期刊文献+

《说文》“■”与其诸“借字”及“釁”字关系之分析

The relations between the character “■ ”and its loan graphs and the character 釁
下载PDF
导出
摘要 甲骨文■,于省吾先生释为■,并把典籍中相关的"幾、刏、祈"视为■之"借字"。通过对■与这几个"借字"之间关系的分析,指出■为本字,幾为其简体形式,讹误作畿。刏和■基本意义用法相同,刏近乎的异体,而祈则是的假借字。釁与■/■都表示血祭形式,具体用法有別,但意义有交叉。 Mr. Yu Xingwu explained the oracle bone character ■as,■and regarded the characters 幾,刏,and 祈 in classical texts as loan graphs of the character. This paper analyzes the relations between the character and its loan graphs,and reveals that is the original graph,幾 being its simplified form. Later it was falsely written as 畿. The basic meaning and usage of the characters 刏and are identical,and 刏 can be regarded as the allograph of,while 祈 is the loan graph of. 釁 and / express sacrificial offerings,their exact usages are different,but their meanings overlap.
作者 李文
出处 《云南民族大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》 CSSCI 北大核心 2016年第3期123-126,共4页 Journal of Yunnan Minzu University(Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)
关键词 假借字 loan graph
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

  • 1姚孝遂.《商代的俘虏》[A]..《古文字研究》第1集[C].中华书局,1979年..
  • 2[清]王筠.《说文句读》,载丁福保《说文解字诂林》第六册,北京:中华书局,1988年版,第5256页.
  • 3[清]段玉裁.《周礼汉读考》,载《经韵楼集[附]补编·两考》,南京:凤凰出版社,2010年版,第43页.
  • 4[清]孙诒让.《周礼正义》卷三十七,载《四部备要》经部,中华书局据清光绪乙巳本校刊,第3页.
  • 5[清]邵瑛.《说文解字群经正字》,载丁福保《说文解字诂林》第六册,北京:中华书局,1988年版,第5257页.
  • 6杨华.先秦血祭礼仪研究——中国古代用血制度研究之一[J].世界宗教研究,2003(3):22-33. 被引量:17

二级参考文献56

共引文献17

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部