從材料看白一平—沙加爾和斯塔羅思京兩家的上古音構擬  

On the Materials of Starostin and Baxter-Sagart’s Phonological Reconstruction of Old Chinese

作　　者：梁慧婧 Liang Huijing

机构地区：[1]北京語言大學北京文獻語言與文化傳承研究基地,北京100083

出　　处：《文献语言学》2022年第1期35-54,233,234,共22页

基　　金：2019年國家社科基金後期資助項目“諧聲與等呼”(19FYYB004);北京語言大學梧桐創新平臺項目“文獻語言學學科建設與發展的創新平臺”(中央高校基本科研業務費專項資金)(19PT05);河北省高等學校人文社會科學研究重點項目“賈公彦漢字學思想研究”(SD191081)階段性成果。

摘　　要：近幾十年來,境外上古音成體系的構擬主要有斯塔羅思京(1989年)、白一平—沙加爾(2014年)兩種。本文從材料上比較了兩種構擬,得出結論如下:斯塔羅思京音系和白—沙音系構擬在材料上的共同之處是使用了方言和親屬語文、借詞等外部材料,對内證材料的材料掌握不夠全面,對所搜集的内證材料雖有詳細分析,但存在時空分析流於觀念演繹的問題,不是真正的假設—驗證法。他們的不同之處在於,斯氏利用原始閩語構擬上古音態度稍微謹慎,白、沙則全面倚重於原始閩語材料;斯氏用親屬語材料,白、沙用借詞;斯氏用傳世文獻材料,白、沙除傳世文獻外,還使用了出土文獻。In recent decades,there are mainly Starostin(1989)and Baxter-Sagart(2014)phonological reconstruction of Old Chinese.This paper compares the two constructions in terms of materials and comes to the following conclusion:In recent decades,there are mainly Starostin(1989)and Baxter-Sagart(2014)phonological reconstruction of Old Chinese.This paper compares the two constructions in terms of materials and comes to the following conclusion:the use of dialects,Sino-tibetan cognates,loanwords and other external materials,as well as the careful and innovative treatment of internal evidential materials,and a relatively clear concept of time and place,but there is too much reliance on external material,hypothesis first,explanation later,is not the real hypothesis-test deduction.The difference between them lies in his cautious attitude towards the Proto-Min language.B&S accepted completely the Proto-Min reconstroction.Starotion uses of Sino-tibetan cognates.B&S uses of loanwords.Starostion uses of handed-down literatures,and B&S uses of unearthed literature in addition to handed-down literature.

关 键 词：上古音 斯塔羅思京 白一平—沙加爾 

分 类 号：H01[语言文字—语言学]