古代小说考证七忌  

Seven Taboos in Textual Research on Ancient Novels

作　　者：陈大康[1] CHEN Da-kang

机构地区：[1]华东师范大学中文系,上海200241

出　　处：《华东师范大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2021年第5期101-115,239,共16页Journal of East China Normal University（Humanities and Social Sciences）

摘　　要：小说在古代为正统意识形态所鄙视,许多作品的作者与成书过程不详,版本嬗变路径也不清晰,考证因此成为古代小说研究的重要内容。经多年累积,考证论文已成一较大集合,其中少数经严密论证而作判断者已被视为确论,推动了研究进展,更多的却遭到同行质疑或被置而不论;同一问题竟考证出数个甚至数十个不同结论,也使研究者无所适从,影响了相应的继续研究。通过检阅以近四十年为主的百余种考证论著,从方法论角度进行梳理,可以归纳出七种对考证结论能否成立有致命伤害的情形:1.前提无可靠性保障;2.资料依据无法支撑结论;3.推理不合逻辑法则;4.将叠加可能性等同于肯定性;5.关键处证明缺略;6.以联想与猜测为论证;7.视索隐等为考证。Novels were despised by orthodox ideology in ancient times.For many works,the author and the writing process of many works are unknown,and the path of version evolution is not clear.Therefore,textual research has become an important content of ancient novel research.After years of accumulation,textual research papers have become a larger collection.A small number of those that have been rigorously argued to make judgments have been regarded as conclusive,which has promoted the research progress.However,more have been questioned or ignored by peers.Several or even dozens of different conclusions have been verified on the same question,which also makes researchers at a loss,which affects the corresponding follow-up research.Examining more than a hundred textual research works covering the past 40 years from a methodological perspective,this paper summarizes seven situations that have fatal harm to the validity of the conclusion of textual research:1.The premise is not reliable;2.The basis of the data is unable to support the conclusion;3.Reasoning is illogical;4.The possibility of superposition is equated with affirmation;5.The key point of the proof is missing;6.Association and speculation is taken as argument;7.Searching for concealed issues,together with others,is taken as textual research.

关 键 词：小说 考证 逻辑法则 

分 类 号：I207.41[文学—中国文学]