文字、文献与文物合证的词汇学价值考察

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (0)

全文: PDF (14695 KB) RICH HTML
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要文字、文献与文物三者合证对词汇研究具有重要意义，尤其是当文献不足征时，文字和文物的价值就尤为珍贵。春秋战国时期，扁壶自名有“鈚”和“錍”，自名与器形之间存在因形立名的关联。秦汉扁壶自名“榼”“柙”“扁”，且汉代传世文献中还有酒器名“椑”者与“錍”也有语义上的联系。“扁”及从“扁”之字有扁小之义，可知西汉昭台宫铜壶自名“扁”当与其器形扁薄有关。“錍”“鈚”“椑”和“扁”语音相近，并以壶器形体扁薄为共性，可判定它们为同源关系。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	岳晓峰

关键词 ：鈚, 錍, 榼, 扁, 同源字

Abstract：Among the bronzes unearthed from the Spring and Autumn and Warring States Periods, there is a special pot-shaped vessel. Although the shapes are different, the common feature is that the vessels are oblate or oblate square. Some flat pots also have their own names of “鈚” or “錍”. The two words are the names of flat pots. They are not only phonetically related, but also related to the flat shape of the pot. The reason why this type of copper flat kettle is named “鈚” or “錍” is because of its flat and thin shape. There is a trace of naming based on shape between the shape of the utensil and its own name.By the Han Dynasty, flat pots were often named with “榼” instead of “鈚” and “錍”. In addition, there are wine vessels named “椑” in the documents handed down from the Han Dynasty, but this has not yet been seen in the name of a flat pot. Although the “椑” type pot is obviously characterized by its low body, the flatness of its front and back abdomen is still an important feature. It should be named after the latter like “錍”. Therefore, “椑” is also the same as “錍”, which is why the utensils are named because of their flat and thin bodies. At the same time, among the flat kettles of the Han Dynasty, there were some pots which are named “bian”. For example, the Zhaotai Palace copper flat kettle in the Western Han Dynasty has an inscription that reads “Zhaotai Palace Copper Flat” (昭台宫铜扁), so it calls itself “tongbian”. It can be seen that the pronunciation of the word “扁” is not a “name without a solid name”, but a convention. Like “鈚”, “錍”and “椑”, it is related to the flat and thin shape of the utensil.Finally, although the examples of the word “扁” meaning “flat thin” in documents appeared relatively late, combined with archaeological discoveries, the copper flat kettles of the Spring and Autumn and Warring States Periods were named “錍” and “鈚”, which indicate the concept of a flat and thin object. It can be seen that although the literatures are insufficient, based on the shape of the flat pot and its name, it can be seen that the meaning of “flat and thin” has not only appeared long ago but is also relatively common. Combining the phonetic and semantic connections of “錍”, “鈚”and “扁”, it can be further determined that they are homologous.The combined evidence of words, documents and cultural relics is of great significance to vocabulary research. Especially when the documents are insufficient, the value of words and cultural relics is particularly precious. The teapot was an important wine-holding vessel in ancient times. As for the relationship between the flat pot’s self-naming and the shape of the vessel, the existing research focuses on the shape of the vessel and the textual interpretation of the self-name. However, there has not yet been a more in-depth discussion on the relationship between the name of the flat pot and the shape of the vessel, the phonetic semantics and homology of different names. This article aims at systematically demonstrating the connection between the name of the flat pot and its thin shape from the perspective of the combination of words, documents and cultural relics, and then further exploring the homologous relationship of similar pronunciation and semantics between the words with the meaning of flat and thin such as “鈚”, “錍”，“椑” and “扁” etc.Therefore, this method of assigning names to objects based on their shapes requires sufficient attention. It also shows that the combination of words, documents, and cultural relics is of great significance in the study of vocabulary, especially the exploration of the sound-meaning relationships between different words.

Key words： pi (鈚) pi (錍) ke (榼) bian (扁) cultural relics cognates

收稿日期: 2023-09-15

基金资助:国家社科基金冷门绝学和国别史等研究专项（19VJX107）；浙江省哲学社会科学重点研究基地浙江大学中国古代书画研究中心课题

作者简介: 岳晓峰（https：//orcid.org/0009-0000-6468-0672），男，浙江大学艺术与考古学院助理研究员，硕士生导师，文学博士，主要从事古文字、出土文献研究；

引用本文:

岳晓峰. 文字、文献与文物合证的词汇学价值考察[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2024, 54(4): 109-118. Yue Xiaofeng. The Examination of the Lexicon Value of Combined Evidences of Texts, Documents and Cultural Relics: The Name of the Flat Pot and Its Homologous Relationship as an Example. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2024, 54(4): 109-118.

