論《倉頡訓纂》之性質及其對《說文》之功用

A Discussion on the Characteristics of Chang Jie Xun Zuan and Its Function on Shuo Wen

許慎在《說文》中常引用某人或某書之說法，以說明本義、引伸義、假借義；但亦有引用某人之說，而未指明其出處者，《倉頡訓纂》即其中之一。本文首先討論《倉頡訓纂》之作者與書名，由《漢書》揚雄傳、杜林傳與〈藝文志〉可知揚雄與杜林有同名之作，又書名亦有《倉頡訓詁》之別稱。其次，因歷來學者有認為此二書為字書者，亦有認為乃訓詁之書者，故本文經由六點以說明其性質：一、《漢志》之排列，乃依同一作者同一性質之書群聚而列；二、《說文‧敘》之說明中，許慎對於字書完全未提《倉頡訓纂》；三、識字教材之字書乃字數相等、具押韻特色，《倉頡訓纂》並不符合；四、訓詁之書有其訓釋形式，《倉頡訓纂》具此特徵；五、字書命名往往為三字，《倉頡訓纂》卻為四字；六、兩本《倉頡訓纂》釋有相同文字，不符合字書收字不重複之原則。因此，斷定此二書為訓詁之書。既為訓詁之書，則其訓釋內容對《說文》有何幫助？筆者分別參酌目前所見揚雄與杜林之《倉頡訓纂》各版本，將《說文》所引字例逐一討論，發現除傳統上所知，有說解字形、說解本義、引伸義、假借義之作用外，亦有兼釋形義、分別二物二名及指出同縣異地之特殊情形，正為其價值所在，可作為《說文》引通人與引書之補充。 Xu Shen, in Shuo Wen, always quoted someone or statements from some books for the purpose to explain the original meanings, extension meanings or borrowing meanings of certain words. However, he also occasionally quoted someone's statements without indicating the sources. Later studies found that some of his quotes were taken from Chang Jie Xun Zuan. In this article, I first discussed on the potential author and the title of Chang Jie Xun Zuan. According to the biography of Yang Xiong and Doo Ling in Book of Han, it is found that Yang Xiong and Doo Ling independently authored a book with the same title. In addition, their books also carried a different title of Chang Jie Xun Gu. Some scholars thought that these two books were wordbooks, while some thought they were philological hermeneutics books. In order to resolve this dispute, this essay intends to show the characteristics of Chang Jie Xun Zuan with six points. First, the same author's books with a similar category were always put together in Book of Han. Second, Xu Shen did not talked about Chang Jie Xun Zuan in Shuo Wen. Third, the characters of word-learning teaching materials are always has the same number of words in one sentence with the same rhymes, However, Chang Jie Xun Zuan does not carry these features. Forth, explanations books of exegetics always had the same forms. Chang Jie Xun Zuan is conformed to this format. Fifth, the titles of wordbooks were always having three words in one sentence. However, Chang Jie Xun Zuan is in the form of four-word. Sixth, both Chang Jie Xun Zuan explained the same words, which is conflict with the common rule of wordbooks. Therefore, this article concludes that these two books are both books of exegetics. This article refers to several versions of Chang Jie Xun Zuan which discuss the words that Shuo Wen quoted and finds that the purpose of Shuo Wen's in quoting Chang Jie Xun Zuan has traditional functions. For example, it talked about the font, original meaning, extended meanings and borrow meanings of words. Besides, it also serves as special purposes, such as explaining the font and meaning of a word at the same time to distinguish two names of two things and to explain two places in the same county. These special situations are its main value, which can be the supplementary reasons of Shuo Wen quoting someone or statements from other books. How do these two books of exegetics help Shuo Wen with their explanations? I examined the currently existing versions of Yang Xiong's and Du Lin's Chang Jie Xun Zuan and discussed one by one the character examples cited by Shuo Wen. I discovered that besides the traditionally known functions of interpreting character forms, interpreting original meanings, extending meanings, and borrowing meanings, there also exist the special features of interpreting both of forms and meanings, distinguishing two names of two objects, and pointing out different places in the same county. These can function as the supplements to the parts of Shuo Wen that cited sophisticate scholars and books, which makes them especially valuable.