《王三》《广韵》词义训释差异成因探析  

Analysis of the Causes for Interpretive Difference between Wangsan and Guangyun

作　　者：夏能权[1] 蔡梦麒[2] 

机构地区：[1]湖南工艺美术职业学院,湖南益阳413001 [2]湖南师范大学文学院,湖南长沙410081

出　　处：《古汉语研究》2016年第3期90-97,104,共8页Research in Ancient Chinese Language

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目"<王三><广韵>比较研究"(13YJC740109);国家社科基金重大招标项目"中国古代语文辞书注音释义综合研究"(12&ZD184);国家社科基金资助项目"汉字今音审订研究--以<辞源>再修订为平台"(11BYY057)

摘　　要：以宋濂跋本王仁昫《刊谬补缺切韵》的词义训释为立足点,与《广韵》的匹配训释进行比较,除约30%的同义同训外,70%的词义训释在两书中存在不同程度的差异。探究两书训释差异的成因,从纂抄者主观角度而言,采取不同的编纂原则、选取不同来源的训释及纂抄者的认知差异造成了两书部分训释差异;从中古汉语客观发展角度而言,词汇双音化及词的分化合并等也造成了两书训释的诸多差异。Based on the explanations of Kanmiu Buque Qieyun by Wang Renxu, compared with the matching ones in Guangyun, there are seventy percent explanations which have differences between Wangsan and Guangyun except for thirty percent identical explanations.From the subjective aspect of the compilers and copyists, adopting different compiling principle,selecting different sources explanations and the cognitive differences of the compilers and copyists cause some interpretive differences between the two books.From the objective aspect of the development of Medieval Chinese, bisyllablization of vocabulary,distinguishing and merging words also cause some interpretive differences between the two books.

关 键 词：《王三》 《广韵》 训释 差异 成因 

分 类 号：H131[语言文字—汉语]