《管子》尹知章注訓詁研究
發(fā)布時間：2019-04-03 13:07
【摘要】：尹知章注是現(xiàn)存最早的《管子》注本。盡管后世學者對《管子》尹知章注多有詬病,對其訓詁內容做了大量匡謬補苴工作,卻忽視了其歷史地位與價值。尹注簡潔的訓釋風格、豐富的訓詁內容,不僅為后人研究《管子》提供了寶貴資源,而且便于人們全面了解唐代的訓詁風貌。目前,學術界對《管子》的研究,主要集中于思想內容方面,自清代訓詁學繁盛以來,王念孫、洪頤煊、戴望等訓詁大家專注于對該書的重新注釋,對尹注的訓詁成就卻鮮有提及。 本文以《管子》尹知章注為研究對象,對尹注進行全面系統(tǒng)的研究。一方面正視其訓釋的風格與特點,另一方面揭示其存在的不足與失誤。 本文分為七個部分。 第一章為引論,簡述《管子》尹知章注的研究意義與價值、研究歷史與現(xiàn)狀,概述尹知章生平及其所注《管子》,并介紹本文將采取的研究方法。 第二章論述尹知章注的訓詁內容,含賅解釋字詞、申明句義、疏解篇章、闡明語法現(xiàn)象、揭示修辭現(xiàn)象兼具考證名物、典制等方面。 第三章闡述尹知章注的訓詁方法。尹注所用訓詁方法主要包括因聲求義、以形索義、因文求義三個方面。 第四章分別從釋義、注音和�？比齻�方面梳理尹注的訓詁術語。 第五章分論述尹注的訓詁特點。從“語言簡練質樸,釋義要括不繁”、“參考前人訓詁成果,訓釋于古有據(jù)”、“釋義明確,實事求是”、“釋義靈活,不拘一義”、“訓詁方式多樣”五個方面展開論述。 第六章分論述尹注失誤的類型。尹注失誤主要原因在于不明句議、不審語境、望文生訓、拆詞為訓、不明古義、不明文例、原文錯訛、不辨通假等八個方面。 第七章考釋尹注中存有爭議、尚未有定論的詞語,他們分別是“云”、“方”、“倮”、“搏(博)”、“椪”。
[Abstract]:Yin Zhizhang note is the earliest extant "tube" annotated edition. Although later scholars have criticized Yin Zhizhang for making a lot of corrections to his exegetical contents, they have ignored their historical status and value. Yin's concise exegetical style and rich exegetical content not only provide valuable resources for future generations to study Guanzi, but also facilitate people to understand the exegetical features of Tang Dynasty in an all-round way. At present, the academic research on "Guan" mainly focuses on the ideological content. Since the flourishing exegesis of the Qing Dynasty, Wang Niansun, Hong Yixuan, Dai Wang and other exegetical scholars have focused on the re-annotation of the book. Yin's exegetical achievements are rarely mentioned. This paper takes Yin Zhizhang as the research object, and makes a comprehensive and systematic study on Yin Zhizhang. On the one hand, facing up to the style and characteristics of its interpretation, on the other hand, it reveals its shortcomings and mistakes. This paper is divided into seven parts. The first chapter is an introduction, which briefly introduces the significance and value of Yin Zhizhang's notes, studies history and present situation, summarizes Yin Zhizhang's life and his notes, and introduces the research methods to be adopted in this paper. The second chapter discusses the exegetical contents of Yin Zhizhang's notes, including explaining the words, affirming the meaning of the sentence, clarifying the text, clarifying the grammatical phenomenon, revealing the rhetoric phenomenon with both textual research and classical system. The third chapter expounds the exegetical methods of Yin Zhizhang's notes. Yin's exegetical method mainly includes three aspects: seeking meaning by sound, seeking meaning by form and seeking justice by writing. The fourth chapter combs Yin's exegetical terms from three aspects: interpretation, phonetic annotation and collation. The fifth chapter discusses the exegetical characteristics of Yin's notes. It is discussed from five aspects: "simplicity and simplicity of language, no complicated interpretation", "reference to previous exegetical results, explanation in ancient times", "clear interpretation, seeking truth from facts", "flexible interpretation, no restriction on one meaning" and "variety of exegetical methods". The sixth chapter discusses the types of Yin's mistakes. The main reasons for Yin's blunders lie in eight aspects: unknown sentence discussion, non-trial context, looking forward to the text of the training, disassembly of words for training, unknown ancient meaning, unknown examples of literature, the original error, do not distinguish between false and false, and so on. The seventh chapter explains the controversial and inconclusive words in Yin's notes. They are "Yun", "Fang", "Le", "Bo (Bo)" and "Gengcheng", which are respectively "Yun", "Fang", "Hu", "Bo" and "Gengcheng".
