论文部分内容阅读
《秦誓》的解读,以史迁悔过说及牟庭用人说为著。二说虽形同冰炭,但其解说方式,均将《秦誓》事件化,以事说文,要在君主之用人。惟悔过说于鉴古之外多了一层价值观上的优越感。其余解说有以文说事者,有以文说文者。前者如《礼记》,借《秦誓》以表达儒家中庸之道,如郭沫若,借以揭示古代社会真相;后者如傅斯年,借以表达“以文为断”的文学主张。不同的文事关系作为不同解说的逻辑起点,架构了不同的解说方式,传达了不同的见解,实为研究不同解说之管钥。
Interpretation of “Qin Oath”, to remorse over the history and Mu Ting said as employed. Second, although the same with ice, but the way of commentary, will “Qin oath” Incident, to say things, to use the monarch. However, I regretted that there was a sense of superiority in values outside of Kamui. The rest of the commentary has a mere mention of those who have a literary source. The former, such as “Book of Rites,” expresses the Confucian doctrine of the mean by “Oath of Qin”, such as Guo Moruo, to reveal the truth of ancient society. The latter, like Fu Sinian, expresses the literary proposition of “taking the essay as the basis.” As the logical starting point for different narratives, different cultural relations constitute different explanations and convey different opinions, which are actually the keys to the study of different narratives.