Inadequacy of Karlgren's Linguistic Method as Seen in Rune Svarverud's Study of Xinshu 新书
从鲁那的《新书》研究看高本汉语言学考证法的缺陷
Shaodan Luo 罗绍丹

Abstract 摘要
Through an in-depth discussion of Rune Svarverud's (1998) study of the Xinshu 新书 (XS), this paper argues that Bernard Karlgren's linguistic approach to textual study is inadequate to ascertain the dates of the texts ascribed to the Han dynasty. Ascribed to the Han times, the XS has been a book with disputed authenticity. In his effort to date of this text, Svarverud (1998) adopts Karlgren's methodology, using certain pronouns, particles, auxiliary verbs, etc., as his criteria. This paper observes that the Han dynasty was a transitional period in which early and late lexical usages coexisted. This often renders Karlgrenian method unreliable. The inadequacy of Karlgrenian method also lies in its assumption of forgers' ignorance of early language. After studying Han Yu's 韩愈 (768-824 AD) prose, this paper finds out that the language of the Han era was not hard for later generations to imitate. Finally the paper suggests that what Svarverud says about the verbs wang 亡 and wu 无 in some XS chapters does not necessarily reflect how the two verbs were used during the Western Han.

本文向北欧学者 Rune Svarverud (鲁那)(1988)所作有关贾谊《新书》的语言考证提出质疑，旨在说明，高本汉氏的语言考证法并不适于考证和鉴别汉代文献。《新书》真伪问题过去长期争论不决。鲁那运用高本汉语言辨伪法，说明贾书不假。高式辨伪法是先总结出某些助词，代词等从先秦到中古时代的用法衍变，然后利用这种新旧用法的差异推测作品时代，判定真伪。但汉代恰是一个书面语言的新，旧用法在消长中大量共存的过渡期，这造成了鲁那使用语言鉴别标准的随意性，降低了研究的可靠程度。此外，西汉文章是旧时代文人们心慕手追的范文。本文发现：唐人韩愈的文章，在通过高氏语言辨伪法的测试时，许多方面都表现得和《新书》难分轩轾。这也说明，我们语言考证的可靠性，实难以建立在后人对西汉语言的无知之上。本文还质疑高氏那种把文本置于纯时间，纯语言的真空的方法有多大的可行性。鲁那在从语言学角度讨论不同时期文本用字的不同时，都未能排除作者习惯、文风、私讳等可能的因素。他还讲到《新书》里“亡”字的某一特殊用法。而这一用法在《新书》的多数版本中都没有，这显然是版本问题，而非语言问题。

<< Back 返回

Readers 读者