최석정, 정제두, 소옹, 경세정운, 경세정운오찬, 훈민정음, 황극경세서, 어문관, 문명인식, 문자, 문명, Choi Seok-jeong(崔錫鼎), Jeong Jae-doo, 鄭齊斗, Shao Yong, 邵雍, Gyeong-sae-jeong-woon, 經世正韻, Gyeong-sae-jeong-woon O-chan, 經世正韻五贊, Hun-min-jeong-um, 訓民正音, Hwang-geuk- gyeong-sae-seo, 皇極經世書, linguistics and literature perspectives, civilization appreciation, letters, civilization
The article brings to light Choi Seok-jeong`s perspective on linguistics, literature and civilization appreciation by mainly focuses on “Gyeong-sae-jeong-woon O-chan (經世正韻 五贊).” It verifies, first of all, through the discussion of Choi`s laborious work of Gyeong-sae-jeong-woon(經世正韻), in which he applies and interprets Shao Yong`s (邵雍) theory of numerology (象數學) to Hun-min-jeong-um(訓民正音); moreover, “Gyeong-sae-jeong- woon O-chan” contains Choi`s comprehensive and intensive thought about Gyeong-sae-jeong-woon. Furthermore, based on “Gyeong-sae-jeong-woon O-chan,” it is possible to deduce that he ultimately brings out both Eastern Kingdom (東國, that is Joson 朝鮮) and China as in charge of letters and civilizations and intends to place them as one`s partner of civilizations. According to the latter half of the seventeenth century`s Joson (朝鮮) intellectual`s one-sided point of view, the method of the relationship between universal civilizations and own civilization as the same plane holds both periodic limitations and accomplishments at the same time. In linguistics level, although scientific achievements of Gyeong-sae-jeongwoon and connotative concepts in “Gyeong-sae-jeong-woon O-chan” transgress farfetched suppositions and deductions, his contribution on Joson`s history of science, in which his penetrating interpretation of letters and civilizations, and Joson and China cannot be neglected. He aimed to succeed former period`s ideology and strived to find a solution; moreover, his endeavoring to interpret Hun-min-jeong-um paved the way for the field of corrective phonology (正音學) in the latter half of Joson. Furthermore, in regard to the present time`s learning direction is concern, he makes us to question again the correlation between generality versus particularity and world civilization versus ethnic civilization. He also shows us interpretations based on mathematical and unitary theory transgress what kind of learning fallacy; therefore, in these matters, he is still significant as a learning interest.