|
Abstract Chunki’u Tso Chuan Kaoyi is an important book of annotations written by Kamei Nammyeong in the Edo period of Japan. In this book, Kamei focused on annotating the ambiguous text of Tso Chuan. Kamei was good at empirical research, and paid close attention to the interpretation of content, argumentation and semantic associations. For what couldn’t be interpreted accurately, Kamei offered various annotations by different scholars for reference, or left the questions open. Such remarks as "Du’s interpretation seems invalid", " It seems better than Du’s interpretation", "Whether Du’s interpretation is better or not is uncertain", "Du’s interpretation is probably wrong", "Perhaps that’s not the case", and "Du’s interpretation seems better" show his doubts on some notes, but he himself did not give conclusive remarks. This attitude is cautious and scientific, and ensures the objectivity and fairness of the annotation. Kamei Nammyeong criticized various mistakes in Du Yu’s interpretations-mistakes resulting from Du’s inadequate study of Tso Chuan’s context and lack of a thorough analysis of the words and sentences, neglects resulting from the arbitrary use of materials and from the misunderstanding of pronunciation, connotation and rules of diction. He criticized Yu for his subjective and groundless interpretations and far-fetched personal views. Kamei’s revisions and supplements to Du’s interpretations are multi-angled and multi-dimensional. His exploitation and innovative use of the available materials and his original interpretations and elaborations on relevant documents show Kamei’s solid skills in textual research and unique academic insight. Influenced by Ogyu Sorai’s research method, Kamei Nammyeong inherited and developed the Puxue tradition of the Han Dynasty. He not only cited original examples from Chunki’u, but also the linguistic examples before the Western Han Dynasty to correct Du Yu’s interpretations. Meanwhile, he stressed the availability and reliability of the materials. Expressions such as “No clear citation”, “The source cited is unknown”, “Not sure whether the citation exists”, “No citation”, etc. are frequently used to question Du Yu. In order to recover the original features of Tso Chuan study, Kamei illustrated his research and analysis with concrete examples. Consequently, Kamei laid the foundation of Tso Chuan study in Japan by combining textual research with content, argumentation and semantic associations. It is remarkable that Kamei was intact from Ogyu Sorai’s thoughts such as “the recognition of the words of ancient Chinese should come first,” “the Six Classics can be talked about”. Kamei regarded the materials of and after the Western Han Dynasty as something important as those before Han. He adopted what was adoptable, and refuted what was refutable, which was obviously a big step forward from Ogyu’s academic views. Kamei’s way of annotating had a profound impact on the academic atmosphere in the early Edo period, which has been dominated by Neo-Confucianism in the Song and Ming dynasties when Yili was emphasized but textual research was underestimated. Furthermore, Kamei’s way of annotating broke through the academic limitations of Japanese sinology, to the periods after Song dynasty. The prominent achievement of Kamei’s textual research made the Tso Chuan studies in the Edo period more scientific. His research method and the academic value of his work also have great influence upon Tso chuan zuan kao written by Kamei Akiyo and Tso shih hui ki’an written by Tzu ti’en ku’ang hung. The systematic analysis of Chunki’u Tso Chuan Kaoyi in its ways of annotation and use of materials, bring out its unique academic value. and its important position and significance in the Tso Chuan studies in Japan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
