Please wait a minute...
文章检索
汉字汉语研究  2019, Vol. 6 Issue (2): 7-18    
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
试论《说文》“丵”字的来源
 季旭升
聊城大学文学院
Trail Argumentation on the Graphic Etymology of the Graph Zhuo ( 丵 ) in Shuo Wen (《说文》)
下载:  PDF(pc)(3252KB)  ( 1796 )
输出:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 
   《说文》释“丵”为“丛生艸也。象丵岳相并出也”,近代古文字学家多不信其说。战国文字中有许多带“丵”形的字,学者也优先释为“察”“窃”“浅”“质”等义,“丵”字似乎变成一个不存在的字。本文同意甲骨文中唐兰释为“璞”的字有“璞”“翦”两个读音,因而所从的“ ”也有“凿”“铲”两个读音。“ ”上加小点就是“丵”,清华贰“ ”即“送”,说明了其所从的“丵”只能是声符,读“士角切”,同时,左冢漆梮的“菆丛”应读为“诹众”,“丵本”应读为“重本”。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
季旭升
关键词:      
Abstract: 
     Zhuo ( 丵 ) was glossed as tussocky grass in Shuo Wen (《说文》) because the graph looks like grass growing up parallel to compete the height, but this explanation didn’t convince the majority of modern paleographers. There are many graphs of the Warring State containing the graph 丵 , and scholars deciphered them preferentially as the meaning of cha ( 察 ), qie ( 窃 ), qian ( 浅 ), zhi ( 质 ), etc., while the graph seems that it didn’t exist. This paper agrees that there are two pronunciations in Oracle Bone Inscriptions for 璞 interpreted by Tang Lan, pu ( 璞 ) and jian ( 翦 ),thus the constituentof it also has two pronunciations, zao ( 凿 ) and chan ( 铲 ).While  being added dots would be 丵 , and should be song ( 送 ) in Volume Two ,Tsinghua Bamboo Slips《清华·贰》, this indicates the 丵 of could only be the phonetic constituent, which should be read as the combination of the initial of 士 and the final of 角 , so 菆丛 should be read as zouzhong ( 诹众 ), and 丵本 should be read as zhongben ( 重本 ) on Zuozhong Qiju ( 左冢漆梮 ).
Key words: 
               出版日期:  2019-06-20      发布日期:  2019-07-26      期的出版日期:  2019-06-20
引用本文:    
季旭升.
试论《说文》“丵”字的来源
[J]. 汉字汉语研究, 2019, 6(2): 7-18.
链接本文:  
http://www.hzhyyj.com/CN/  或          http://www.hzhyyj.com/CN/Y2019/V6/I2/7
No related articles found!
[1] ZHANG Yongquan. #br#[J]. THE STUDY OF CHINESE CHARACTERS AND LANGUAGE, 2018, 1(1): 4 -11 .
[2] DENG Zhangying . [J]. THE STUDY OF CHINESE CHARACTERS AND LANGUAGE, 2018, 1(1): 12 -16 .
[3] LIN Zhiqiang. [J]. THE STUDY OF CHINESE CHARACTERS AND LANGUAGE, 2018, 1(1): 17 -22 .
[4] HUANG Xiquan. [J]. THE STUDY OF CHINESE CHARACTERS AND LANGUAGE, 2018, 1(1): 23 -33 .
[5] LI Weiqi . [J]. THE STUDY OF CHINESE CHARACTERS AND LANGUAGE, 2018, 1(1): 33 -35 .
[6] LIU Yun , YUAN Ying . [J]. THE STUDY OF CHINESE CHARACTERS AND LANGUAGE, 2018, 1(1): 36 -38 .
[7] YANG Baozhong. [J]. THE STUDY OF CHINESE CHARACTERS AND LANGUAGE, 2018, 1(1): 39 -48 .
[8] ZHANG Qingsong . [J]. THE STUDY OF CHINESE CHARACTERS AND LANGUAGE, 2018, 1(1): 49 -55 .
[9] LIANG Xiaohong. [J]. THE STUDY OF CHINESE CHARACTERS AND LANGUAGE, 2018, 1(1): 56 -67 .
[10] ZHONG Zheyu . [J]. THE STUDY OF CHINESE CHARACTERS AND LANGUAGE, 2018, 1(1): 68 -74 .
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared