中华书局姚刊三韵本《类篇·石部》校读劄记  

The Emendation of Shi Radical(石部)in Lei Pian Published by Chinese Press

作　　者：陈源源[1] 

机构地区：[1]温州大学人文学院,浙江温州325035

出　　处：《西南交通大学学报（社会科学版）》2011年第3期17-19,24,共4页Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University(Social Sciences)

基　　金：浙江省哲学社会科学规划课题(10CGZY05YBQ)

摘　　要：今通行本《类篇》有中华书局的姚刊三韵本影印本和上海古籍出版社据上海图书馆藏汲古阁影宋钞本影印的本子。但中华书局姚刊三韵本讹误甚多,使用前需对其进行校勘。以中华书局本(1984年12月第1版)为底本,上海古籍出版社本(1988年2月第1版)为参校本,对《类篇.石部》进行校勘,可以发现:姚刊三韵本《类篇.石部》存在释义和读音方面的一些错误,如"碑"下所引郑康成之说"官"当作"宫"、"空"作"窆","砠"所引《说文》"石戴土"当为"土戴石",《说文》"■"之释义"石也恶也"的前一个"也"字乃"地"之偏旁讹夺,等等。同时,《说文》、《集韵》也有若干失误。这些讹误主要是由形近而讹、偏旁讹夺、倒文等原因造成的。Now,there are two common versions of Lei Pian.One was published by Chinese Press based on the photostat copy of Yao Kan San Yun version,the other by Shanghai Ancient Books Press based on photocopy of a transcript in Song dynasty.But the Yao Kan San Yun version abounds in mistakes,which should be emendated before use.In this paper,we emendate Shi Radical of Lei Pian,and try to point out some mistakes in Shuo Wen（说文）and Ji Yun（集韵）.We find some errors,for example,＂Guan＂ is misused as ＂Kong＂ because of similar font-style.＂Shi Dai Tu＂ is inaccurate in explanation,and the correct one should be ＂Tu Dai Shi＂.The ＂Ye＂ in ＂Shi Ye E Ye＂ is the character ＂Di＂ because of loss of character component.At the same time,we point out some errors in Shuo Wen and Ji Yun.Similar font-style,loss of character component,and reverse characters give rise to these mistakes.

关 键 词：《类篇》 《说文》 《集韵》 姚刊三韵本 汲古阁影宋本 

分 类 号：G256[文化科学—图书馆学]