|
|
A Study of the Historical Changes of Ancient People’s Concept of “Yi Wen Wei Ci” |
Wang Xianyong |
Institute of Literature, Jiangsu Provincial Academy of Social Sciences, Nanjing 210004, China |
|
|
Abstract At present, the research on “Yi Wen Wei Ci” can be said to be sufficient. There are not only research results from the perspective of article creation techniques, such as the arts of composition, syntax, discussion, metrical rules, narrative characteristics, function words, allusions and so on, but also the research on finding theoretical support for “Yi Wen Wei Ci” from the tradition of Chinese literary criticism, such as the theory of “Wenqi”. However, according to the existing research results, especially focusing on the research of creative techniques, if we look back at the whole development process of Ci, we will find that “Yi Wen Wei Ci” has blurred its boundary and connotations as a concept. Because before the ancients proposed “Yi Wen Wei Ci”, the article creation techniques in the existing research had been applied to the creation of Ci. It can be said that there was a period of “Pre Yi Wen Wei Ci”, but the application of article techniques in this period obviously cannot be called “Yi Wen Wei Ci”. Taking this as the starting point, this paper analyzes the context when the concept of “Yi Wen Wei Ci” was put forward, confirms its original connotation, and makes a diachronic study on the change of how people understand this concept.“Yi Wen Wei Ci” is put forward by Chen Mo according to the characteristics of Xin Qiji’s Ci, especially referring to the Ci such as “He Xin Lang” (The bird Tijue is singing in the green tree) and “Qin Yuan Chun” (The cup that you come). It includes not only the article techniques, but also the application of literary form. Specifically, it focuses on the literary form, discussion and allusion. However, with the development of “Yi Wen Wei Ci”, when people found the concept’s connection with Su Shi’s Ci, which is in one continuous line with Xin Qiji’s Ci, the original meaning of “Yi Wen Wei Ci” is broken. The literary form is ignored, but the article techniques are added to the concept, such as using language that does not avoid slang. Thus, the original “Yi Wen Wei Ci” is gradually integrated with the application of article techniques in the “Pre Yi Wen Wei Ci” period, and becomes dominated by emphasizing article techniques, that is “Using Article Techniques to Write Ci”. After Xin Qiji, the discussion of “Yi Wen Wei Ci” mainly focused on “Using Article Techniques to Write Ci”, and showed the cognitive differences between the theory and creation of Ci. In the theory of Ci, the article technique of “Yi Wen Wei Ci” expands, but the literary form is gradually obliterated. It is different from the actual creation. In the creation of Ci, some writers often selected his ci of “Yi Wen Wei Ci” into selections of Ci or imitated his work, because of their admiration for Xin Qiji’s Ci. But only a few Ci writers of them can imitate successfully, and most of their imitating works lack innovation. Down to the early Qing Dynasty, there were many people who learned Xin Qiji’s “Yi Wen Wei Ci” in their creation, but only a few poets such as Chen Weisong paid attention to learning and imitating the literary form. At this time, what can expand the scope of the literary form of “Yi Wen Wei Ci” should be represented by Gu Zhenguan’s “Yi Ci Dai Shu”. In Gu Zhenguan’s Ci “Jinlü Qu” to his friend Wu Zhaoqian, the original meaning of “Yi Wen Wei Ci” can be truly embodied and developed again. Unfortunately, after that, the concept of “Yi Wen Wei Ci” still focuses on “Using Article Techniques to Write Ci” and has affected the research of “Yi Wen Wei Ci” until now.
