題,也各有不同,它們不但烙印著近代日本認識中國的方式,也反映了研究者在觀點和方法上的歧異。由它們在使用上的歧義重重,也可知它們所蘊含的生產性尚未得到窮盡。因此本文回溯至十九世紀前半,以思想史角度來捕捉「東洋」、「東亞」、「儒學」、「儒教」論的架構及演變。 簡言之,「東洋」的概念在十九世紀初期主要指涉中國、日本、印度的廣域亞洲,即「東洋哲學」的論述範圍,二十世紀後此概念變得較為狹義,涵蓋中國、日本、韓國等地域,即「東洋倫理」與多數「東洋文化」的論述範圍。「東亞」與「東洋文化」論都在一九二○年代間出現、論述範圍也相似,都包括中國、日本、韓國。三○、四○年代出現的「大東亞」,則隨著日本對亞洲戰略範圍的擴大,將滿州、印度、和南洋也納入範圍。 「漢學」在十八世紀後半已經出現,是一個因應近世後期「國學」的興盛而出現的稱呼,此預設了儒學並非日本本土的學問、思想之立場。「儒教」則在明治中期頒布〈教育敕語〉後,受到執政者及保守派漢學者的提倡,他們特別強調德政及忠孝愛國之義,視儒教為一種教化工具,而「孔子教」也是此儒教主義的延伸。反之,隨後出現的「支那學」則刻意與政治意識形態保持距離,以冷靜的態度追求學問的自立性與科學性,標榜西歐東洋學(Sinology)式的方法論。 當我們立足臺灣,思索「東亞儒學」的出發點時,上述語詞所經歷的歷史變化,如「東洋」、「東亞」語詞的消逝與「儒學」、「儒教」研究在日本的盛況不再等,將帶給我們啟示。唯有跳脫近代日本「自-他」的認識架構,才能夠把真正意義上的「他者」納入眼簾。 |
英文摘要 | In modern Japan, during the period between 1868 and 1945, the terms “Toyo,” “Toa,” “Toho,” “Higashi Asia,” and “Asia” were employed to mean “the East” or “the oriental”; while “Rugaku,” “Rukyou,” “Kangaku,” and “Shinagaku” were used to convey the cocept of “Confucian studies,” the study of a foreign system of thought. These terms, which have different meanings and different concepts of civilizations, and are taken from different historical backgrounds, reflect Japanese ways of understanding China, showing the different viewpoints and methodologies of researchers. These terms have significantly different implications in their different contexts, and these implications have not been well explored. Therefore, this article discusses the context of “Toyo”, “Toa,” “Jyukyo,” or “Jyugaku” discourses in the early 19th century from the perspective of intellectual history. In brief, the concept of “Toyo” means the wider territory of Asia in the early 19th century, including China, Japan and India, three countries that from the area on which “Toyo Tetsugaku” discourses are based. The concept of “Toyo” becomes narrower in the twentieth century, covering only China, Japan and Korea, three countries that are the subject of “Toyo Rinri” and “Toyo Bunka.” “Toa” discourse appeared in the 1920s as a discourse dealing with China, Japan, and Korea. With the strategic military expansion of Japan in the period between the 1930s and the 1940s, the term “Dai toa” was then used to cover the even lager area of Manshuria, India, and South Asia. “Kangaku”, a term which had already appeared in the late 18th century, is a neological substitute for “Kokugaku,” which defines Confucianism as part of foreign learning and culture. “Jyukyo,” advocated by the ruler and conservative Confucians after the mid-Meiji period, emphasizes moralism and loyalty for the emperor and the nation. “Jyukyo” was widely used as a conceptual tool for education, and its extension was later referred to as “Koshikyou”. In contrast, “Shinagaku” as a methology of “Sinology” conveys an attitude of pursuing knowledge independently and scientifically; and so is independent from the confines of political ideology. As we consider the beginning of “Confucian Studies in East Asia” from a Taiwanese perspective, the hitorical changes of terminologies summarized above can serve as a mirror to reflect related information. The disappearance of the terms “Toyo” and “Toa,” together with the decline of “Jyugaku” and “Jyukyou,” may also lead us to consider more deeply some of the concepts related to modern scholarship on “Confucian Studies in East Asia.” |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。