English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 54367/62174 (87%)
Visitors : 14644266      Online Users : 113
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTHU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version

    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nthur.lib.nthu.edu.tw/dspace/handle/987654321/80399

    Title: 字義訓詁與經典詮釋之關係
    Other Titles: The Relationship Between Exegesis(Xungu) and Interpretation of Classics
    Authors: 張寶三;Pao-san Chang
    Date: 2002-06
    Publisher: 國立清華大學出版社
    Relation: 清華學報,國立清華大學,2002,new,v.32,n.1,p47.
    Keywords: 字義訓詁
    exegesis (xungu)
    the interpretation of the classics
    Abstract: 字義訓詁之學在傳統中國學術中乃屬「小學」之一,向來與文字、聲韻之學同被視為「經學之附庸」。本文旨在列舉實例以探討字義訓詁與經典詮釋間的關係。全文分為三節,第一節論述字義訓詁為經典詮釋之基礎,第二節析論經典語境及經義詮釋對字義訓詁之制約,第三節析論字義訓詁在經典詮釋中之局限。結論以為:字義訓詁卻為經典詮釋之基礎,其重要性不可忽視,自古以來,小學成為經學之附庸,實不為無因。然經典中之文字,有用本義者,有用引伸義者,有用假借義者,詮釋者在詮釋之際,其對字義之判解,有時亦受經文所處之語境及詮釋者所持經義之制約,因而字義訓詁與經義詮釋間亦會形成互動之關係。此外,字義訓詁雖為經典詮釋之基礎,然而非經典詮釋之唯一途徑,故字義訓詁在經典詮釋過程中仍有其局限,不宜過度誇大其功能。清代乾嘉學者所謂「小學明而經學明」,應僅是一種理想,並未能符合經典詮釋之實情。 Exegetics (xunguxue) in traditional Chinese academia belongs to one of the categories of "xiaoxue". It is usually taken together with etymology and phonetics as "a dependency of canonical studies". This paper aims to give concrete examples of the relationship between exegesis (xungu) and the interpretation of classics. This topic is presented in three sections: the first section discusses exegesis as the foundation in the interpretation of classics; the second section examines the restrictions of canonical perspectives on and interpretations of exegesis; the third section focuses on the limitations of exegesis within the framework of canonical interpretation. In conclusion, this paper argues that exegesis is indeed the basis of canonical interpretation, and that its significance is not to be overlooked. Also, there must be a reason why "xiaoxue", since ancient times, has been relegated to a dependent status in relation to canonical studies. But, the words in the classics consist of the original meaning, inferred meaning, or borrowed meaning, and, in the process of interpretation, the interpreter's understanding of words is often restricted by the canonical perspective and his or her comprehension of the canon. Therefore, exegesis and the interpretation of classics interact. Furthermore, even though exegesis is the basis of canonical interpretation, it is not the only way. Hence, exegesis has its limitations in canonical interpretation, and its function should not be exaggerated. The so-called "understanding xiaoxue is equivalent to understanding the classics" by the Qing Qian-Jia scholars is only an ideal; it does not conform to the actual situation of canonical interpretation.
    URI: http://thjcs.hss.nthu.edu.tw/catalogue_detail.php?id=99
    Appears in Collections:[01 清華學報] 新32卷第1期

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    JA01_2002_p47.pdf683KbAdobe PDF525View/Open


    SFX Query


    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback