|
|
|
| Historical Phonetic Strata of “Duruo” in Shuowen Jiezi in the Light of Excavated Texts |
| Ye Yuying |
| Department of Chinese Language and Literature, Xiamen University, Xiamen 361005, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Since Shuowen Jiezi (SJ) was compiled for the purpose of interpreting Confucian classics, the phonetic annotations of “duruo” (pronounced as...) in this dictionary did not always indicate the actual pronunciations in the Later Han Period. Rather, they sometimes preserved the tradition handed down by the scholars from previous generations. Therefore, the pronunciation recorded by duruo in SJ manifest historical strata. This paper argues that there are both homogeneous and heterogeneous phonetic strata revealed by “duruo” annotations in SJ. The former refers to the diversity caused by sound changes in history of the same language (including its dialects). Some “duruo” in SJ recorded the old pronunciation of the Pre-Qin time, some recorded that of the Western Han, and some recorded that of Xu Shen’s era. Although some of these pronunciations recorded were from Chu or Qin dialects, since these dialects had evolved from the common language of the Western Zhou or the Spring and Autumn Period, they can be regarded as in the same stratum. “Duruo” in SJ reflect pronunciations of the standard language and local dialects of Xu Shen’s time and also include some old pronunciations which were even represented later in Guangyun or Jiyun in the form of fanqie. On the other hand, heterogeneous phonetic strata refer to two or more independent pronunciations annotated as “duruo” of one character in SJ, which form different phonetic correspondences with that character, and these correspondences are so isolated that it cannot be explained as phonetic divergences. The primary reason for such situation is dialect contact. Since the data of ancient dialects reflected in excavated texts are not enough at present, we only discuss in this paper the first category, the historical homogeneous phonetic strata of duruo in SJ. The characters of “duruo” and the characters annotated in SJ are both in the process of dynamic evolution of phonetics. Excavated texts shed light on the evolution process and the time and space of the phonetic changes, and the phonetic strata of “duruo” in SJ can thereby be analyzed in the light of such documents. There were four circumstances in which “duruo” were used. First, the “duruo” characters recorded the later pronunciation of the annotated characters after phonetic evolutions. Relevant examples from excavated texts show such phonetic changes occurred from the middle or late Warring States Period to the early Han Dynasty. Second, from the perspective of annotated characters, there had been phonetic changes of the “duruo” character. Excavated written materials show such changes occurred from the late Spring and Autumn Period, through the Warring States, to the early Han Dynasty. Third, some phonetic changes occurred in the standard Chinese language of that era, while others occurred in the Chu or Qin dialects. Last, characters with the same phonetic component sometimes appear as annotated characters, and were sometimes used as “duruo” character in SJ, which often show different phonetic strata. They all indicate phonetic strata of homogeneous variants formed in the process of phonetic evolution. By the analysis of different layers in phonetic evolution, this study helps us deepen the understanding of the nature of “duruo” in SJ.
|
|
Received: 29 October 2021
|
|
|
|
1 钱大昕： 《十驾斋养新录》，上海：上海书店，1983年。
2 蒋冀骋、席德育： 《〈说文〉“省声”“读若”所反映的语音演变》，《古汉语研究》2021年第1期，第31-34页。
3 杨宏： 《〈说文〉“读若”性质研究综述》，《华北水利水电学院学报（社会科学版）》2004年第1期，第33-35，45页。
4 裘锡圭： 《说嵒、嚴》，见《古文字论集》，北京：中华书局，1992年，第99-104页。
5 徐在国、程燕、张振谦： 《战国文字字形表》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2017年。
6 饶宗颐： 《马王堆〈刑德〉乙本九宫图诸神释——兼论出土文献中的颛顼与摄提》，《江汉考古》1993年第1期，第84-87页。
7 李方桂： 《上古音研究》，北京：商务印书馆，1980年。
8 石志廉： 《馆藏战国七玺考》，《中国历史博物馆馆刊》1979年第1期，第86-90页。
9 刘钊： 《古文字构形学》，福州：福建人民出版社，2011年。
10 王静如： 《中台藏缅数目字及人称代名词语源试探》，见中华书局编辑部编： 《历史语言研究所集刊》第三册，北京：中华书局，1987年，第49-92页。
11 裘锡圭： 《释“衍”“侃”》，见《裘锡圭学术文集1：甲骨文卷》，上海：复旦大学出版社，2012年，第378-386页。
12 裘锡圭、李家浩： 《曾侯乙墓钟、磬铭文释文与考释》，见湖北博物馆编： 《曾侯乙墓》，北京：文物出版社，1989年，第532-582页。
13 美］白一平、［法］沙加尔： 《上古汉语新构拟》，来国龙、郑伟、王弘治译，上海：上海教育出版社，2020年。
14 韦名应： 《从侗台语PL/KL对应看上古汉语来母字的PL/KL拟音》，见戴昭铭编： 《汉藏语研究四十年：第40届国际汉藏语言暨语言学会议论文集》，哈尔滨：黑龙江大学出版社，2010年，第88-91页。
15 董珊、陈剑： 《郾王职壶铭文研究》，见张弘泓编： 《北京大学中国古文献研究中心集刊》第三辑，北京：北京大学出版社，2002年，第37-38页。
16 陈斯鹏、石小力、苏清芳： 《新见金文字编》，福州：福建人民出版社，2012年。
17 黄天树： 《殷墟甲骨文“有声字”的构造》，见“中央研究院”历史语言研究所编： 《“中央研究院”历史语言研究所集刊》第七十六本第二分，2005年，第315-350页。
18 赵超： 《“铸师”考》，见吉林大学古文字研究室编： 《古文字研究》第21辑，北京：中华书局，2001年，第293-300页。
19 谢明文： 《商周文字论集》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2017年。
20 孟蓬生： 《〈说文〉“”读若“耿”疏证》，见朴慧莉、程少轩编： 《古文字与汉语历史比较音韵学》，上海：复旦大学出版社，2017年，第205-223页。 |
|
|
|
2023, Vol. 53 
