〈五倫全傳序〉의 再解釋

The goal of this paper is to shed new light on the significance of preface to Oryunjeon-Jun and Oryunjeon-Jun in the history of Korean novel by looking into the phases of translating and interpreting preface to Oryunjeon-Jun in order to find out what the problems are and thus to get a new interpretation of the work. The findings are as follows:<BR> First, the biggest problem that the past interpretation of preface to Oryunjeon-Jun of Nakseogeosa has is that it does not respect the inner logical relation of the whole context. In doing so, the interpreters have taken Oryunjeonbigi for the original work on which Nakseogeosa based his Chinese revision, so that lots of questions and problems difficult to be dealt with were raised.<BR> Second, keeping in mind the difficult problems that are not easy to be addressed within the existing framework, the author managed to reinterpret the work concerned with special regard to its inner structure and finally found out that the original work Nakseogeosa based his Chinese revision on was, as he specified it, Oryunjeon-Jun then popular as a Korean novel and that the Korean version Oryunjeon-Jun was in fact transcribed from the original oral work.<BR> Finally, one of the biggest findings of the new interpretation is that, together with the Korean version of Seolgongchan-Jun(c. 1511), the Korean version of Oryunjeon-Jun(c. 1531) was also popular in the early Chosun Kingdom era. Also noteworthy is the fact that we can add, quite with confidence, the schema 〈written work[play work]→oral work of written work[play work]→→ Korean novel〉 to the analysis of the formation of Korean novel.