Earticle

李白的詩文旣豪放飄逸又充滿浪漫色彩，但在其字裏行間卻流露着無限的悲哀與孤獨。無疑是他在所追求理想的過程中屢遭挫折的緣故。他懷着以自我爲中心的價値觀, 試圖使自己成爲一個‘與衆不同的存在’，但結果還是以失敗而告終, 只能在孤獨傷心中度日。這種情行可以通過符號論的空間分析來作以更科學性地、羅輯性地說明。本文將把他的詩文擬定爲上/下和內/外的空間，借此來探究其布置關係。上方空間由太陽、月亮、星辰等組成來構成。下方空間則由大地以及大地上存在着的各種物體來構成。上方空間是詩人所憧憬的具有積極意義的空間，下方空間則是詩人所處的眞實世界。上方空間的氣韻如果能順利地與下方空間連接起來的話，處在下方空間的李白就會順勢昇到上方。但如果這股氣勢受阻的話，就會分隔成爲上下兩個空間。這種情況下的李白往往企圖通過飮酒來克服，但是酒只能讓他在夢幻中實現暫時地上昇，而最終幷不能使他夢想成眞。內空間是作中中心人物處在的空間, 外空間是內空間外部的空間。在李白的詩裏面, 這兩個空間之間的關係就似於上方空間和下方空間的關係。對李白來說內空間是不願意留處的, 所以他每次想脫出內空間到外空間。可是他究竟找不到引導外空間的媒體只好留在內空間流淚。<靜夜思>裏月光存在於上方空間而與詩人自己所在的下方空間是斷絶的。上方空間與象徵故鄕的外空間是互相連接的。所以在他的詩裏故鄕幷不單單是指自己家人所在的空間，而是代表能實現自己理想的空間。<獨坐敬亭山>裏連接上方空間與下方空間的媒介是鳥、雲與山，但是這種連接媒介作用是失敗的，所以只好留下了李白自己一個人孤獨地坐在山上。‘坐' 這個行爲也是作爲在‘留' 與‘動'中間境界的一個動作, 來表現出李白的準安定性，卽暗喩着李白隨時會離開此山而向其他地方移動。

中國文學史家, 皆以爲新樂府運動發生於中唐之際, 而中唐文學之價値莫大於此也. 然中國學者羅宗强等針對其虛構以反駁此見. 因運動之支持者與反駁者之間, 展開一場十餘年之論爭也. 其詳細情況, 未傳於韓國, 而國內諸學者猶信文學史家之主張, 終致無反駁之氣分. 我素憫然之. 於是欲到致韓國學者間之一場論爭, 我先受反駁之見, 以主張新樂府運動之不在也. 略我之主張, 蓋如下也. 第一, 諸硏究家以白居易爲現實主義者也. 然考其人之著作, 如此之主張, 蓋偏載於<策林>與<新樂府>等不多之作中, 而餘他作無類似主張也. 又詳細觀察其新樂府創作之情況, 其眞實理由不在於現實主義, 而<策林>志於制擧, 新樂府志於唱和詩, 吾等不可以之爲現實主義也. 第二, 白居易詩中多數作, 流行於社會全地域與全方向. 考察唐代刊行之文書, 唯未見告新樂府流行之記錄也. 故吾等以此得判, 新樂府之流行無史籍記錄. 第三, 中唐與晩唐皆混亂時期, 而藩鎭外族與唐之間, 戰爭不休不息, 唐終陷於再起不能之處地也. 又元稹著作<白氏長慶集序>, 而載元和體流行之事實, 學者之多數以爲此體有唯美主義也. 以此考之, 新樂府運動無實體之主張也.

