《春秋》“鼷鼠食郊牛角”新解  

New Explanation on“Mus Musculus Nibbled the Sacrifice Ox Horn”in Spring and Autumn Annals

作　　者：彭华[1] 李佳喜 Peng Hua;Li Jiaxi

机构地区：[1]四川大学古籍整理研究所,四川成都610064 [2]清华大学人文学院

出　　处：《中原文化研究》2020年第6期64-69,共6页The Central Plains Culture Research

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“中国国家起源研究的理论与方法”(12&ZD133);上海085社会学学科内涵建设科研项目阶段性成果。

摘　　要：《春秋》成公七年所载"鼷鼠食郊牛角",其实应当是"鼷鼠食郊牛嘴",与《春秋》宣公三年所载"郊牛之口伤"同义。改释"郊牛角"为"郊牛口",有来自语文学(文字)、文献学(文本)、历史学(事例)的证据,也合乎常理与学理。反观历代经学家所阐发的"微言大义",它们实际上属于"郢书燕说"。进一步而言,"经"与"史"确实大有区别,而由"小学"入"经学"、入"史学",确实属于正途。正如陈寅恪所言,如果"不把基本的材料弄清楚了,就急着要论微言大义,所得的结论还是不可靠的"。"Mus musculus nibbled the sacrifice ox horn"recorded in Chenggong seven year of Spring and Autumn Annals,should be"Mus musculus nibbled the sacrifice ox mouth".In fact,it has the same meaning as"the sacrifice ox mouth was injured"recorded in Xuangong three year of Spring and Autumn Annals.There are evidences from philology(characters),literature(documents)and history(examples),which is also in line with the general and academic principles.Furthermore,there is a big difference between"classics"and"history"(as Liu Chang and others said),while"primary school"into"classics"and"history"really belongs to the right path(as Zhang Zhidong said).In a word,as Chen Yinkoh said,only when the basic materials and historical facts were made clear,can we talk about small words and big meanings.

关 键 词：《春秋》 鼷鼠 牛角 经学 史学 

分 类 号：K225.04[历史地理—历史学]