《春秋》中的“空白”叙事:“阙文”与“不书”

发布时间：2018-01-01 09:31

本文关键词：《春秋》中的“空白”叙事:“阙文”与“不书”　出处：《文史哲》2015年04期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】："阙文"与"不书"为《春秋》中"空白叙述"的两种表述形态,前者是一种"待书写",后者则是指向"空白"的"已书写",而非"未书写"。"待书写"、"已书写"、"未书写",笔者实已对《春秋》本文作出对于"空白"三态之区分。"阙文"语出《论语》,被孔子用来指称史官、书写与传统的关系;"不书"则系出于三《传》,用以解释《春秋》中的"赋义"何以与无形之文的"空白叙述"有关。因此,《春秋》中的"空白"状态是可以被解释的,三《传》后学能在"不书"与"阙文"之间进行"空白"态为"待书写"或是"已书写"的意义认知转换,就是最好的例子。自书写学上对《春秋》本文中"空白"形态的研究是重要的,不仅是对"空白"三态的区分,尤其是对"阙文"与"不书"的区分,它暗示了早期有一种书写行动,在这行动中有一种"空白"意识之察觉,却没有诉诸"文字"之有形;它更是一种特殊的"书写"立场:一旦我们在《春秋》"上下文"间揭示出一种"空白叙述"时,"空白"也就与有形符号一样,也是一种书写符号,必须加以阅读及解读。
[Abstract]:"lack" and "no book" are two forms of "blank narration" in Spring and Autumn period. The former is "to be written" and the latter is "written" to point to "blank". Instead of "not writing", "to be written", "already written", "not written", the author has actually made a distinction between "blank" and "blank" in this paper. Confucius used to refer to historians, writing and traditional relations; Therefore, the "blank state" in the "Spring and Autumn" can be explained by explaining why the "meaning of Fu" in the Spring and Autumn period is related to the "blank narration" of the invisible text. The third "Biography" can transform the meaning of "blank" into "to be written" or "already written" between "not writing" and "lack of writing". This is the best example. The study on the form of "blank" in "Spring and Autumn" is important, not only the distinction between "blank" and "blank", especially the distinction between "absence" and "no book". It implies an early writing action in which there is a perception of "blank" consciousness, but no recourse to the "writing" of the tangible; It is a special "writing" position: once we reveal a "blank narrative" in the context of "Spring and Autumn", the "blank" is as much a writing symbol as a tangible symbol. It must be read and interpreted.
【作者单位】：台湾佛光大学;
【分类号】：K225.04
【正文快照】： 一、前言(一)《春秋》与“annals”波兰学者托波尔斯基(Topolski)曾从内容上的时间性,将历史叙事(historical narratives)区分为三种理想型(ideal type):年鉴(annals)、编年史(chronicles),及一种更为严谨的历史叙事——编史学(historiography)。托波尔斯基其实仍认为年鉴是较

【共引文献】