《史记·高祖本纪》字词校订二则  

Two Revisions of Characters and Words in Historical Records · Biographic Sketches of Emperor Gaozu

作　　者：张雨涛 ZHANG Yutao(School of Arts,Shanghai University,Shanghai 200444,China)

机构地区：[1]上海大学文学院,上海200444

出　　处：《湖州师范学院学报》2022年第1期107-112,共6页Journal of Huzhou University

摘　　要：《史记》"与父老约法三章"一句中,辛德勇认为"与"做介词"给","约"做"简省"义。此句的"与"应是连词"和","约"当作"约定"义。文献中"与……约"格式的语例都应解释为"和……约定";"约定"在语义上要求3个动元成分共现,而"省约"的语义上只要求2个动元成分共现,故本句的"约"必须是3价动词;"项羽僄悍猾贼"一句,《汉书》写作"僄悍祸贼",两处写法皆确,不需要以《汉书》来改正《史记》。结合"猾"和"祸"的语境分布和组合上的差异,以及篇章结构上的不同,可以推断出该处异文在语用功能上的差别。Xin Deyong believes that in the sentence “make an agreement with the father and the elderly” in Historical Records, the character “Yu” is used as the preposition“Gei”(meaning “give”), and“Yue” is used as the meaning of“jiansheng”(meaning “simplicity”). But “Yu” in this sentence is used as the conjunction“He”(meaning “and”), and“Yue” is regarded as the meaning of“Yueding”(meaning “make an appointment”). In the literature, the language format of“Yu…Yue” should be interpreted as“make an appointment with”, which requires the co-occurrence of three verb components in semantics, while “Shengyue”requires only two. Therefore “Yueding” in this sentence must be a trivalent verb;the sentence“Xiang Yu Piao Han Hua Zei” in Historical Records and “Piao Yong Huo Zei”in History of the Han Dynasty are both correct, so there is no need to revise Historical Records according to History of the Han Dynasty. Considering the different contexts and collocations of“Hua” and“Huo”, as well as the differences in the text structure, we can infer their differences of pragmatic functions in different texts.

关 键 词：《史记》 动词配价 字词替换 考察分布 

分 类 号：H131[语言文字—汉语]