| | 中文题名 | | 《管子》文献学研究 | | | | 副题名 | | | | | | 外文题名 | | | | | | 论文作者 | | 郭丽著 | | | | 导师 | | 崔富章指导 | | | | 学科专业 | | 中国古典文献学 | | | | 研究领域\研究方向 | | | | | | 学位级别 | | 博士 | | | | 学位授予单位 | | 浙江大学 | | | | 学位授予日期 | | 2006 | | 论文页码总数 | | 137页 | | | | 关键词 | | 《管子》 古文献学 版本 | | | | 馆藏号 | | BSLW 2008 B226.1 1 | | | | 【中文摘要】 | | | 論文主要以南宋紹興年間具楊忱《序》的浙刻本為坐標，比對各種版本的《管子》。銀雀山漢簡與《管子》相關篇章的互證，證明《管子》產生早於銀雀山《王兵》篇。敦煌抄本《管子》的殘片，證明唐代《管子》流傳甚廣。唐宋時期的類書與浙刻本《管子》的比對，能夠訂正浙刻本用字的訛誤，但類書非為... >> 详细 |
論文主要以南宋紹興年間具楊忱《序》的浙刻本為坐標，比對各種版本的《管子》。銀雀山漢簡與《管子》相關篇章的互證，證明《管子》產生早於銀雀山《王兵》篇。敦煌抄本《管子》的殘片，證明唐代《管子》流傳甚廣。唐宋時期的類書與浙刻本《管子》的比對，能夠訂正浙刻本用字的訛誤，但類書非為全文抄錄，乃是有所删減，這是需要注意的。
宋版主要有一種，即浙江刻本。明代的《管子》刻本，本文主要考查五種，即劉績《管子補注》本；朱東光《中都四子》本；趙用賢《管韓合刻》本；朱長春《管子榷》本；淩汝亨本《管子》。劉績本與南宋浙刻本有比較大的不同，有的篇章語句較浙刻本為少；有的較浙刻本為多。劉本還多出二十幾條注解，證明《管子注》的流傳非為人們想象的那樣，祇有一種形態。《中都四子》本係翻刻劉績本，形態與劉續本又有不同，《四庫提要》評曰“是書帕本最下者也”，其實未必盡然。《管子榷》本刊印過程中訛誤較多。淩汝亨本《管子》無注，與上述幾種《管子》版本不同。
清代主要考查《管子》的四種版本：《四庫全書》抄劉績《管子補注》本和趙用賢《管韓合刻》本；清刻趙用賢本；《二十二子》本。民國年間主要考查《百子全書》本。《四庫全書》本《管子補注》與明刻劉績本有很大的不同，以四庫本為佳，四庫本當是借鑒浙刻本和趙用賢本系統。《四庫全書》抄趙用賢本，對明刻趙本有校正，但抄寫亦有疏漏之弊。《二十二子》本和《百子全書》本是比較通行的版本，對浙刻本和明刻趙本的疏漏有所訂正，但也存在訛誤。從明刻趙本開始，有將《管子》的古文字改為流行文字的趨勢，直至《二十二子》本和《百子全書》本，這種趨勢一直存在。本論文梳理《管子》各種版本形態，試圖對《管子》版本的流變作比較明晰的論證。
關鍵詞：《管子》；銀雀山漢簡；唐宋類書；刻本；抄本
| | 隐藏 |
| | | | | | 【外文摘要】 | | | This thesis briefly summarized guanzi's produce and it's spread at the paper's beginning. The writer think that Simaqian and Bangu who liv... >> 详细 |
This thesis briefly summarized guanzi's produce and it's spread at the paper's beginning. The writer think that Simaqian and Bangu who lived in Han dynasty believed that guanzi was written by Guanzhong who was a great statesman in Chunqiu Dynasty. But from Han dynasty, almost in every Dynasty had scholars put up argument that the book was not written by Guanzhong himself. The most scientific deduce guanzi's written time was in last century after 50ths, one reason is that many bamboo books and books copied on silk had been emerged.
This paper contrast many edition of guanzi. From bamboo books in Yinque, we could deduce that Wangbing, which was belonged to bamboo books generated latter than that of guanzi. The written books in Dunhuang could be deduced that the book was spread broadly in Tang and Song Dynasty. Though the written book was not the best edition, it could help us inferred the beginning model of the book. The category books which was written in Tang and Song Dynasty could revised the wrongly words in guanzi. We must pay attention that the category books usually written down guanzi not according their beginning test, but abbreviate them.
