论文部分内容阅读
2014年,儒藏编纂中心出版了一部《群经平议》排印本。该书的总体质量相当高,可是由于在版本的选择和运用方面有不妥之处,因而导致了一些本来可以避免的问题。首先,儒藏点校者所选取的底本乃《续修四库全书》本,不如《春在堂全书》本面世早,也不如它清楚、可靠。其次,《春在堂全书》本专门提供了一个刊误表,可是儒藏点校者没有使用这个本子,因此未能吸收这些重要的刊误信息。另外,除了这两个版本,《群经平议》还存有一个难得可贵的原作者亲笔手稿本,而儒藏整理者也没有参考校对,导致儒藏本《群经平议》继承了传世木刻本固有的若干错误。本文将要讨论现存《群经平议》的不同版本,分析它们各自的优劣得失,再介绍儒藏的版本选择,最后揭示由此而引起的一些校勘与文本的问题。
In 2014, the Center for Compilation of Confucianism published a printed version of the “Classics of Peace”. The overall quality of the book is quite high, but because of the pitfalls in the selection and use of versions, some of the problems that could have been avoided were caused. First of all, Confucianism point school chosen by the school base is “renewal of Sikuquanshu” this, as “Spring in the Church of the book,” this book is early, nor as clear and reliable. Second, the book “Spring in the Church,” this book provides a misstatement, but Confucianism point school did not use this book, so failed to absorb these important journals. In addition, apart from these two editions, there is also a precious original author autograph manuscript, while Confucianism and Tibet organizers also did not refer to proofreading, resulting in Confucian classics “Ping Jing Ping” inherited the handed down woodcut Some inherent mistakes. This article will discuss the different versions of the existing “group discussion”, analyze their own pros and cons, then introduce the version choice of Confucianism, and finally reveal the problems caused by some collation and text.