论文部分内容阅读
一九八三年二月上旬,新华社据青海人民出版社一九八二年十一月出版的《黄河源头考察文集》播发了一条消息,提出黄河正源是卡日曲而不是约古宗列渠。二月五日、八日,《光明日报》、《河南日报》等报纸相继登载了这条消息。在此以前,一九七九年《人民画报》五月号撰文即把卡日曲作为黄河的正源,否定一直沿用下来的约古宗列渠为正源的提法,这样的意见作为结论性的提法也被写进了一些中小学教科书和《辞海》中,从而引起了史地学界的关注和争论。黄河是中外人士普遍关注的一条大河,在目前对河源的意见很不一致的情况下,更改黄河源头宜持慎重态度。为此,本刊在这里选登了四篇文章,以便使读者了解各种意见的梗概,希望遵循百家争鸣的方针,开展广泛、充分的讨论,以利取得认识上的一致和妥善的解决。
In early February 1983, Xinhua News Agency circulated a message according to the “Proceedings of the Yellow River Source Survey” published by the Qinghai People’s Publishing House in November 1982 that the Yellow River Zhengyuan is a card kuri instead of an ancient one Drainage channel. February 5 and 8, “Guangming Daily”, “Henan Daily” and other newspapers have published the news. Prior to this, in the People’s Pictorial in May 1979, the author of the May issue considered Kajiatu as the source of the Yellow River, and rejected the argument that the ancient Guzong Canal, which has been used, is the source of Zhengyuan. Sexual references have also been written into some primary and secondary school textbooks and Cihai, which has drawn the attention and controversy of the historians. The Yellow River is a big river of common concern both at home and abroad. In the current situation where the opinions of Heyuan are not consistent, it is advisable to change the source of the Yellow River to a cautious attitude. To this end, we have published four articles here, in order to enable readers to understand the outline of various opinions and hope to follow a hundred-pronged approach and conduct extensive and adequate discussions so as to facilitate a concerted and properly resolved solution.