In Song Dynasty, guanzi mainly had two editions. One of which was South Song Dynasty Zhejiang edition; another of which was South Song Dynasty Mobaotang edition, which had lost in Minguo dynasty. This paper deduced the keep and spread of the two editions, believing that Yinzhizhang's annotated guanzi was false by Fangxuanling who was a big man in Tang Dynasty which merchants did this. The mainly reason of passed down annotated guanzi was that the examination must us the book.
This paper mainly argument five kinds of Ming dynasty guanzi edition, which are Liuji edition,Zhongdusizi edition, Zhaoyongxian edition, Zhuchangchun edition and Lingruheng edition. Liuji edition had much difference with Zhejiang edition, the mainly reason was that on the one side, the former had missed many sentences which the latter had been in the book; one the other side, the former had many sentences which the latter had been missed in the book. And Liuji edition had more than twenty annotates than the Song dynasty edition, which could deduce that annotates was not only one kind of matter. Zhongdusizi edition was come from Liuji edition, but it had much difference between the two books, mainly reason was that the former had more wrong words than the latter.Zhuchangchun guanzique edition had much wrong words, and we must pay more attention to this.The model of Lingruheng edition had much difference than that of the Song dynasty edition, and its words could modify the Song dynasty edition too.
This paper mainly argument five kinds of Qing dynasty guanzi edition too. They are Liuji written edition, Zhaoyongxian written edition, Zhaoyongxian in Qing dynasty edition, twenty-two zilist edition, and one hundred zilist edition. Liuji written edition was much better than that of Liuji edition, the mainly reason of which was that the written edition modify the wrong words in Liuji edition. Zhaoyongxian written edition modified Zhaoyongxian edition, but had some wrong words too.Twenty-two zilist edition and one hundred zilist edition was popular editions, which had modified some wrong words of Song and Ming dynasty editions. In Ming dynasty, Zhaoyongxian edition sometime use new words in placed of the old words. From that time, the tendency had been exist all the time. The writer arranges many sort of guanzi edition, try to make conclusion of the generation of guanzi edition.
Key words: guanzi; bamboo books; category books; Song Ming Qing dynasty editions; writer edition
|
| 目录 | | 緒論 《管子》研究綜述 | | 第一節 《管子》的產生和流傳 | | 第二節 歷代的《管子》研究(上) | | 第三節 歷代的《管子》研究(下) | | 第四節 上世紀五十年代以來《管子》文獻學熱點研究 | | 第一章 銀雀山和敦煌史料與《管子》互證 | | 第一節 銀雀山《王兵》與《管子》的互證 | | 第二節 敦煌抄本引《管子》考略 | | 第二章 唐宋類書與《管子》研究 | | 第一節 《北堂書鈔》的研究 | | 第二節 《藝文類聚》考略 | | 第三節 《群書治要》引文考略 | | 第四節 《初學記》引《管子》考略 | | 第五節 杜佑研治《管子》考略 | | 第六節 《管子》傳本在宋初的形态推測 | | 第七節 《太平御覽》與《管子》比較研究 | | 第三章 宋以來《管子》傳本研究 | | 第一節 宋本《管子》的保存和流傳 | | 第二節 楊忱和張嵲考略 | | 第三節 房玄齡還是尹知章注釋了《管子》 | | 第四節 浙刻本版本考論 | | 第四章 明刻《管子》考論 | | 第一節 明刻劉績《管子補注》本考述 | | 第二節 《中都四子》本《管子》考論 | | 第三節 趙用賢本考論 | | 第四節 《管子榷》考論 | | 第五節 湲汝亨本《管子》考論 | | 第五章 清代和民國間《管子》考論 | | 第一節 《四庫全書》中所收劉績《管子補注》考論 | | 第二節 《四庫全書》中所收趙用賢本考論 | | 第三節 清刻趙本和明刻趙本比較 | | 第四節 《二十二子》本《管子》考論 | | 第五節 《百子全書》本《管子》考論 | | 第六章 《管子》善本平議 | | 結語：本文得出之初步结論 | | 主要徵引文獻 | | 主要參考文獻 |
|
|
