【作者】 张志勇；

【导师】 詹福瑞； 李金善；

【作者基本信息】 河北大学 ， 中国古代文学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 颂和赞是具有历史文化内涵的两种文体形式。它们以各自特殊的语言结构形式,述颂美赞着社会和人生,具有崇高的情感色彩和积极的价值判断。它们均源自于先秦,初兴于两汉,流变于魏晋南北朝,至唐代大盛,是李唐时期诸多文体之中的一个重要组成部分。在本研究中,我们结合唐代各阶段的社会文化思潮,从颂、赞创作和批评两大方面对唐代的颂赞作了探讨。从创作的角度看,初唐时期颂、赞在主题取向上有反思性和现实性的一面,既有应制而作也有文士的自制,其中以唐太宗、王绩、褚亮、颜师古、王勃等人的创作较为突出;盛唐时期,在文德政治理念下,颂和赞呈百花竞放的局面,这与时代乃至文士的心态有很大关系。在风格上有圆融和靡丽的一面。此期以唐玄宗、张说、张九龄、苏颋、李华、王维、李白等人的创作水平最高;中唐时期的颂赞在内容上出现了对圣德和帝王的疏离,较多的是对贤臣高士的赞歌,同时出现了较多的佛赞。此期的颂赞作家以韩愈、柳宗元、梁肃、白居易、吕温、符载等人的作品较好;晚唐五代,佛颂有了较大的发展,并出现了繁荣的景象。这些佛颂在观照与体悟中走向了雅化一途。同时,这个时期,邈真赞登上了文学的前台,其纪传叙事文学的特征,表现的较为突出。由于社会历史环境的转变,此期的圣德明君和高德贤臣们已经遥不可望,盛世宏业的光芒也无法照射每天的生活,晚唐五代的士人的目光开始内转,用颂赞表现生活、山野和佛事等,为个人情志的表达找寻了又一出路。从文体的角度看,唐代颂、赞文体功能的发生,表现为颂文体的纪事功能指向和赞文体的纪传功能指向。颂赞文体的形式批评中,颂表现为颂序的恣肆,藻饰中的华丽和繁写下的精致;赞表现为体赡辞清,杂用文绮,华实相胜。注重缓急应节,繁约得正,贵乎精要。注重点睛画龙,夹叙夹议,义正志显;从语言层次中的突出形式及其前景化的角度看,唐代颂文体表现为对高、大、全、美的追求,对奇、僻、生、疏的张扬和词语的叠用与并列;唐代赞文体则表现为语音层面、词汇和句法层面,以及形式上的四言和多言、散体赞的出现。唐代颂赞文体的修辞则表现为:唐代的颂和赞多采用比喻和夸饰等微观修辞技巧,在宏观修辞上,唐颂多注重全知视点、节奏和距离,唐赞则多注重全知视点和场面。更多还原

【Abstract】 Song and Zan were two literary forms which were full of historical and cultural meanings. In their own special language structure, they sang the praises of the society and life, Song and Zan had great emotion and positive value judgments. We had combined a lot of social trends about culture from every stage of Tang Dynasty. From two aspects, creation and criticism, Song and Zan in Tang Dynasty were discussed.In our opinion, from the angle of creation, Song and Zan in early period of Tang had reflexivity and practicality in the subject orientation. There were works for both requirement and initiative. Among the intellectuals, Li Shimin, Wang Ji, Chu Liang, Yan Shigu and Wang Bo were better; In the glorious age of Tang Dynasty, with the political idea about the function of literary moralization, there were a lot of writers and works, and the works in this period were spectacularity. It had some connection with the times and the mentality of the intellectuals. In styles, Song and Zan in this period were thorough and smooth, extravagant and magnificent. Among the intellectuals, Li Longji, Zhang Yue, Zhang Jiuling, Su Ting, Li Hua, Wang Wei and Li Bai were in the highest level. In the Mid-Tang, the contents of Song and Zan became apart from the favour of emperors and emperors themselves. There were more glorification of conscientious officials and virtuous eremites, while there were many Buddha Zan. Among the intellectuals were Han Yu, Liu Zongyuan, Liang Shu, Bai Juyi, Lu Wen, Fu Zai who worked well. In Late Tang and Five Dynasty, Buddha Song had made some development, and the creation of it appeared a flourishing situation. It had gone to a way toward the elegance in reflection and realization. Meanwhile, Miaozhenzan got on the stage of literature. Its biographical and narrative features were prominent. As the development of social and historical environments, sagacious emperors and high moral officials had never been expected, the brilliancy of the great times could not lighten the everyday lives any longer. The attention of the intellectuals began to turn to their own hearts. Song and Zan were written to describe life, nature and Buddhist activities. Another way to express personal emotion and ideal were offered.From the angle of form, the occurrence of the stylistic function of Song and Zan in Tang Dynasty had directed to the narration function of Song and the biography function of Zan. In the criticism about the exterior of Song and Zan, Song had self-indulgent preface, florid words and delicate style which expressed complicated. Zan had Dantesque appearance, unmeretricious words and intricate deliver. It looked not only gallant but also inornate. It laid emphasis on harmonious rhythm, succinct styles and precise theme. It attached importance to critical points, alternating narration and discussion, proper meaning and obvious aspiration. From the prominent form and foregrounding angle of the language layers, Song showed pursuing loftiness, lustihood, integrity and beauty, publicizing uncommonness, scarceness, infrequency and unfamiliarity and overlapping and juxtaposing words. Zan showed different in three aspects: pronunciation, vocabulary and syntax. It also showed the appearance of four characters, over-four characters and rhymelessness. The rhetoric of Song and Zan in Tang appeared that both of them had adopted micro-rhetoric skills such as metaphor and exaggeration, however, on macro- rhetoric skills, Song focus more on omni-viewpoint, cadence and interval, and Zan focus more on omni-viewpoint and spectacle.更多还原