【作者】 韩军；

【导师】 徐超；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 汉语言文字学， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 唐兰先生是中国现代著名的文字学家、金石学家和历史学家,他从事教学和科研工作五十多年,其学前承清末孙诒让、王国维等学者的学术遗风,后领现代学术研究之风潮,在文字音韵、历史考古、甲骨金石、简帛写卷、汉字改革和诗文书法等多个领域都取得了令人瞩目的成就。因此,全面系统地考察、总结唐兰先生的学术成就,对于梳理20世纪相关学科的学术史,乃至于对当今相关专业的学术研究都具有重要的意义。上世纪80年代以来,学界对唐兰先生治学成就的研究逐渐展开;然其集中讨论的领域范围,多囿于古文字学理论及甲骨学,而对唐兰先生研治金文的成果,却迟迟未见有系统专门之研究。事实上,唐兰先生是金文研究领域世所公认的顶尖学者,纵观20世纪30年代至70年代的金文研究史,其中几乎所有的热点和重点问题的讨论,唐兰先生都有参与,且其意见多自成一派,影响巨大。因此,对唐兰先生金文研究的成就和特色缺乏系统全面的梳理研究,必将对在总结前辈学者学术经验成果的基础上推动当代金文研究的继续发展造成不利影响。因此,本文即以唐兰先生在金文研究领域的相关论著为研究对象,利用当代金文研究的最新成果,试对唐兰金文论著中重要的具体问题进行讨论和评价,对唐兰研治金文的主要创获和方法特色进行梳理和总结,进而为准确界定唐兰在20世纪金文研究领域的地位提供实据,以裨益当代金文研究继续向前发展。全文共分四章。第一章为“绪论”。本章分两节,主要申说本文研究对象的相关问题。第一节简要介绍了唐兰先生的生平事迹、学术研究和治学背景。第二节首先梳理总结了最近三十年学界对唐兰先生学术成就的研究状况,指出了学界对其研治金文缺乏系统研究的问题,并分析了出现这种情况的深层原因,进而指出了本论文选题的意义价值和研究方法。第二章为“唐兰的金文文字考释研究”。唐兰是对金文未识字进行考释成就卓著的大家,也是现代古文字学理论构建的先驱。不论是关于金文文字考释方法的理论阐述,还是关于具体个案的金文未识字考释,唐兰皆有极富价值的论著存世。本章第一节主要总结评价唐兰的金文文字考释理论,我们对唐兰先生早期关于金文考释方法的理论阐述分7个方面进行了重新梳理,并将其放在古文字考释方法发展史的序列中予以评价,认为唐兰先生的金文文字考释理论实具空前和超前的重要意义。第二节在全面研读唐兰先生及相关学者金文论著的基础上,初步估测得出由唐兰先生首先释出的金文未识字大致在50字至70字之间的结论。本节以唐兰在考释金文未识字具体过程中使用的主要方法为纲,重点择取了“蔑”、“(?)”、“厚”、“寏”、“(?)”、“(?)”、“(?)”、“(?)”、“尢”、“诰”、“畀”、“(?)”、“(?)”、“再”、“徹”、“倝”、“羽”、“易”、“彗”、“宛”、“(?)”、“(?)”、“(?)”、“来”、“宾”、“(?)”、“虞”、“外”、“便”、“真”、“(?)”、“(?)”、“盾”、“(?)”、“哲”、“(?)”、“(?)”、“(?)”、“(?)”、“(?)”、“盭”、“(?)”、“宜”、“豊”、“葢”、“(?)”、“徬”、“利”、“溓”、“(?)”、“光”、“(?)”、“亢”、“黹”、“屯”等55个唐兰金文未识字考释的典型个案,利用当代金文研究的最新成果,予以细致讨论和客观评断,从而初步归纳唐兰金文文字考释的特色和成就。第三章为“唐兰的金文文献释读研究”。章首总结了唐兰先生释读金文文献的整体特色,即立足前沿,尤重新出铜器铭文的释读;系铭于史,善于将铭文释读与古史研究紧密结合;多有突破,在铭文释读的具体讨论中不墨守陈说,敢于提出新见。第一节以例解析唐兰先生对金文文献旧释的考察情况,在他关于金文文献释读的论著中,多有对旧释的考察评断,主要表现为补充未备成说和纠正失当旧释两个方面,体现了他在承继中加以发展的释读模式。第二节通过对唐兰金文释读典型案例的具体分析,从探求字词用义、考证名物形制和探索历地典章三个方面,归纳了唐兰金文文献新释的创获成就。第三节则主要讨论唐兰先生释读金文文献时的疏失之处,并通过具体个案的分析,将其疏失归纳为释字、破读、标点、考制四个方面。第四章为“唐兰的金文断代研究”。准确细致地对金文进行断代,是进行断代词汇学、语义学、文字学、书法构形学研究的前提和基础。唐兰建立了以金文词语“康宫”为核心的西周金文断代体系,自成一派,影响巨大。本章第一节主要总结了唐兰进行金文断代的主要方法经验,通过对具体金文断代实例的分析,将唐兰先生的主要断代方法归纳为利用人物关系线索、根据铭意对照史籍、根据书体字形特征、综合运用多重方法四端。第二节重点剖析了唐兰先生金文断代中的“康宫”标尺的相关问题,从回顾学界著名的“康宫论战”的经过入手,对两派学者的分歧意见进行了重新考察,对唐兰“康宫说”立论依据的可信性和说服力进行了逐条讨论与反思,最后通过综合当代学者对唐兰先生“康宫”标尺的不同评价,指出了下一步研究“康宫”问题的出路。第三节通过对照考察其余五家的金文断代意见,并运用当代金文断代研究的最新方法和最新成果,对唐兰《西周青铜器铭文分代史徵》正文所收金文的断代结论,进行了逐一分析评断,并初步统计得出如下结论:该书正文部分所列的176篇金文文献中,唐兰断代结论明显有误的仅有29篇,断代结论准确或近是的达147件。文末“附录”有二,其一是汇聚众家意见整理而成的“《西周青铜器铭文分代史徵》所收器铭六家断代表”;其二是“唐兰先生学术年谱简编”,是编纠正并补充了唐兰先生公子唐复年、唐益年合编的《唐兰年表》中若干瑕漏之处,并将唐兰先生的学术事迹进行了更加准确详尽的梳理。更多还原

【Abstract】 Tang Lan has been regarded as the most famous contemporary scholar on the subjects of characters, inscriptions and history, for he devoted all his life to the career of teaching and research, whose theory follows from the school of Sun Yirang as well as Wang Guowei in the Qing Dynasty and has been developed further by later scholars in modern times, accomplishing prodigious achievements and making great contribution to the development of multiple realms such as phonology, archeology, inscription studies, the research of bamboo tablets or silk scripts, calligraphy and ancient poems, as well as the reform of Chinese characters. Consequently, this systematic and comprehensive exploration on Tang Lan’s theory would have tremendous significance to the academic study of the 20^th Century even the one at present.The academic exploration on Tang Lan’s research has been focused on since 1980s, whereas the dominate field of this realm was limited in the theory of ancient characters and carapace-bone-script, which was devoid of any systematic and specific achievements on Tang Lan’s study of Bronze inscriptions. As a matter of fact, throughout the theoretical history of bronze inscriptions during 1930s to 1970s, Tang Lan not only played a role as a leader in this realm, but also the most distinguished scholar in almost all the polemics on every vital issue. For his magnificent achievements and engagement that influenced study on linguistics of ancient Chinese, the lack in the research of Tang Lan and his school would definitely be helpless or harmful to the development of bronze inscriptions study at present, in terms of the absorption of former scholars and their theories. Thus, taking Tang Lan’s works as the main subject of this study at the point of modern bronze inscriptions study would provide sufficient and efficient evidences for identifying Tang Lan’s academic rank and the promotion of Bronze Inscriptions study, which would be companied with the evaluation and criticism of the typical issues and propositions in Tang Lan’s research, as well as the advanced innovation and specific methodology in his works. This study has four chapters as follows.Chapter One "Preface" has two dominate dimensions, elaborating certain issues related to the main subjects of the dissertation. In the first part of Chapter One, a generalization on Tang Lan’s career both in life and study as well as the academic background would be made in details. The second part of Chapter One presents the situation of research in this realm in the recent three decades, pointing out which lacks in systematic study on Tang Lan’s bronze inscriptions research thereby analyzing the profound reasons of this phenomenon in the first place, which could be referred to as exactly the significance of this dissertation and its methodology.Chapter Two focuses on Tang Lan’s textology study in bronze inscriptions, who’s famous for the accomplishments in this domain of bronze inscriptions textology, as well as the fundamental constructioner of modern theory on ancient Chinese linguistics. No matter his methodology of bronze inscriptions textology, or the concrete and specific explanation on certain unknown bronze inscriptions, there are both valuable and significant works in his theory. The first part mainly evaluate the earlier textological theory of Tang Lan as the greatest significant theory without any parallels in the history, which would be mentioned in seven dimensions as a paradigm of repectination and put into the frame and sequence in terms of the methodology. In the second part, based on the serious examination of the original work of Tang Lan and related scholars, the conclusion would be draw as below. The number of the unknown bronze inscriptions analyzed by Tang Lan for the first time in the history should be in the range of fifty to seventy. According to the main methodology Tang Lan used in his study on textological study of bronze inscriptions, fifty five typical and concrete cases would be specifically analyzed and objectively judged in order to figure out the significance and achievemnts of Tang Lan’s study by using the latest accomplishments of modern linguistics.Focusing on his hermeneutic study of literatures written in bronze inscriptions, the third chapter analyzes the whole style and character of Tang Lan’s perspectives as follows. First, standing at the advanced front all the way, Tang Lan renewed the explanation of inscriptions on bronzewares. Second, keeping inherent connection