It is clear that the experience of Zheng He[鄭和] who made seven times voyage to the Western World exerted some far-reaching influences on the literature of late Ming[明] Dynasty. The various informations of the new world broadened writer’s mental horizon and thinking space in most all of the literature genres. The 100 chapter[回]’s Sanbao-taijian Xiyangji Tongsuyanyi[三寶太監西洋記通俗演義] by Luo Maodeng[羅 懋登](or represented by him) is a typical instance of that experiences. Although this first story of the sea adventure in Chinese Literature is not a realistic novel──almost can be a fantasy, it contains substantial meanings in the society and history of late Ming Dynasty. The rich imaginations about overseas countries in this novel, for instance, gave an impetus to the Chinese of late Ming Dynasty who were still not prepared to accept the objective knowledge of the whole world and were self-sufficient for the idealism of the suzerain vassal. In addition, the writer(s) of this novel would like to represent his (or their) displeasure and indignation about the present state of late Ming Dynasty by satire and deriding style. Nevertheless, the sentence quality and story structure of this novel could not fulfill most of high-class leaders’ aesthetic requirements at that time, so much as Lu xun[魯迅] in modern China. In point of fact, Xiyangji can be placed a transitional stage in writing style from generational episodes cumulation to individual story writing. So, it was natural that the writer(s) of this novel betray many clumsy workmanships when he (they) tried to make use of some old episodes and other short stories, or when he (they) tried to imitate some sentences of history books and prose texts, or when he (they) tried to joke, even when he (they) tried to show his (their) talent of story writing. As things turned out, Xiyangji has many distinguished marks of experimental writing. In this paper, I studied some types of quoting poetry and prose from outside of this novel. And I found some notable features. Only 86 pieces of poems and phrases are directly quoted without any modification in total 178 cases. With a few exceptions that resulted from the mistakes in copy, most of all the quoted poetry and prose are intentionally modified by writer(s) of Xiyangji, for the purpose of application to his (their) novel’s context. But it is true that not a few confusions induced by these modifications. Without a few very high-class readers, almost all popular readers could not distinguish the modified poem from its original one, especially in the case that the extent of modification is rather high. The prose sentences quoted in this novel were usually from the prose collections by the fairly famous literary men before the writer(s) or contemporary with him (them), history books, and the Confucian scriptures. But almost of all sentences were diversely modified also. In this case, the purpose of modification is far from the case of poetry. Apart from a few modification in consideration of the context, many modifications seems to cross the line. Intentionally or unconsciously the writer(s) reversed the arrangement of words or omitted some words. It make readers cannot grasp the meaning of the whole sentence. In conclusion, the modification in quoting poetry and proses is a very remarkable feature in the Xiyangji text. But we cannot regard the poor workmanship of modification as an immature defect. Because not a few cases suggest that the poorness is made on purpose. In other words, we can think that the writer(s) of this novel intended to hold the so-called ‘high-class readers’ up to ridicule or to satirize them by presenting sets of absurd prose sentences. And in any sense, we can regard this kind of writing as somewhat similar to the ‘pastiche’ of the post-Modernism.

本稿的目的有二:第一, 以中國現當代學術史的視角梳理一九五八年以來余英時對陳寅恪晚年詩文的解釋以及有 關討論的社會意義. 第二, 以文學研究方法論的立場探討余英時對陳寅恪晚年詩文之解釋的學術意義. 本論第一部分主要討論余英時一九五八年文章<陳寅恪論再生緣書後>之學術與社會意義. 據余英時的分析, 我 們將《論再生緣》的宗旨可視為“針對當時社會沒有‘自由之思想’而提倡自由思想之意義”. 本論第二部分主要討論余英時一九八三年文章<陳寅恪的學術精神和晩年心境>之學術與社會意義. 據余英時的 分析, 我們將《柳如是別傳》的宗旨可視為“針對當時社會沒有‘獨立之精神’而提倡知識份子獨立精神之意義”. 本稿的結論有三:第一, 關於陳寅恪晚年詩文之解釋的討論其實與中華人民共和國的文化正統性問題有密切關係, 此便係這場討論的外部背景. 第二, 關於陳寅恪晚年詩文之解釋的討論其實與在中國大陸自由主義勢力的伸張有密切關係, 此便係這場討論的 內部背景. 第三, 《論再生緣》與《柳如是別傳》皆可視為以學術精神與社會批判相融合的具有特殊意義的學術著作.

