摘要
《汉书·艺文志》对《三家诗》和《毛诗》均有著录。通过对《三家诗》著录的考察,认为"故"和"传"分别为汉人不同的解《诗》经文的方式。又联系汉代人和清代人对"故"和"传"的解释,认为"故(故训)"是对《诗》经文属于文辞方面的解释;而"传"则是对《诗》经文属于内容方面的解释。就《毛诗》系统说,今所谓《毛传》,恰恰是汉人讲的《毛诗》的"故(故训)";今所谓《毛序》,恰恰是汉人讲的《毛诗》的"传"。以此出发,揭示出西汉《诗》(特别是《毛诗》)传本的状况,并对纷争不休的《毛诗序》形成问题,提出了新的认识视角。
The Record of Literature and Arts in Hanshu has recorded The Three Schools＇ Commentary and Mao Shi. In studying the Three Schools＇Commentary, we conclude that Gu and Zhuan are different interpretation of The Book of Songs.And through the analysis of the interpretation about Gu and Zhuan in Han Dynasty and Qing Dynasty, we think Gu is the text explanation on the The Book of Songs and Zhuan is the explanation on the content of The Book of Songs. According to the system of Mao Shi, the so-called Mao Zhuan is the Gu （Gu Xun） about Mao Shi and Mao Xu is Mao Zhuan in Han Dynasty. From the analysis above, we can not only reveal the status of the version of The Book of Songs （especially Mao Poem） in Western Han Dynasty but also put forward a new view on the long dispute of the formation of The Preface of Mao Poem.
出处
《衡水学院学报》
2012年第5期45-48,65,共5页
Journal of Hengshui University
关键词
《汉书·艺文志》
《诗经》
《毛诗》
西汉传本
The Record of Literature and Arts in Hanshu
The Book of Songs
mao shi
the editions of Western Han Dynasty
