英文摘要 |
When the ancients evaluated the editorial principle of The Five Classic Explanatory Note, they believed in the existence of the rule of “Note and Commentary not Annotation”. People nowadays had started to review such issue, but still there are various perspectives existing. This study discussed this issue by investigating the official explanation in the Tang dynasty and the editing process of The Five Classic Explanatory Note respectively. Besides, we analyzed the instances that oppose the commentary in The Five Classic Explanatory Note and cross-discussed the formation process of the saying of “Note and Commentary not Annotation”. The following conclusion had been derived: When the people in the Tang dynasty edited The Five Classic Explanatory Note, there was no evidence showing that the rule of “Note and Commentary not Annotation” was carried out strictly. Currently, there are many instances in The Five Classic Explanatory Note without opposing the commentary, which is only to show a respectful mindset to the commentary by the people of the Tang dynasty, as well as the criticism of the old casual comment to the commentary in the time of the six dynasties. However, if the explanations of the commentary were indeed unreasonable, both would be recorded in The Five Classic Explanatory Note and were criticized in a euphemistic manner, or covered by a new explanation. As for the regulation of “Note and Commentary not Annotation”, it is only a phenomenon discovered from summarizing The Five Classic Explanatory Note and there is no sign of evidence that it is a rule defined by the people of the Tang dynasty. |