链接本文:

https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/CN/ 或 https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/CN/Y2024/V54/I4/109

1 郑玄注、贾公彦疏：《周礼注疏》，见阮元校刻：《十三经注疏》，北京：中华书局，2009年。
2 毛亨传、郑玄笺、孔颖达正义：《毛诗正义》，见阮元校刻：《十三经注疏》，北京：中华书局，2009年。
3 裘锡圭：《说鈚、榼、椑榼》，见《裘锡圭学术文集·杂著卷》，上海：复旦大学出版社，2012年，第12-26页。
4 中国社会科学院考古研究所编：《殷周金文集成》（修订增补本），北京：中华书局，2007年。
5 徐元诰：《国语集解》（修订本），北京：中华书局，2002年。
6 何琳仪：《战国古文字典：战国文字声系》，北京：中华书局，1998年。
7 黄盛璋：《关于壶的形制发展与名称演变考略》，《中原文物》1983第2期，第22-27页。
8 黄旭初、黄凤春：《湖北郧县新出唐国铜器铭文考释》，《江汉考古》2003年第1期，第9-15页。
9 史游：《急就篇》，颜师古注，王应麟补注，钱保塘补音，北京：中华书局，1985年。
10 段玉裁：《说文解字注》，上海：上海古籍出版社，1988年。
11 朱凤瀚：《中国青铜器综论》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2009年。
12 王念孙：《广雅疏证》，南京：江苏古籍出版社，2000年。
13 罗振玉：《雪堂所藏古器物图说》，见罗继祖主编、王同策副主编：《罗振玉学术论著集·雪堂所藏古器物图说（外九种）》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2013年，第387-393页。
14 唐兰：《长沙马王堆汉轪侯妻辛追墓出土随葬遣策考释》，见中华书局编辑部编：《文史》第10辑，北京：中华书局，1980年，第1-60页。
15 许慎：《说文解字》，北京：中华书局，2013年。
16 汉语大字典编辑委员会编纂：《汉语大字典》（第二版），成都：四川辞书出版社，2010年。
17 刘钧杰：《同源字典补》，北京：商务印书馆，1999年。
18 金立：《江陵凤凰山八号汉墓竹简试释》，《文物》1976年第6期，第69-75页。
19 王长启、孔浩群：《西安北郊发现汉代墓葬》，《考古与文物》1987年第4期，第39-41页。
20 孔颖达：《春秋左传正义》，见阮元校刻：《十三经注疏》，北京：中华书局，2009年。
21 吉林大学历史系考古专业赴纪南城开门办学小分队：《凤凰山一六七号汉墓遣策考释》，《文物》1976年第10期，第38-46页。
22 孙机：《说“柙”》，《文物》1980第10期，第81页。
23 孙机：《汉代物质文化资料图说》（修定本），北京：中华书局，2020年。
24 高崇文：《错铜蟠螭纹錍》，见《保利藏金》编辑委员会编著：《保利藏金——保利艺术博物馆精品选》，广州：岭南美术出版社，1999年，第210页。
25 裘锡圭：《文字学概要》（修订本），北京：商务印书馆，2021年。
26 汉语大词典编辑委员会、汉语大词典编纂处编纂：《汉语大词典》，上海：汉语大词典出版社，1991年。
27 林义光：《诗经通解》，上海：中西书局，2012年。
28 罗振玉：《贞松堂集古遗文》，见刘庆柱、段志洪、冯时主编：《金文文献集成》第二十四册，北京：线装书局，2005年。
29 黄德宽主编：《古文字谱系疏证》，北京：商务印书馆，2007年。
30 王力：《同源字典》，北京：商务印书馆，1982年。
31 马承源主编：《上海博物馆藏战国楚竹书》（一），上海：上海古籍出版社，2001年。
32 朱骏声：《说文通训定声》，北京：中华书局，1984年。
33 朱德熙、裘锡圭：《马王堆一号汉墓遣策考释补正》，见中华书局编辑部编：《文史》第10辑，北京：中华书局，1980年，第61-74页。
34 蒋绍愚：《古汉语词汇纲要》，北京：商务印书馆，2021年。