论文部分内容阅读
我们阅读古书时,常会碰到这样的情况,句子里某一个字,依照它本身的意义来讲,不管是本义或者引申义都解释不通,但是读读声音,如果拿另一个跟它声音相同或相近的字的字意去讲,却可以讲得通。例如“蚤”,从字形看,属虫类,本意是跳蚤。可是根据这样的意义无法理解“不可不蚤自来谢项王” (《史记·项羽本纪》)这句话,如果换个同音字“早”来解释,意思便通了。再如“距关,毋内诸候” (《史记·项羽本纪》)这句话,其中的“距”是距离的“距”,“内”是内外的“内”,若依照这两个字的常用义也是解释不通的。如果把“距”
When we read ancient books, we often encounter such a situation. A word in a sentence, in its own right, can not be explained either in the original meaning or the extended meaning. However, if we read another voice that is the same as the voice or The words of similar words to speak, but it can be justified. For example, “fleas”, from the glyph, insects, intended to fleas. However, according to this meaning, it is impossible to understand the meaning of “indescribably” (“Shi Ji Xiang Yu Ji Ji”). Another example is “from off, not within the Zhu Xi” (“Shi Ji Xiang Yu Benji”) this sentence, where “distance” is the distance “distance”, “inside” is inside and outside “inside”, according to these two The common meaning of the word is also illegible. If the “distance”