requestId:68499ab3cd8904.78582601.
The editorial of “Pen” and the structure of “Mao Poetry”
Author: Xu Jianwen (Associate Professor of the Chinese Academy of Literature)
Source: “Revival News (Social Science Edition)” 2017 Issue 2
Time: Confucius was in the 2568th year of Dingyou October 11th Gengshen
Jesus November 29, 2017
Content summary:Records of the articles such as “Mao Poems·June Preface”, “June Gift·House Beverage”, “Han Book·Gu Yongyi”, and Zheng Xuan’s “Mao Poems”, you can find that there are slight differences in the poems of Zhou Rong’s performance, “Performance”, “Mao Poems” and the poems of the three schools. Based on the problems such as Ji Zha’s discussion on “Pen” in “Zuo Zhuan”, the relationship between “Lya Shun” and “Mao Zhuan”, and the source of “Mao Zhuan”, it can also be judged that the internal “Mao Zhuan” was buried in “Mao Zhuan” that was before the Confucius era. From this we can infer that Confucius emphasized the sequence and structure of 300 chapters to make it more suitable for the Zhou Dynasty’s tribute system. In the Zixia era, influenced by the study of “Year”, Zixia or his later studies also adjusted the poems of “Daya” and “Xiaoya”, making both “Ya” beautiful. These two re-editors were mostly the most reflexive in the writing process of the text of “Pen” before the early years of the war. During the second re-editing, the foundation of “Penchant” which imitated the energy of “Year”, was based on the foundation of “Penchant”. However, the “Xiao Ya” still abides by Zhou Rong’s poems, and Mao Gong’s “The Seminar of Mao’s poems” was adjusted to the current poems.
Related Keywords: Mao Wen/Post Notes Summary/Travels/Travels of “Years”
Introduction: Proposal of the questionBao Huying Network
“Mao Wen” is a writing work that relies on “Fuxi”. The difficult ancient characters and lyrics in “Fuxi” are multiple, so “Fuxi” must face the problem of repeated annotations. How does it prevent recurrence? Just a little familiar with the annotation process will understand that when a word (or word) appears for the first time, there is often no need to be noted again in order to be simple. We can call it the principle of simplicity afterwards. This is not absolutely true. Sometimes because the text is vast, a certain character is far apart from each other, and the subsequent texts are often noted. But generally speaking, those who have already commented on the previous text often do not comment on the following text. When reading ancient books, I found that this basic approach is not difficult. So can “Mao Shi” generally adhere to the principle of simplicity of the post-notes? It is certainly certain.
On ordinary, if there are any notes in “Mao Feng” in “Guo Feng”, “Ya” and “Zhu” are not. For example, “Shi” is seen in “GeBaofengTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwanTaiwan</a If the recurring words are different from the pure meaning, it is not difficult to understand their meanings. At the same time, the initial explanation is far from the later chapters. Repeated annotations often appear, such as the word "Yan" is seen in more than 20 poems including "Ge Tan" to "Gui", and "Mao Shi" is made in three notes: "Ge Tan", "Tong Gong" and "Wen Wang". The three notes include "Guo Feng", "Xiao Ya" and "Da Ya".
There are also some recurring words and lyrics that are not annotated in “Feng”, and “Ya” and “Zhu”, or “Ya” are annotated in “Ya” and “Zhu”. Although the quantity of this type is not advantageous, there are quite a few, and the quantity is about one or two hundred, which is enough to illustrate the problem. Only the number of examples:
(1) The word “” is seen in “Gu Feng”, “Da Dong”, “Loading”, and “Loading”. That is, “Zhou” has not been noted, but “Guofeng” and “Xiaoya” have not been noted.
(2) “Wang Feng·Shu Leave” “That millet is gone”, “Leave” “Mao Wen” is not noted. However, in “Xiao Ya Zhanlu” “actually left”, “Mao Feng” says: “Leave is to droop.”
(3) “Ping Chen and Song” in “Bing” is “Ping Chen and Song”, “Ping” is not commented on “Mao Feng”, “Big Ya·Zong” “Yu Rui’s Qi is accomplished”, “Mao Feng” says: “Qi is accomplished. Cheng is to flat. “This sentence also shows “Erya·王王”: “Qi, Ping, is accomplished.”
(4) “He Xi, Wei Xi” in “Qi O”, and Mao Zhi said: “He, there is a bright virtue.” However, the comment on “He He” did not make any comments on “He He” because the meaning of “He He” has been seen in “Xiao Ya”. “The Departure of the Train” says: “Great, great looks.” “The Departure of the Nanshan Festival” also says: “Great, great looks.”
(5) “The Roman” “has his leaves, woruo”, “Mao” says: “The woruo.” But what does the word “wo” mean, and this is not mentioned. In the sentence “Xiao Ya·Xi Sang” “The leaves are fertile”, “Mao Yu” says: “Wo Yu is soft.”
(6) “The leaves of the Sang Lan are worn by the boy”, “Mao Yu” says: “The leaves are swayed by the Sang Lan, and “Mao Yu” says: “The sway is a jewel. It can shoot the sway of the Sang Lan.” But what is “Jue”? “Xiao Ya·Zhi Yang” says: “After picking up and holding the bow and arrow, the bow and arrow are adjusted”, “Mao Yu” says: “Zhi Yang is a string.” “Zhi Yang is a jewel.”
At the same time, the current version is very much between the nearby poems, and there are some repetitive words with annotation and no notes, which can actually differ from the current version of the poems, such as the word “Yan” above. “Yan” appears in the current version of “Xiao Ya” in “The Departure” and “Tong Bow” nearby the compilation. “Tong Bow” was before “Tong Bow”, but “Mao Yi” was annotated in “Tong Bow” but not in “Tong Bow”. For example, the word “王” appears in “The Last Style”, “The Two Sons on the Boat” and “Bo Xi”, and the meaning is “each”. Mao Zhi is annotated in “The Two Sons on the Boat” rather than first seen in “The Last Style”.
The above is different from the notes or notes in the edited version of the current version of Mao Feng, and the phenomenon of notes and no order. If you look into the compilation of the current version of Mao Feng Feng, it will be abnormal and incorrect, and you will not be able to understand it. If we think of the “Mao Shi” as a pure and clear story of “Pen” by Chen’s “Pen”, this kind of incorrect and wrong will certainly show unestimated academic value.
From the observation of order, the text and lyrics of “Mao Yi” may be hidden from the verses that differ from its general order. This structure must have been earlier than that of Mao Gong. “Mao Poetry” was written by Mao Gong at the beginning of Han Dynasty. After that, the sequence and structure of the text were established, which is the basis that we have seen today. “Mao Yi” was written by Mao, so why can it convey the information of the late “Pen” text? The Han people said that it was not independent creation, but had their own inheritance and superior sources, which is what the teacher said first, this is common sense. Therefore, whether the Western Han literature in Mao Zhi can be learned by a teacher, or perhaps whether there is a pre-Qin “Penchant” that exists is the key to this problem.
1. The relationship between “Mao Shi”
[/p> 
[/p>