「」、「」考辨──釋「」及其相關諸字

Philological Interpretation of“”and Related Characters

楚系簡帛「」字的釋讀，迄今已有十幾種不同意見。本文逐一檢視各家說法之後，確認此字應隸定作「」，在《緇衣》和《語叢四》簡文中可讀作「轍」，在《凡物流形》簡文中可讀作「徹」。在研究過程中，對於上博竹書《周易》簡32「」字、馬王堆帛書《陰陽五行（甲篇）》149行「」字、郭店楚簡《老子（甲）》簡27「」字、《汗簡》「撤」字條「」字、《古文四聲韻》「轍」字條「」和「」字，四版《金文編》附錄下204號「、、」等字，以及附錄下205號「」字，筆者也分別提出個人見解。此外，還對殷商甲骨文「、、、、、」等字是否為「曷」字，以及西周金文「」字、春秋金文「」字是否為從「曷」旁的字提出質疑。

There has been considerable disagreement among scholars on the interpretation of the character“”found in bamboo silk scripts of the Chu 楚 region. Against this background, this paper explores this character from different perspectives, finally coming to the conclusion that it should be interpreted as “” and that it should be read as zhé in Ziyi 緇衣 and Yucong（IV） 語叢四. This study makes some detailed supplementary statements about the process of figuration and transformation of the character hé 曷, and also proposes new interpretations of the following characters:“” in the Shanghai Chu slips,“”in the Mawangdui boshu 帛書,“” in the Guodian Chu slips,“”in the Hanjian 汗簡, and“,”in the Guwen sishengyun 古文四聲韻. Besides this, some characters in oracle-bone inscriptions traditionally suspected to be forms of hé 曷, such as“,,,,,,” or characters found in bronze inscriptions in which hé 曷 is an element, such as“,”, are also thoroughly investigated.