The current study explores a couple of aspects involving the myths of Huo Yuanjia, a national hero in the late Qing and the early Republic China. In the myths, two important episodes were most important. One was about his protecting western missionaries and Chinese Christians against the The Boxers in Tianjin and his punishing the head of The Boxers. The other was about his defeating a Russian giant man who used to insult the Chinese by referring to them as the sick men of East Asia. One of the arguments that this study is suggesting is that the two episodes were conceived by a martial arts novel writer and a researcher of martial arts Pingjiang Buxiaosheng, who compiled Huo’s myths completing him to be the national hero by creating Righteous Heroes of Modern Times[Jindai Xiayi Yingxiong Zhuan]. The reason for the claim is the that, except Pingjiang Buxiaosheng, no one in even Chin Woo Athletic Association mention the episodes. The claim was further supported by the series of contrastive text analyses of all the descriptions of Huo in both Biography of Great Strongman Huo Yuanjia [Da Lishi Huo Yuanjia chuan] and Sketches of Chinese Martial Arts [Qianshu Jianwenlu] conducted in the current study. Although the episodes were first released to the public through Xiao Rulin’s Biography of Great Strongman Huo Yuanjia, through the analyses, this paper suggests that Huo in Pingjiang’s Sketches of Chinese Martial Arts was written earlier than that of Xiao. In addition to the introduction of the two episodes, the paper investigates how the two played an important part in making Huo as a national hero. Russian giant man episode—the single battle with the Russian giant man was an alternative choice for the cancelation of the fight with an Western giant man which was originally planned—led Huo to acquire the status and quality of national hero. The Boxers episode, which occurred before the Russian giant man episode, played a role in certifying Huo to be one of best fighters in China so that he can fight with the Russian giant man. The episode is also meaningful in that it removed the obstacle for the Chinese martial arts society by completely denying the society’s relations with the Boxers. Pinjiang’s creation of the Boxers episode demonstrates that his martial artist identity has been an huge influential factor in making Huo as the national hero.

這篇文章注意着《檀香刑》的深層結構, 察看了表現在《檀香刑》里的兩種慶典的樣相及具有着顚覆性的狂歡 節的要素. 《檀香刑》里面共存着兩個慶典, 卽做爲公式慶典的劊子手的處死刑, 還有做爲民衆慶典的猫腔. 前者 是借着封建意識形態而維持, 爲了保持封建的上下秩序而存在的慶典, 具有着儀禮的、權威的、序列的公式文化 的性格; 後者是爲了漫畵化和顚覆支配階級的文化而抵抗它的慶典, 具有着自由的、平等的、解放的民衆文化的 性格. 劊子手的處死刑立足于國家權力的公式性與意圖性而殺死活人, 以保持和加强封建的支配權力與上下秩序. 舞臺 與客座在公式慶典里分明地劃分着, 而舞臺應該服從坐在客座的支配階級的單方面指示, 而且坐在客座的被支配 階級在慶典的游戱里做爲他者被對象化. 另一方面, 猫腔沒有一定的格式或規律而自然發生了, 在發展過程中通 過它自己的開放性與混合性接受了民間的原始生命力. 民衆慶典統一了舞臺的上與下, 以使差別的境界消失了, 而通過基于共鳴與同情的一體感, 具有使死者復活的抵抗文化的性格. 執行檀香刑的過程是公式慶典和民衆慶典相會的接觸点. 支配階級企圖通過酷刑使民衆感覺恐懼, 以盲從他們的 權力與權威. 這時最緊要的是分開死囚與民衆, 以使民衆歡娛檀香刑它自己的奇怪性與暴力性. 但是, 在執行檀香 刑的過程中, 與支配階級的期望不一樣, 死囚與民衆通過猫腔形成一體感. 在要以權力與權威奴化民衆的公式慶 典的廣場上, 民衆做爲慶典的主人而嘲弄權力與權威, 以將支配階級的公式慶典顚覆爲被支配階級的民衆慶典. 《檀香刑》具有着文學化了的狂歡節的要素, 也就是說民衆的歡笑與傳奇的寫實主義(grotesque realism)的特徵 . 民衆的歡笑是從對秩序與權威的顚覆和嘲弄里發生的, 在這個過程中運作着愉快的相對性(jolly relativity)的規 律. 在《檀香刑》里, 民衆的歡笑分明地表現在具有着慶典性的事件上, 卽淸明節的打鞦韆、錢丁與孫丙的斗須 、花子節等. 傳奇的寫實主義是看重物質的、肉體的下部, 以對於有關吃、喝、排泄的文學的形象大大地有關心 的. 這些文學的形象在《檀香刑》里顚覆支配階級的嚴肅和嘲弄封建意識形態的虛僞.

