完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | 黃忠慎 | |
| dc.contributor.other | Chung-Sheng Huang | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2020-08-25T07:02:59Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2020-08-25T07:02:59Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2012/10/30 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1682-587N | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://dspace.fcu.edu.tw/handle/2376/2506 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 宋代《詩經》學者對於《詩序》的價值爭辯得非常激烈，由此而衍生出新舊兩派，其中，范處義屬舊派中的極端者，他完全相信太史公所提的孔子刪《詩》之說，認為聖人刪《詩》寓有深刻的褒貶之義，他也絕對尊重《詩序》，以為〈大序〉經過聖人之手，其重要性猶如《周易》之〈文言〉，甚至全部《詩序》都有聖人之參與，所以要理解三百篇，除了研讀《詩序》之外，別無他途。范處義寫《詩補傳》，用意在補毛公於文義上所不足的「傳」，由於他幾乎是籠罩在所謂聖人意志的條件之下進行解經的工作，所以學者往往直接為他的著作貼上保守落伍的標籤而忽略其在《詩經》學史上的存在意義。事實上，就歷史發展的過程來看，范處義《詩補傳》尊經信《序》的動機的確是為了對抗宋朝日趨激烈的疑經廢《序》的學術潮流，但是其用心是在護衛學術的傳統，一種自漢代以來即樹立的《詩經》研究傳統。更重要的是，就互文性的角度觀察，范處義未必跟多數新派說《詩》者站在對立面上，根據本文的研究，所有視三百篇為經典的研究者，他們在研究《詩經》的立場上都屬同一方，差別在於對傳統《詩經》學的界定與接受程度而已。 | |
| dc.description.sponsorship | 逢甲大學 | |
| dc.format.extent | 28 | |
| dc.language.iso | 中文 | |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | 逢甲人文社會學報 | |
| dc.relation.isversionof | 第十六期 | |
| dc.subject | 范處義 | |
| dc.subject | 詩補傳 | |
| dc.subject | 聖人 | |
| dc.subject | 詩序 | |
| dc.subject | 毛傳 | |
| dc.subject.other | Fan Chu-Yi | |
| dc.subject.other | A Complement to Poems | |
| dc.subject.other | Confucius | |
| dc.subject.other | Prologues to Poems | |
| dc.subject.other | Mao’s Annotation and interpretation of Poems | |
| dc.title | 范處義《詩補傳》的解經特質及其在《詩經》 學史上的存在意義 | |
| dc.title.alternative | The Characteristic of Fan Chu-Yi’s Interpretation of Poems in his A Complement to Poems and his Significance in the Study of Poems | |
| dc.type | 期刊篇目 | |
| dc.description.translationabstract | The scholars in the Song Dynasty who researched Poems argued intensely over the value of Prologues to Poems. These scholars were then divided into two scholars–New and Old. Fan Chu-Yi, an extremist of the Old School, completely believes Sih Ma-Cian’s saying of Confucius’ deletion of many poems in Poems. He thinks that Confucius’ deletion must embody profound significance of praise and criticism, and he absolutely respects Prologues. He also thinks that Confucius wrote “Great Prologue,” whose importance would be like that of “Wun Yan” to The Book of Changes, and that Confucius even involved in the creation of the whole work of Prologues. Therefore, he thinks that there is no other way to understand Poems without reading Prologues. In A Complement to Poems, Fan intends to supply more information to complete the work of Mao Kung, who annotated and interpreted Poemsunder the influence of Confucius and, thus, was often labeled as being out of date. _x000D_ This effort has also made his significance in the study of Poems neglected. In fact, according to the development of history, the motivation of Fan’s admiration of Poems and Prologues shown in his work was resist the intense academic trend of doubting Poems and abolishing Prologues in the hope of protecting the academic convention, a _x000D_ traditional research on Poems since the Han dynasty. However, in terms of intertextuality, Fan might not be an opponent of the scholars of the New School. _x000D_ According to this research, all the researcher of Poems, who regard Poems as a work of classical literature, stand on the same side, and the only difference lies in their different definition and degrees of acceptability of Poems. | |
| 分類: | 第16期 | |
在 DSpace 系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。