표제지

목차

서론 12

1. 연구의 목적 및 의의 12

2. 연구의 방법 및 대상 15

2.1. 연구의 방법 15

2.2. 연구의 대상 16

3. 연구의 내용 18

4. 선행 연구의 검토 20

4.1. 한·중·일 건축의 비교연구 20

4.2. 전통건축의 공간성 분석에 관한 연구 23

제1부 근세 한·중·일 상류주택의 건축론 26

제1장 서 28

제2장 정주환경 29

2.1. 자연환경 29

2.1.1. 지리와 지형 29

2.1.2. 기온과 강수량 31

2.2. 인문환경 34

2.2.1. 민족적 심성 34

2.2.2. 정치 및 신분제도 37

2.2.3. 가족제도 41

2.2.4. 유교 44

제3장 배치 및 평면계획원리 47

3.1. 공간의 분화 47

3.1.1. 공간확장 47

3.1.2. 동분화와 간분화 49

3.2. 배치계획원리 54

3.2.1. 분동형과 일체형 54

3.2.2. 중정형과 외정형 57

3.2.3. 전후좌우의 계획질서 60

3.3. 평면계획원리 65

3.3.1. 기본격자로서의 칸(間) 65

3.3.2. 실의 구성과 배열원리 68

3.3.3. 홑집[단열형]과 겹집[복열형] 70

3.3.4. 평면형태 72

3.4. 소결 75

제4장 건축구성요소 77

4.1. 자연환경과 건축구성요소 77

4.1.1. 자연환경과 인간의 대응 77

4.1.2. 기후환경과 건축구성요소 78

4.2. 흙계열 바닥과 마루 계열 바닥 81

4.2.1. 건축의 원형 81

4.2.2. 흙 계열의 바닥구조 83

4.2.3. 마루 계열 바닥구조 85

4.2.4. 흙바닥과 마루바닥의 융합 88

4.2.5. 기거방식과 난방방식 90

4.3. 벽과 창호의 융합 96

4.3.1. 목조가구식 구조 96

4.3.2. 벽체의 구조와 물리적 성능 97

4.3.3. 변화에 적응하는 창호 99

4.4. 지붕 형태와 처마 103

4.4.1. 지붕 구조와 형태 103

4.4.2. 처마의 깊이 107

4.5 소결 110

제5장 결 111

제2부 근세 한·중·일 상류주거의 경계론 113

제1장 서 115

제2장 경계구조의 이론적 고찰 117

2.1. 경계와 경계구조 117

2.1.1. 경계와 경계구조의 개념 117

2.1.2. 경계의식과 경계구조 120

2.1.3. 공간과 경계구조 123

2.2. 경계구조의 속성 124

2.2.1. 경계구조의 양면성 124

2.2.2. 경계구조의 물리적 특성 125

2.2.3. 경계에 대한 인간의 심리적 특성 129

제3장 사회에 대한 경계의식과 경계구조 131

3.1. 가족의 사회에 대한 경계의식과 경계구조 131

3.1.1. 동양의 '가' 개념 131

3.1.2. 사회 영역과 가족 영역 133

3.1.3. 주택과 가로의 경계구조 136

3.1.4. 가족 영역의 경계구조 139

3.2. 남성과 여성의 사회에 대한 경계의식과 경계구조 146

3.2.1. 남성의 사회적 역할과 위계성 146

3.2.2. 여성의 사회적 제약과 보호구조 147

3.2.3. 안채와 사랑채의 경계구조 152

3.3. 소결 159

제4장 인간에 대한 경계의식과 경계구조 161

4.1. 인간관계와 경계의식 161

4.1.1. 동양의 인간관 161

4.1.2. 인간관계의 범주에 따른 경계의식 163

4.2. 부부관계의 경계의식과 경계구조 166

4.2.1. 부부관계의 경계의식 166

4.2.2. 부부 침실의 경계구조 167

4.2.3. 부부의 역할관계와 공간관계 171

4.3. 부자관계의 경계의식과 경계구조 176

4.3.1. 부자관계의 경계의식 176

4.3.2. 남성영역의 경계구조 178

4.4. 고부관계의 경계의식과 경계구조 180

4.4.1. 고부관계의 경계의식 180

4.4.2. 여성영역의 경계구조 182

4.5. 소결 184

제5장 자연에 대한 경계의식과 경계구조 186

5.1. 자연관에 따른 경계의식과 경계구조 186

5.1.1. 동양의 자연관 186

5.1.2. 인간과 자연 사이의 경계구조 189

5.2. 동과 마당[庭]사이의 경계구조 196

5.2.1. 동과 마당[庭]의 관계 196

5.2.2. 경계구조의 물리적 특성 198

5.3. 소결 205

제6장 결 207

결론 210

1. 연구의 결과 210

2. 연구 후기 213

참고문헌 214

Abstract 221

도표 1. 연구의 내용 19

제1부 7

표 2.1. 도시별 월별 기온 평년값 32

표 2.2. 도시별 월별 강수량 33

표 3.1. 공간분화의 방법 50

제2부 7

도표 2.1. 인간의 경계의식과 경계구조의 관계 122

표 4.1. 동서양 문화 기본 비교 (최영진, 1996, p.21) 162

표 4.2. 한·중·일의 인간경계의식과 경계구조 결과표 184

The purpose of this study is to make clear the identity of Korean traditional residence more objectively by making a comparative review of traditional houses among Korea, China and Japan which are neighboring geographically and whose cultural environments are similar historically. Specifically, the study compared differences in the boundary of traditional residence among the three nations to find out unique characteristics adapted by each of the three countries in utilizing a space for traditional residence.

In the West, such boundary is formed to protect and preserve privacy while in the East, the boundary of traditional residence is made under a full consideration of relationships between self and outside objects. Thus this researcher herein suggested spatial characteristics of traditional residence could be best compared among Korea, China and Japan by looking into such boundary based on perceptional differences among the three countries.

As a result of the comparison, it was found that Chinese QUADRANGLE(四合院) and Japanese WARRIOR'S HOUSE(武家) are very different with each other in terms of arrangement, plane and construction elements. Korean traditional house for the UPPER-CLASS HOUSE(班家) is more similar to Chinese QUADRANGLE in arrangement and plane, but more similar to japanese warrior's house in construction elements. Such traditional residence for the ruling class of this nation either fully accept or negotiate all features of Chinese and Japanese traditional houses. This seems to have something to do with the fact that Korea is in a middle position in terms of climate and environment, and in cultural transfer between the other two nations.