between inscriptions on bronzewares and historical literatures, there is a strict style in Tang Lan’s hermeneutic study. Third, being good at break through the limitation and weakness in the detailed discussion of inscription hermeneutics, Tang Lan’s theory is full of innovation spirit. According to his textological works of the existing explanation of literatures written in Bronze inscriptions, the first part of Chapter Three analyzes Tang Lan’s supplement to the unaccomplished perspectives and the correction of the inaccurate mistakes, which reveal his hermeneutic mode as development and promotion based on former theories. In the second part, according to the concrete and typical cases in his study, the achievements and characteristics of Tang Lan’s study would be analyzd and draw as a conclusion, which are embodied in three dimensions as the meaning and usage, the name and description as well as official institutions both in history and geography. Certain mistakes in Tang Lan’s research would be pointed out in the fourth chapter respectively in four dimensions as the explanation of characters, the separated pronunciation, the punctuation and archeology, based on strict analysis on specific and concrete cases.In the last chapter, Tang Lan’s research would be analyzed in terms of dynastic study accurately, which provides the premise and basis of dynastic lexis, semantics, linguistics and the study on the structure of calligraphy. By establishing the theoretical system that concentrates on the bronzei nscription category "Kanggong", the school of Kanggong starts to develop, which is represented by Tang Lan. The first part of Chapter Four focuses on the dominate methodology of Tang Lan’s research, working out the basic clue and standard with which, Tang Lan diveded the dynastic period, including the interpersonal correlation, the combination between inscription and historical literatures, the analysis of shapes and figures of Bronze inscriptions, as well as using multiple methodology and the latest achievements. In the second part, the Kanggong standard related issues has been referred to and discussed based on the review of the famous argument in the history about Kanggong, by reflection and examination on the persuasiveness and possibility of this perspective step by step, figuring out the solutions of the theoretical development of this issue in the future. Compared with the other five schools on the dynastic study of bronze inscriptions, The last part of this chapter makes respective evaluation and criticism on Tang Lan’s conclusion of the Charts of Inscription on Bronze Instruments in Xizhou Dynasty with preliminary statistics, by using the latest academic achievements. According to the preliminary statistics, in body of the work mentioned above, there are merely twenty nine obvious mistakes whereas the number of the accurate and proximate conclusions almost reaches one hundred and fourty seven amongst all the one hundred and seventy six pieces of literatures written in Bronze inscriptions.There are two appendixes in the end of the dissertation. Firstly, the Charts of Inscription on Bronze Instruments in Xizhou Dynasty is based on all the schools’ perspectives. Secondly, the Academic Annual of Tang Lan is a correction as well as a supplement toward the Annual of Tang Lan by Tang Funian and Tang Yinian, the sons of Tang Lan in order to accomplish and fulfill a much more detailed pectination of his academic achievements.更多还原