Earticle

The associated design system was introduced with the revision of the industrial design protection act in 2013. At the same time, The similar design system was abolished with the introduction of the associated design system. However, the purpose of the associated design system is different with that of the similar design system. The purpose of the similar design system is to clarify the similar range of principal design. But the associated design system is to protect designs having the same design concept with the principal design. The associated design system is contrary to the purpose of clarifying the similar scope of principal design. The purpose of the associated design system is to reinforce the protection of a design owner. In other words, the associated design system is introduced to protect thoroughly the specific form of multiful, which is developed under one design concept. This study commented on what the meaning of its introduction is. It reviewed that if there are any changes according to the introduction of this system, what it is. Futhermore, it mentioned on merits and demerits of the associated design system in detail. Although this system was adopted for enlarging protection of a design owner, this also have many problems. So this study suggested several ways to solve these problems.

The purpose of this paper is to clarify the rhetorical intent of the narrative of the tower of Babel in Genesis 11:1-9. To do this, I first tried to analyze the unity, context and structure as well as the rhetorical techniques and features of the passage. There are two main ways to analyze the text. One is a diachronic way of looking at the text as combining two or three elements of different origin. The other is the synchronic way of looking at the text as having unity. I who prefer the unity of the text used the synchronic rhetorical method to analyze the microscopic context and structure of the text itself. Then I tried to analyze its meaning. I argued that not only did the text show a distinctive inclusio, but it also shows that it has a structure that reveals the contrast between the folly of human unity without God and God’s reaction to “disperse” this unity. Furthermore, I examined the various rhetorical techniques including wordplay and irony. Besides, I analyzed the macroscopic context that provided the direction of the rhetorical meaning of the text. Attention was drawn to the preface of Genesis (Gen. 1:1-2:3) and the ten toledot formulae that follow. First, in line with J. S. Derouchie’s opinion, I read the climax of the preface of Genesis as “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth” in Genesis 1:28. And this climax of the creation command of “dispersing” is seen as the heading for the next ten toledot formulae. Given the role of the creation command as heading of the following toledot, dispersion had to be the main goal of the Babel builders. Genesis 11:1-9 is related to the toledot of Noah’s descendants which begins in Genesis 10:1. While Genesis 11:1-9 is seen to be the cause of multiethnic origin, Genesis 10 is seen to be its result. Through this understanding of Genesis 11:1-9 as the cause of multiethnic origin in connection with Genesis 10, it is highlighted that the unity of the Babel builders was against God’s command of “dispersing.” Furthermore, through the toledot formula which begins anew in Genesis 11:27, the Babel narrative prepares for “dispersed” Abram as a descendant of Terah.

Since Aristotle, writers and critics have paid a lot of attention to the organic unities of literary works. In an organically unified work, each part of the story is meaningful, contributing in some way to the making of the whole. After completing “Counterparts,” Joyce was exceptionally satisfied with the work and did not want to change any part of the story. The story is a good example of an organically unified work. The title, which plays a pivotal role in organizing the story, has two meanings: “a duplicate copy” and “a person who has a similar function or position to another in a different place.” The former refers to the duplicate copies of the contract and correspondence transcribed by Farrington. Interestingly, from those copies Farrington’s life as one of nonexistence can be inferred. The latter is concretized in the correspondences between the powerful and the powerless; Farrington’s roles change according to his circumstances. Even in the repeated words and phrases throughout the story, those meanings of the title are scrupulously embedded. By creating “Counterparts” as an organically unified work, Joyce tried to embody aesthetic order in the story. However dismal and hopeless Farrington’s life is now or in the future, readers are encouraged to envision an organized world by exploring aesthetic order in the story. This is what artists are supposed to do and what Joyce achieved in “Counterparts.”

본고는 현대 생태문제에 관한 논의에서 유명한 린 화이트의 테제(Lynn White thesis)를 단초로 삼아 프란체스코(Francesco d’Assisi, 1182-1226)의 자연관을 그의 역사적 배경 속에서 살펴본다. 이 연구는 화이트의 주장과 반대로 프란체스코의 자연관은 기독교 사상 안에서 ‘이단적’인 것이 아니라 기독교의 정통적인 창조 교리에 토대를 두고 있음을 밝힌다. 다시 말해 프란체스코는 모든 피조물이 그와 같은 기원, 즉 하나의 근원이신 창조주 하나님에게서 나온다는 신앙을 통해 모든 자연에 대해 보편적인 형제애를 가질 수 있었다. 요컨대 그는 모든 자연이 동일한 하나님의 피조물이기 때문에 영적인 가족으로 조화와 통일을 이룰 수 있는 관계로 이해한다. 이것은 기독교의 창조신앙이 자연착취를 함축하고 있는 것으로 해석한 화이트의 주장과 대조적이다. 본고는 이러한 창조의 영성과 더불어 가난의 영성이 프란체스코의 자연관을 형성 하는데 중요한 역할을 했음을 밝힌다. 아씨시의 성인은 가난한 그리스도를 따르기 위해 가난과 결혼하고 모든 소유욕에서 해방되어 피조물을 이용이나 착취의 대상으로 보지 않고 그 자체의 아름다움과 좋음을 발견하고 존중하였다. 무절제한 자연 자원 사용으로 초래된 생태계 위기의 극복을 위해 자발적 가난과 금욕적 삶이 요청되는 이 시대에 프란체스코의 가난의 영성을 연구하는 것은 의미 있는 일이다.

Lynn White thesis, constituting an essential chapter in the contemporary discussion about the ecological crisis, viewed that Christianity has a huge burden of culpability in the crisis. But he considered St. Francis's idea of nature as nature-friendly and thus ‘heretical’ among the Christian thoughts about nature. In this article, we try to show that, contrary to White's interpretation, Francis's idea of nature is not ‘heretical’ but is rooted in the Christian orthodox doctrine of creation. This refutes indirectly White's interpretation of the Christian view of nature. We also show that Francis's attitude toward nature is influenced by his spirituality centered on poverty. His ascetical mode of life gives us guidance and inspiration in front of the massive devastation of our planet's ecosystems resulting from the human beings’ abuse of nature.