Next this study compared differences among basic relationships existing in Korea, China and Japan, and examined how such differences were related with spatial characteristics shown in the three nations' traditional residence. Specifically, the study compared relationships such as between man and wife, householder and housewife, father and son, and mother-in-law and daughter-in-law among Korea, China and Japan and then correlations of such relations with the boundary of traditional residence shown in the three nations.

Regarding relations between human and society, all of the three nations are common in that they apply the quality of prevention from outside society to traditional houses under the view of family orientation and in that they seek to ensure a space for protecting women. Also in relations between human and gods, the three nations are similar in that they all employ a multiple frame of boundary from the view of psychology in which ancestral souls are worshiped, some gods beneficial to human share a space of traditional residence and other gods harmful to human are expelled out through ritual activities.

When perceived relations between human and nature are compared among the three nations, China and Japan has their own frame of boundary to appreciate nature formed artificially inside houses, while Korea adapts such structure which is sympathetically consistent with non-artificial, original nature and with the consideration of the heaven and the earth as metaphysical objects.

In this study, the definition of boundary is made based on what has been perceived as the proper structure, whose characteristics can be described in terms of openness, inside and outside parts and orientation. As a critical factor to spatial qualities, boundary is closely related with the connection and disconnection, background and atmosphere, and inferior and superior relations and hierarchial order from the view of space.

With regard to differences in the boundary of traditional residence among Korea, China and Japan, QUADRANGLE uses a practical but unreal boundary for the main purpose of protecting its interior space from exterior environments. In contrast, Japanese house for warriors adapts unreal but practical boundary seeking a connection between inside and outside spaces. However, Korean traditional house for the ruling class shows a variety of such structure in openness under the consideration of a number of requirements about spatial connection and disconnection including complicated relations among its residents.

The inside and outside parts representing spatial backgrounds of traditional residence are clearly discriminated in Korea and Japan, but their perceptions are completely opposite between the two nations.

Regarding boundary orienting spatial hierarchy, Korean traditional house for the noble class is different with both Chinese and Japanese traditional residential facilities in that it makes its final deepest space ranked highest on the hierarchial order by gradually increasing its bottom levels while reaching the final deepest space. The Korean traditional residence has more spaces reserved than in the other two houses to ensure a hierarchial position of the deepest space.

Compared to the traditional houses of Korea and Japan, Chinese is most characterized as its expressive hierarchial order by means of straight passage and the left and right symmetry, It also has a spatial hierarchy by locating court yards and buildings repetitively along the main axis.

The Japanese traditional house has a shorter access to its interior space than in the other two residences of Korea and China. It is characterized as having many processes which must be passed through to reach its final space, whose hierarchial position is raised by requiring several processes of going through psychological boundary in a way of proceeding over inside thresholds.