论文部分内容阅读
本刊于1993年第2期发表了谢质彬《“然而”表顺接质疑》一文,于同年4月12日又收到谢质彬《<“然而”表顺接质疑>补正》一文。同年4月26日、5月6日、1O月14日还先后收到李先耕《“然而”顺接述例》、史佩信《“然而”表顺接例证》、朱城《“然而”表顺接考察》三文。谢的《补正》和三篇讨论文章都认为,在古汉语中,“然而”表转折是通例,但也有表顺接的用法,并举例加以说明。现将上述四篇文章在《关于古汉语中“然而”表顺接问题的讨论》的同一标题下按收文时间的先后一并摘要刊出,供读者参考。“摘要”的原则为:凡引例相同者,保留先收到的,删略后收到的;在文字上,则保留主要的,删略枝节的或无关宏旨的。这个问题已大致讨论清楚,本刊不拟再讨论下去了。
The publication published in the second issue of 1993, Xie quality “” However, “table connected with the question,” a text, on April 12 the same year and received Xie Jinbin “<” However, On April 26, May 6, and October 14, the same year, Li Xiangeng also received Li Xiangeng’s account. However, according to Shi Peixin’s account, However, “table followed by inspection” three texts. The “correction” of Xie and the three articles in the discussion all hold the view that in ancient Chinese, the turning point of the “ n” Now the above four articles in the “on the ancient Chinese”, however, “” the problem of discussion of the table, “the same title according to the timing of the closing time of the summary published for readers reference. ”Digest " principle is: Where the same reference, retain the first received, after the deletion of the received; in the text, then retain the main, abbreviated or irrelevant. This issue has been generally discussed clearly, we do not intend to discuss it any further.