【學位授予單位】：華中師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：H13
本文編號：2453239
[Abstract]:Yin Zhizhang note is the earliest extant "tube" annotated edition. Although later scholars have criticized Yin Zhizhang for making a lot of corrections to his exegetical contents, they have ignored their historical status and value. Yin's concise exegetical style and rich exegetical content not only provide valuable resources for future generations to study Guanzi, but also facilitate people to understand the exegetical features of Tang Dynasty in an all-round way. At present, the academic research on "Guan" mainly focuses on the ideological content. Since the flourishing exegesis of the Qing Dynasty, Wang Niansun, Hong Yixuan, Dai Wang and other exegetical scholars have focused on the re-annotation of the book. Yin's exegetical achievements are rarely mentioned. This paper takes Yin Zhizhang as the research object, and makes a comprehensive and systematic study on Yin Zhizhang. On the one hand, facing up to the style and characteristics of its interpretation, on the other hand, it reveals its shortcomings and mistakes. This paper is divided into seven parts. The first chapter is an introduction, which briefly introduces the significance and value of Yin Zhizhang's notes, studies history and present situation, summarizes Yin Zhizhang's life and his notes, and introduces the research methods to be adopted in this paper. The second chapter discusses the exegetical contents of Yin Zhizhang's notes, including explaining the words, affirming the meaning of the sentence, clarifying the text, clarifying the grammatical phenomenon, revealing the rhetoric phenomenon with both textual research and classical system. The third chapter expounds the exegetical methods of Yin Zhizhang's notes. Yin's exegetical method mainly includes three aspects: seeking meaning by sound, seeking meaning by form and seeking justice by writing. The fourth chapter combs Yin's exegetical terms from three aspects: interpretation, phonetic annotation and collation. The fifth chapter discusses the exegetical characteristics of Yin's notes. It is discussed from five aspects: "simplicity and simplicity of language, no complicated interpretation", "reference to previous exegetical results, explanation in ancient times", "clear interpretation, seeking truth from facts", "flexible interpretation, no restriction on one meaning" and "variety of exegetical methods". The sixth chapter discusses the types of Yin's mistakes. The main reasons for Yin's blunders lie in eight aspects: unknown sentence discussion, non-trial context, looking forward to the text of the training, disassembly of words for training, unknown ancient meaning, unknown examples of literature, the original error, do not distinguish between false and false, and so on. The seventh chapter explains the controversial and inconclusive words in Yin's notes. They are "Yun", "Fang", "Le", "Bo (Bo)" and "Gengcheng", which are respectively "Yun", "Fang", "Hu", "Bo" and "Gengcheng".
【學位授予單位】：華中師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：H13
【參考文獻】
相關期刊論文 前8條
1 周洪才;;《管子》版本考述[J];管子學刊;1990年02期
2 鞏日國;《管子》版本述略[J];管子學刊;2002年03期
3 鞏曰國;出土文獻與《管子》校釋[J];管子學刊;2003年02期
4 鞏曰國;;《管子》校釋整理的幾個問題——兼談黎翔鳳《管子校注》[J];管子學刊;2010年04期
5 肖建春;《管子·形勢》篇“抱蜀”解詁[J];四川師范大學學報(社會科學版);2000年03期
6 吳顯慶;《管子》“和合”思想辨析[J];社會科學研究;1998年01期
7 鞏曰國;;《管子》尹知章注二考[J];圖書館雜志;2004年04期
8 郭麗;;明刻劉績《管子補注》考述——以陸貽典校跋本與南宋浙本《管子》比較為例[J];圖書館雜志;2008年05期
相關碩士學位論文 前7條
1 程水龍;《戰(zhàn)國策》高誘注研究[D];安徽大學;2003年
2 羅國強;《淮南子》高誘注訓詁研究[D];湖南師范大學;2002年
3 葛文杰;王逸《楚辭章句》訓詁研究[D];南京師范大學;2005年
4 孫園園;《國語》韋昭注研究[D];南京師范大學;2006年
5 楊蕾;《國語》韋昭注訓詁研究[D];重慶師范大學;2008年
6 郭啟輝;韋昭《國語解》訓詁研究[D];福建師范大學;2008年
7 李祖民;任淵《山谷內集詩注》訓詁研究[D];華中師范大學;2010年
，本文編號：2453239
本文鏈接：http://www.sikaile.net/wenyilunwen/hanyulw/2453239.html