|
Received: 17 February 2022
|
|
|
|
1 李静: 《略论“以文为词”》,《北京大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》2005年第2期,第71-76页。 2 赵崇祚编: 《花间集校注》,杨景龙校注,北京:中华书局,2017年。 3 夏承焘: 《唐宋词欣赏》,北京:北京出版社,2002年。 4 任海天: 《韦庄研究》,北京:人民文学出版社,2005年。 5 李璟、李煜: 《南唐二主词笺注》,王仲闻校订,陈书良、刘娟笺注,北京:中华书局,2014年。 6 欧阳修: 《欧阳修词校注》,胡可先、徐迈校注,上海:上海古籍出版社,2015年。 7 秦观: 《秦观词集》,徐培均导读,上海:上海古籍出版社,2010年。 8 晏殊、晏幾道: 《晏殊词集·晏幾道词集》,张草纫导读,上海:上海古籍出版社,2010年。 9 张先: 《张先集编年校注》,吴熊和、沈松勤校注,杭州:浙江古籍出版社,1996年。 10 李贺: 《李贺诗歌集注》,王琦等注,上海:上海人民出版社,1977年。 11 周邦彦: 《周邦彦词集》,李保民导读,上海:上海古籍出版社,2010年。 12 俞平伯: 《读词偶得·清真词释》,北京:人民文学出版社,2000年。 13 柳永: 《乐章集校笺》,陶然、姚逸超校笺,上海:上海古籍出版社,2016年。 14 陈模: 《怀古录校注》,郑必俊校注,北京:中华书局,1993年。 15 李白: 《李白集校注》,瞿蜕园、朱金城校注,上海:上海古籍出版社,2016年。 16 辛弃疾: 《稼轩词编年笺注》,邓广铭笺注,上海:上海古籍出版社,1993年。 17 陈廷敬、王奕清等纂: 《钦定词谱考正》,蔡国强考正,上海:华东师范大学出版社,2017年。 18 陆侃如、冯沅君: 《中国诗史》,天津:百花文艺出版社,1999年。 19 章学诚: 《文史通义》,上海:上海古籍出版社,2015年。 20 张璟: 《苏词接受史研究》,北京:光明日报出版社,2009年。 21 元好问: 《遗山乐府序》,见邓子勉编: 《宋金元词话全编》下,南京:凤凰出版社,2008年,第1815页。 22 刘敏中: 《刘敏中集》,邓瑞全、谢辉校点,长春:吉林文史出版社,2008年。 23 永瑢等: 《四库全书总目》,北京:中华书局,1965年。 24 沈雄:《古今词话》,见唐圭璋编: 《词话丛编》第1册,北京:中华书局,1986年。 25 吴衡照: 《莲子居词话》,见唐圭璋编: 《词话丛编》第3册,北京:中华书局,1986年。 26 陈廷焯撰、孙克强主编: 《白雨斋词话全编》,北京:中华书局,2013年。 27 陈亮: 《龙川词校笺》,夏承焘校笺,上海:上海古籍出版社,1982年。 28 蒋捷: 《蒋捷词校注》,杨景龙校注,北京:中华书局,2010年。 29 程继红: 《辛词八百年接受史实与分析》,《上饶师专学报》1997年第5期,第65-71页。 30 刘尊明: 《历代词人次韵辛弃疾词的定量分析》,《黄冈师范学院学报》2010年第2期,第41-51,56页。 31 朱丽霞: 《刘须溪对辛稼轩的接受》,《同济大学学报(社会科学版)》2003年第6期,第117-122页。 32 高启: 《高青丘集》,金檀辑注,徐澄宇、沈北宗校点,上海:上海古籍出版社,2013年。 33 刘基: 《刘伯温集》,林家骊点校,杭州:浙江古籍出版社,2016年。 34 陈霆: 《水南词》,见赵尊岳辑: 《明词汇刊》,上海:上海古籍出版社,2012年。 35 朱丽霞: 《清代辛稼轩接受史》,济南:齐鲁书社,2005年。 36 聂先、曾王孙编: 《百名家词钞》,见《续修四库全书》第1721册,上海:上海古籍出版社,2002年。 37 王夫之: 《王船山诗文集》,北京:中华书局,1962年。 38 曹贞吉: 《珂雪词笺注》,段晓华笺注,上海:华东师范大学出版社,2018年。 39 丁澎: 《梨庄词序》,见孙克强编著: 《唐宋人词话》,天津:南开大学出版社,2012年,第781页。 40 南京大学中国语言文学系《全清词》编纂研究室编: 《全清词·顺康卷》第4册,北京:中华书局,2002年。 41 宋琬: 《安雅堂全集》,马祖熙标校,上海:上海古籍出版社,2007年。 42 周绚隆: 《论迦陵词以文为词的倾向——兼评陈维崧革新词体的得失》,《文史哲》2002年第1期,第92-99页。 43 陈维崧: 《陈维崧集》,陈振鹏标点、李学颖校补,上海:上海古籍出版社,2010年。 44 张宏生: 《清初“词史”观念的确立与建构》,《南京大学学报(哲学人文社会科学版)》2008年第1期,第101-107页。 45 冯金伯辑: 《词苑萃编》,见唐圭璋编: 《词话丛编》第2册,北京:中华书局,1986年。 46 郭麐: 《灵芬馆词话》,见唐圭璋编: 《词话丛编》第2册,北京:中华书局,1986年。 47 许昂霄: 《词综偶评》,见唐圭璋编: 《词话丛编》第2册,北京:中华书局,1986年。 48 李宏图: 《概念史与历史的选择》,《史学理论研究》2012年第1期,第4-7页。 |
|
|
|