段玉裁論訓詁「為傳注」與「造字書」之分別與義蘊──兼論黃侃相關訓詁理論之來源

Distinction and Judgment between ''Word-making Interpretation'' and ''Special Interpretation of the Article'' in Duan Yutsai's Theory of Exegesis-Also on the Relevant Sources of Huang Kan's Exegesis

現代訓詁學通論著作中述及「訓詁體式」之內容者，多有「隨文釋義」與「通釋語義」兩類，是傳統訓詁材料最重要內涵。此兩類訓詁體式，關係密切，而要義各有不同，此義早為段玉裁所揭。本文擬以此為核心，細論段玉裁對「為傳注」、「造字書」之觀點與實踐，並以此為基準，從學術史之立場論段玉裁此一論述在近現代訓詁學發展。爰分擬以下三題，以系統深入討論：一、段玉裁論「為傳注」、「造字書」之義蘊。二、段玉裁論「為傳注」、「造字書」與本義、引申義。三、由「為傳注」、「造字書」」之異，論黃侃學術之淵源。經由討論，本文以為「為傳注」、「造字書」當區分為兩類：一類為「為傳注」對經典文獻脈絡之特殊體認有關，不應視為客觀詞語解釋，此是「造字書」者所不能為；第二類則當自段玉裁之詞義觀而論，此涉及本義、引申與假借，「說字」與「說經」兩者對三類之採取，層面狹廣不同。最後，本文並由學術史之觀點，因枝振葉，沿波討源，以近代訓詁學之奠基人黃侃為例，檢視其訓詁學內涵中對於段玉裁學說之歧互與繼承。

In the general works of modern exegesis, the contents of the ''Ancient Notes Annotation'' refer to the two categories of ''interpretation of the article'' and ''general interpretation of semantics'', which are the most important connotations of traditional exegesis materials. The two types of Ancient Notes Annotation are closely related, but the main meanings are different. The difference between the two was first revealed by Duan Yutsai. This study intends to take this as the core and discuss Duan Yutsai's views and practices on ''special interpretation of the article'' and ''word-making interpretation''. Based on this, from the standpoint of academic history, this study explores the significance of Duan Yutsai's discussion in the development of modern exegesis. Therefore, the following three topics are proposed to be systematically discussed in depth: 1. Duan Yutsai on the meaning of ''special interpretation of the article'' and ''word-making interpretation''. 2. Duan Yutsai on ''word-making interpretation'', ''special interpretation of the article'' and original meaning, extension meaning. 3. Discussion of the origin of Huang Kan's academic arguments by the difference between ''word-making interpretation'' and ''special interpretation of the article''. Through discussion, this study considers that ''word-making interpretation'' and ''special interpretation of the article'' are divided into two categories: One category of ''special interpretation of the article'', which is related to the special understanding of the classical literature, should not be regarded as an objective interpretation of words. This is the part that ''word-making interpretation'' cannot achieve. The second category should be discussed depends on Duan Yutsai's lexical meaning, which involves the original meaning, extension and sham phrase. There are different degrees of adoption of the ''word explanation'' and ''scriptures explanation'' for the second category. Finally, this study takes the perspective of academic history and the case of Huang Kan, the founder of modern exegesis, as an example to examine the inheritance of Duan Yutsai's doctrine in the connotation of his exegesis.