《越絶書》是在東漢初年郡國之書先後被編纂的風調之下編輯成書的, 是一本有關吳越地域的歷史､人士､遺跡､ 地理和民間傳說的地方史典籍. 它不但具有彌補正史的不足的史料價値, 而且具有很豊富的文學價値, 所以我們 可以說它是一本介於史學與文學之間的著作. 在史學價値上來說, 《越絶書》除了含有很多吳越地方的史料之外, 還有隆重的名聲開成了中國最早的地方志的 先河. 在文學方面上來說, 它在記錄史實的名分之下其實很多採取了文學的因素, 甚至於有的文章讓我們問一問 這本書是果然史書或者是文學書. 《越絶書》裡面的文學的因素, 我認爲, 大槪來自作者的偏向於小說化. 我硏究和分析《越絶書》而獲得的結論如此. 第一, 《越絶書》保留很多神話與民間傳說, 這些因素讓讀這本書 的人感覺奇異和神秘而立刻體感此書內充滿了小說的因素. 第二, 雖然局限於一部分的情況, 作者運用小說家的 想像來寫了歷史, 就是作者根據斷片的記錄而運用小說家的想像來一邊敷衍一邊擴大, 使故事具有小說的因素. 第三, 有的文章上, 作者把故事又興趣又巧妙地構成了, 我想這些都是《越絶書》裡面的小說因素的發現. 總之, 《越絶書》雖然是地方史的著作, 我們可以說它裏面保留着很多小說的因素, 在一部分的文章上達成了値 得注目的小說的成就.

The writing style and the power of strokes in the sphere of writing Chinese characters, respectively 書體shuti and 書勢shushi, developed their own theories from 漢Han dynasty to 魏晉Weijin dynasties. In Shuowenjiezi說文解字, Xushen許愼 explained eight styles of Qin秦 and six styles of Wangmang王莽. In Sitishushi四體書勢, Weihang衛恒 explained current four styles and the power of strokes depending on the style. This paper aims to investigate the process that how the transition from shuti to shushi came true, and how the theory of shushi was established.

《論衡》三十卷八十五篇是後漢時代王充作品的. 根据自己篇和別的地方出现的，大约一百白篇以上. 王充是後 漢時代著名的學者, 字仲任, 後漢時代會稽郡上虞縣(今屬浙江省)人. 生於光武帝建武3年(西元27年), 約卒於和帝 永元9年(西元97年), 終年70歲左右. 王充自幼 聰明好学, 后到京城入太學, 拜扶风歷史學者班彪为师. 家贫无书, 常游於洛书铺, 所阅之书过目能诵, 遂博通众流百家書籍. 何谓《論衡》? 王充自己<自紀>解释说，“論衡者, 論之平也.” 《漢書⋅律曆志》解释说, “衡, 平也, 所以任權而 均物, 平輕重也.” 由此可见, ‘平’表示‘衡’, 引伸而为《論衡》正是表着议论之秤, 还是议论之客观性. 王充使用这 个書名欲对于言論是非和眞僞衡量標準.《論衡》被称为中國文學史⋅古代文學理論評論⋅中國哲學史⋅思想史⋅中 國通史⋅文化史上一部劃時代的著作. 《論衡》的写作目的在譏世俗, 疾虛妄. 然而《論衡》是一部难读的书. 这 并非因为它文字难深，难以卒读，恰恰相反，平易浅近，明白如话，连王充自己也承认它“形露易观”, 以致引起 时人非议. 这个論章欲考察《論衡》难读字句现象几个方面, 特別赘疣字句, 错误字句, 脱落字句 等.

