论文部分内容阅读
《档案工作》1986年第7期《“档案”一词不始于清》一文(以下简称《档文》),以元代杂剧高文秀《赵元遇上皇》中“便肖、曹律令不曾习,有档案分令吏支持”为据,认为“由此,我们可以说:‘档案’一词的出现,最晚亦始于元。”作者提出这个问题,提供了一些资料和看法,对于“档案”一词溯源的研究是有益的。假若所有材料可靠,始见“档案”的时间提前了三百多年,这不能不说是一种突破。如果材料不确,而经过讨论澄清问题,也是可喜的事,它反映了档案界学术研究的活跃。在笔者看来,《档文》立论含糊,难以令人置信。现提出几个问题,以供参考。一、引据古籍须考查版本见到“档案”一词出现于元杂剧,而不考查和说明它的版本,就作出“档案”一词出现
“Archives work” 1986 the seventh period “” archives “does not begin with a clear” article (hereinafter referred to as “file”) to the Yuan Dynasty drama Gao Wenxiu “Zhao met the king” in the “ As a result, we can say that the emergence of the word ”archives“ starts from Yuan at the latest. ”The author raised this question and provided some information and opinions on the The study of traceability of the term “file” is useful. If all the materials were reliable, the time to see the “Archives” advanced more than three hundred years ago can not but be regarded as a breakthrough. It is also gratifying if the material is not accurate and the discussion clarifies the issue, which reflects the active academic research in archives. In my opinion, “file” argument ambiguous, it is hard to believe. Several questions are raised for reference. First, the reference to the ancient books to be examined version to see the “file” appeared in the Yuan drama, without examining and explaining its version, it made a “file” appeared