论文部分内容阅读
徐世荣先生的《反训探原》(见《中国语文》一九八○年第四期)一文,全面、深入而又系统地对反训词,主要是对反训词的来历和成因做了比较科学的分析,给我们很大的启迪。笔者本着学习求教的精神,不避贻笑大方,把几点肤浅的读后感想直陈如以次,恳请徐先生及诸位老师不吝赐教。一、关于“破读”视为反训成因的质疑“破读”,又叫“读破”,最早见于东汉郑玄《三礼》注、高诱《淮南》《吕览》注等音释,到六朝尤为盛行,大部分收在《经典释文》里。周祖谟先生在他的著述中曾谈到过这种“破读”,但是并没有肯定指出“破读”就是上古口语中原有区别的反映。
Mr. Xu Shirong’s “Anti-Tracing and Exploration Original” (see “Chinese Language”, fourth issue, 1980), a comprehensive, in-depth and systematic comparative analysis of the anti-precepts, mainly the origin and causes of anti-precepts Analysis, give us a great inspiration. The author in the spirit of learning to ask for advice, not to avoid laughing and generous, to a few superficial sense of read straight Chen Ru times, urge Mr. Xu and your teachers have educated us. First, on the “broken reading” as the cause of the formation of anti-suspect “broken reading”, also known as “read broken”, first seen in the Eastern Han Dynasty Zheng Xuan “Sanli” note, high lure “Huainan” “Lu” To the Six Dynasties is particularly prevalent, most of them received in the “Classic Interpretation”. In his writings, Mr. Zhou Zu-mo once talked about this kind of “broken-reading,” but he did not definitely point out that “breaking through” is a reflection of the difference in the ancient spoken language.