试论楚简中的“■”及相关字形

On“■”and other Related Character on Chu Bamboo Slips

楚系文字中的构件■两个不同的来源,由此产生了具体语境中“■”“慮”两字如何区别的问题。本文通过对相关字形的考察,发现■皆为以“■”为终点的单向讹混,不得逆推,因此楚简从“■”的“■”和从“■”的“慮”并不存在相混的问题。在此基础之上,本文认为郭店简《老子》“绝伪弃■”、上博简《三德》“■事不成”中的“■”都不能看作“慮”的讹误字,前者当读为“诈”,后者当读为“作”;上博简《竞建内之》“发古■”之“■”字从“■”得声,也不能读为“慮”,可以试读为“籍”。

The radical“■”in the writing system of Chu state has two sources,“■”and“■”,which causes a question that how to distinguish“■”and“慮”in spe-cific contexts.By examining those related character patterns,this paper discovers that it is irreversible one-way changes from“■”to“■”and from“■”to“■”.So there is no possible confusion between“■”and“慮”.Based on this,The character“■”in Gou Dian Chu bamboo slips Lao Tzu“绝伪弃■”and Shanghai Museum bam boo slips San De“■事不成”should not be considered as a variant of“慮lv”.In the former it should be interpreted as诈zha,in the latter it should be interpreted as作zuo.The radical“■”of the character“■”in Shanghai Museum bamboo slips Jing Jian Nei Zhi“发古■”is a phonetic element.It can not be interpreted as“慮”,but probably should be interpreted as“籍”.