《明史·刑法志》标点商兑一则

A Study and Discussion about Puncuation Marks in A Paragragh of Hsing-fa-chih of Ming Shih

中华书局点校本二十四史因具有权威性 ,受到广大文史工作者的喜爱。然而《明史·刑法志》在涉及明律关于诬告反坐的处理办法时 ,有一段文字竟有十多处标点存在着问题。其原因是整理者没有将所举的每一个例子看成是反映“已决”、“未决”两种情况 ,且这些规定根据的是“反坐剩罪”的处罚原则。

Here are something wrong with ten more punctuation marks in the part of solutions that Ming dynasty codes involue about fake accusation should be punished in Hsing-fa-chih of Ming Shih. The reason ,in my opinion,is the proofreaders fail to discern that the sentence is executed and unexecuted,the two situations are both involued in each example given,and those statutes concerned are based on the penal doctrin that one person accusing falsely should be sentenced by punishment difference between the original punishment and the punishment sentenced for the crime accused falsely.