本文通过分析‘是+个+NP’结构和‘是+NP’结构的语义及语用差异，考察了汉语中不带‘色彩义’的量词‘个’的语义功能。‘是+NP’结构属于客观性命题判断句，而‘是+个+NP’结构则带有名词属性，同时表达说话者的客观判断。这可以从三种情况下对‘是+个+NP’结构的较常使用得到确认。这三种情况具体是：结构中带有描写性成分，或名词本身带有有主观性评价色彩的情况，心理活动动词和认知动词一起使用的情况，表假设和猜测的结构使用的情况。本文将‘是+NP' 结构和 ‘是+个+NP’结构中所体现的主观性和客观性差异分析为‘外延语境谓语’和‘内延语境谓语’。外延语境谓语‘是+NP'结构中的名词虽然被释义为外延义，实际上指称存在的色彩义，但内延语境谓语‘是+个+NP’结构中的名词也可以释义为内延义，因此实际上即使不存在也能体现出属性义。因此，实体并不存在，只是叙述比喻的话语，或表达说话者关于名词短语的属性的主观性判断时，只有‘是+个+NP’才能发起谈话。现代汉语中的‘是+NP’结构和‘是+个+NP’结构中所体现的客观性和主观性解释的差异，可以看做源于外延和内延的谓语语境差异。另一方面，‘是+个+NP’结构中名词所体现的属性，并非特定的个人特别认知的名词属性，而是在社会中大多数人所认知的具有普遍性质的属性。这‘是+个+NP’结构中‘个’后面所带成分的释义被诱导为普遍属性的这一功能所致，同时，这可以从‘V+个+AP’结构中‘个’被释义为普遍属性中得出，因此‘V+个+AP’结构中形容词不受副词修饰，不能重叠。‘V+个+AP’结构不能使用于比较句，而较常使用于祈使句和命令句中。

本文对汉语空间量度词“大/小”的语义扩展及其所反映的概念化方式进行了系统的考察。空间域是认知语言学中最受瞩目的认知域之一，许多其他认知域的概念都需借助空间概念来建构。而“大/小”体现了对空间量的量度，是空间表达的重要组成部分。据考察，空间量度词“大/小”是跨语言普遍存在的一对核心词汇，而且是形容词范畴的典型成员。基于此，本文认为“大/小”是考察汉语空间认知方式的一个有效切入点。本文首先考察了“大/小”的造字方式，确认这对空间量度概念的文字都是通过对具体的空间事物进行描摹的方式来表达的，这印证了认知语言学关于“空间域是最基本的认知域”这一观点。接下来，本文考察了“大/小”的原型义，认为“大/小”的原型义是对2,3维空间物的整体空间量进行量度，凸显的是整体空间量与比较标准之间的关系。“大/小”的语义在隐喻、主观化、语法化等认知机制的作用下，由空间域投射到感觉、时间、事件、状态等其他认知域，产生了若干扩展义。通过与韩国语“크다/작다”的对比，我们发现，中韩都具有｢声音、时间、事件、抽象概念是空间物｣的认知方式，在这方面，“大/小”和“크다/작다”的语义具有共性。而在表达弱离散性的事件和抽象概念的程度时，汉语主要用“大/小”，而韩国语“크다/작다”和“많다/적다”均可，这说明汉语主要采取整体性的认知方式，韩国语则整体认知和具体认知共存。另外，相对于“크다/작다”而言，“大/小”的主观性用法更为活跃，这与中国古代哲学中将“大”这一概念纳入哲学范畴，对其进行推崇的思想有关。