论文部分内容阅读
我在1983年1月27日《北京晚报》上写过一篇小文《范蠡的老师计然》,今天看来也还很有意思。这里涉及关于《史记·货殖列传》:“范蠡计然”如何断句的问题。中华书局《史记》标点本是这样断句的:“昔者越王句践困于会稽之上,乃用范蠡、计然。”而钱穆《先秦诸子系年》则是另一种断句:“昔者越王句践困于会稽之上,乃用范蠡《计然》。”两种不同的断句方法,对于文义就有完全不同的解释。前者认为计然是人名,是范蠡的老师。而后者则以为计然是书名,是范蠡的著作。其实这是个历史上早就有争论的问题。我想就此问题再谈谈个人的看法,以求教于专家、学者和同志们。
I wrote a short essay “Teacher Fan Fan” on “Beijing Evening News” on January 27, 1983 and it seems very interesting today. Here are some questions about how to break the sentence in “Shi Ji · Zhuo Ran Chuan”: “Fan Qiu Qiu Ran”. Zhonghua Book Company “Historical Records” punctuation is so sentenced: “The past who Yuejian Wang sentenced to trapped in the above Huiji, Fan Ran, counting Ran.” And Qian Mu “Pre-Qin Zhu Yi Year” is another kind of Sentence: “Xi The more the king sentence practice trapped in Huiji above, is to use Fan Qi ”Total Ran.“ ”Two different methods of sentence segmentation, there is a completely different interpretation of the text. The former think that the total number of people is Fan Li’s teacher. The latter is considered as a matter of course is the title of the book, is Fan Zhi’s writings. In fact, this is a long history of controversial issues. I would like to talk about personal opinions on this issue in order to seek advice from experts, scholars and comrades.