| 题名 |
吳澄《書纂言》對〈洪範〉、〈洛誥〉錯簡的釐正 |
| 并列篇名 |
Wucheng corrects the layout disorder of ＂Hongfan＂ and ＂Luogao＂ in his Shuzuanyan |
| 作者 |
顧海亮(Gu Hai-Liang) |
| 关键词 |
吳澄 ； 《書纂言》 ； 〈洪範〉 ； 〈洛誥〉 ； 錯簡 ； Wucheng ； Shuzuanyan ； Hongfan ； Luogao ； Layout Disorder |
| 期刊名称 |
漢學研究集刊 |
| 卷期/出版年月 |
31期（2020 / 12 / 01） |
| 页次 |
49 - 91 |
| 内容语文 |
繁體中文 |
| 中文摘要 |
吳澄《書纂言》乃宋元「疑經改經」集成之作，以釐正〈洪範〉、〈洛誥〉錯簡體現得最為集中。宋儒各家對〈洪範〉錯簡多有訂正，但尚未及全篇，吳澄全面釐正〈洪範〉錯簡，有承宋儒陳說，也有異於宋儒及發宋儒未道之處；〈洛誥〉文本竄雜凌亂，顛倒失次，存在錯簡、闕文，宋儒釐正〈洛誥〉錯簡僅止〈康誥〉篇首四十八字，吳澄從〈洛誥〉文本內在理路和問題邏輯出發釐正錯簡，獨發機杼，精思巧構，使得〈洛誥〉上下章節環扣呼應，通貫妥順，幾乎沒有錯簡的痕跡，乃補宋儒之所未及，明清以來學者皆未嘗理會，遑論深究。《書纂言》非集注集解體，而是隱括諸家之說以成己意，注文清通簡要，其「疑經改經」說法雖未詳言根據，但卻非《四庫提要》所謂「以意自為」、「隨意改竄」。梅賾所獻《古文尚書》為《尚書》惟一傳本，在傳世及出土文獻可資考訂《尚書》的資料甚為有限的情況下，吳澄從〈洪範〉、〈洛誥〉文本內在理路和問題邏輯出發，以類似「以經解經」的方法釐正錯簡，似乎是唯一可行之路徑。古史杳遠難覓，文獻茫昧難徵，雖然很難說吳澄所釐正錯簡就是〈洪範〉、〈洛誥〉的原貌，但其針對並試圖解決〈洪範〉、〈洛誥〉文本存在的不少問題，應視為恢復《尚書》原貌的努力，有其《書》學史及經学史價值。 |
| 英文摘要 |
WuCheng's Shuzuanyan is a comprehensive work of ＂Doubting the Classics and Recomposing the Classics＂ in Song and Yuan dynasties, which embodied in the correction of the layout disorder in ＂Hongfan＂ and ＂Luogao＂. Many Confucian scholars in the song dynasty have corrected the layout disorder in the ＂Hongfan＂, but they haven't corrected the text in the whole. Wucheng comprehensively corrects the errors in the ＂Hongfan＂, some of which are inherited from the Song Confucians, while some are different from those of the Song dynasty.＂Luogao＂ text is full of miscellaneous chaos, in which there are layout disorder and missing words. Confucian scholars in the Song dynasty only correct 48 characters in the beginning of ＂Kanggao＂ as they correct the layout disorder of ＂Luogao＂.From the intrinsic logic of the text and consciousness of problems, Wu Cheng's correction is skillfully organized, expressing his unique views on Shangshu study, which makes ＂Luogao＂ context smooth and easy to understand, almost without any layout disorder. Wucheng has contributed in the Shangshu study that Confucian scholars in the Song dynasty has not, for this point, scholars in the Ming and Qing dynasties have paid no attention to, much less deep and further exploration. Unlike the collective annotation and interpretation style, in Shuzuanyan, Wucheng summarizes the previous explanation and integrates them into his system. The annotation is clear and concise. Although his ＂Doubting the Classics and Recomposing the Classics＂ is not based on detailed explanation, his annotation is not the so-called ＂acting on one's own will＂ or ＂making random changes＂, as the General Catalogue Summary of Imperial Book Collection of Four Series criticizes. Classic Documents in Ancient Scripts offered by MeiZe in the only version of Shangshu that handed down. Considering that the existing classics and unearthed literature are limited, there are a few references available for Shangshu study. Under such circumstance, Wu Cheng corrects the layout disorder in ＂Hongfan＂ and ＂Luogao＂ via the intrinsic logic of the text and consciousness of problems, such way of interpretation, like ＂Interpreting one Classics by other Classics＂, seems to be the only viable path. The ancient history is far away, and the literature is almost disappeared. Although it is hard to say that Wucheng's corrections reveal the original appearance of ＂Hongfan＂ and ＂Luogao＂, it should be regarded as an effort to restore the original appearance of Shangshu, and such endeavor has its significance in the history of ShangShu study and Confucian classics. |
| 主题分类 |
人文學 >
語言學 人文學 > 中國文學 |
| 参考文献 |
|
| 被引用次数 |
