摘要
传抄古文中的“嬉”写作“■(四1·20乂)”,旧多无善解。我们以为此形当即“毐”字,“毐”与“嬉”是音近通假的关系。宋本《玉篇》收“娭”字古文作“”,正是“毐”字,与“嬉”字古文写作“毐”亦相合。《古文四声韵》收“虔”字隶定古文作“■(四2·6崔)”,一般以为属“虐”字误植。我们认为“■”当即“茍(敬)”字之隶讹,与“虔”是义近换用的关系。
The character xi嬉in transcribed ancient scripts is written as■,which has traditionally defied satisfactory interpretation.We propose that this character form corresponds to the character ai毐,suggesting a phonetic loan relationship between ai and xi.The Song edition of Yu pian玉篇records the ancient script form of the character xi/ai娭as毒,aligning with the character ai.This supports the hypothesis that the ancient form of xi is written as ai毐.Similarly,Guwen sisheng yun古文四声韵records the clerical script form of the character qian虔as■,which is often thought to be a mistaken transcription of nue虐.We argue that■is instead a clerical misrepresentation of the character jing茍(敬),which has a synonymous or closely related semantic usage to qian.
出处
《出土文献》
2025年第1期132-138,173,共8页
Excavated Documents
基金
国家社科基金重大项目“阜阳汉简整理与研究”(21&ZD305)
国家社科基金青年项目“传抄古文疑难字考释与研究”(24CYY014)
全国高等院校古籍整理研究工作委员会项目“《集篆古文韵海》释证”(2439)阶段性成果。
关键词
嬉
毐
虔
茍(敬)
义近换用
zi
ai
qian
jing
semantic substitution
