摘要
唐代单篇传奇的命名学界多有讨论,然囿于一城一池,未能综合考量不同文献之义例而斟酌之。其实,《太平广记》与《类说》所录《异闻集》各有义例。如二书共同引录之篇目中,六篇篇名相同,知为原名;另之篇名不同者中,与《类说》相较,有《太平广记》出处可证《类说》本为原名者,有《太平广记》仅删体字者,亦有可与其他早期文献互证者。再如《太平广记》杂传记类所录均为作品原名,反求之《类说》,则知后者有数篇命名当有更动。《类说》编者对体字颇为注意,循兹体例,又可证《类说》本数篇非原名。如此互相补充,庶得唐传奇篇名之原貌。
There are many discussions on the naming of single legends in Tang Dynasty.However,most of them did not consider the meaning of different documents comprehensively.In fact,there are different examples in Yiwenji recorded in Taiping Guangji and Lei Shuo.For example,six of the articles cited in the two books are the same and they take the original names.Among the different articles,some found in “Guangji”originates from “Lei Shuo”,and some with deleted characters in “Guangji”can be proved in other early documents.For another example,all the miscellaneous biographies recorded in “Guangji”are the original names of the works,while in “Lei Shuo”,several titles have be changed.The editors of “Lei Shuo”paid much attention to the characters,thus proving some articles in this book do not carry the original titles.Only in the complementary way can people get the original Tang legend titles.
作者
李小龙
LI Xiaolong(School of Chinese Language and Literature,Beijing Normal University,Beijing 100875)
出处
《扬州大学学报（人文社会科学版）》
2019年第6期97-107,共11页
Journal of Yangzhou University(Humanities and Social Sciences Edition)
基金
国家社会科学基金项目“中国古典小说命名方式与叙事世界建构之关系研究”(10CZW041)
