Wang Yinzhi "Jing yi shu wen" tan wei =: A detailed study of Wang Yinzhi’s Jingyi shuwen

M.Phil.Wang Yinzhi (王引之1766-1834) and his father Wang Niansun (王念孫1744-1832), known as the “Gaoyou Two Wangs”, are eminent scholars studying on Classical Chinese textual collation and exegesis in Qing dynasty. The most remarkable works of Wang Niansun are Gwangya shuzheng(廣雅疏證) and Dushu Zazhi(讀書雜志), while Wang Yinzhi are Jingyi Shuwen(經義述聞) and Jingzhuan Shici(經傳釋詞). All through the years, scholars mainly focused on Wang Niansun’s work, while Wang Yinzhi has been overshadowed by his father’s achievement. Recently, researches started to shed light on Yinzhi’s work by comparing the interpretation on ancient text between Two Wangs but indeed, the related field is not yet fully explored. On this basis, this thesis attempts to make in-depth analysis on Yinzhi’s academic features through Jingyi Shuwen by observing three perspectives including the study of Zhouyi(周易), ancient astronomical calendar and function word which, Yinzhi has obtained greater development than his father.This thesis is divided into five chapters, the first chapter introduces the significance, scope, methodology and previous studies of this thesis. Chapter two systemizes Yinzhi’s research of Zhouyi by investigating how he uses texts and commentaries intertextually to explain hexagrams, how he criticizes Yi-ology of Han dynasty and comparing his work with another Qing scholar, Jiao Xun(焦循 1763-1820). Chapter three investigates TaiSui Kao(太歲考) by comparing different explanation of Taisui between Yinzhi and his contemporaries and also verifying his theory by science method. Chapter four examines the exegesis of function words in Shuwen with the aim of revealing its characteristics and scientificity apart from Shangshu Xungu (尚書訓詁) and Shici. At the same time, the controversial issue over the author of Shuwen and Shici would also be discussed. The last chapter gives a conclusion on how these three perspectives have increased the understanding of Wang Yinzhi’s academic interest and added new dimension to the researches of Two Wangs.王引之(1766-1834)，字伯申，江蘇高郵人，清代著名學者，與其父王念孫(1744-1832)世稱高郵王氏父子。二人校治古籍，創獲頗多，王念孫著《廣雅疏證》、《讀書雜志》，王引之著《經義述聞》、《經傳釋詞》，四書合稱「高郵王氏四種」。歷來評論二王之學，多以王念孫為重心，混同二人而不作區分，隱沒王引之的治學特色。近年開始有學者留意王氏父子治學的不同，打破王氏父子合論的框架，頗見成績。本文循此以進，將焦點放在《經義述聞》中王引之對易學、古天文曆法以及虛詞的研究。這三個範疇皆屬王引之術業專攻的領域，本文希望藉此揭示王引之異於其父的學術興趣以及成因，呈現引之個人的治學特色。本文共分五章，首章導論闡述研究緣起、文獻回顧、研究範圍及方法，勾勒清代有關《易》學、古天文曆法及虛詞研究的情況，作為全文的張本。次章從《周易述聞》對《周易》經傳校改的條目中，建構王引之經傳互證、本卦自釋的《易》學系統，並以此與焦循的《易》學比較，揭示王氏《易》學的價值，旁及伯申對里堂《易》學的態度。第三章以〈太歲考〉為研究對象，整理王引之對古天文曆法的研究，比較其與時人對「太歲」的不同理解，同時以科學方法驗證其說，揭示其時代意義。第四章探討《述聞》所見的虛詞校改條目，兼及《尚書訓詁》、《經傳釋詞》的材料，發掘不見於《釋詞》的虛詞研究特色，同時說明王引之虛詞研究的科學性，確立二書互為表裡的關係，兼論二書部分材料的作者問題。末章結論，總結各章內容，重申王引之對《易》學、古天文曆法及虛詞研究有獨特建樹，這三方面的研究，均有助今人對王引之的治學旨趣及研究成果有更立體的認識，同時突破過去將父子二人合論的研究方法，為高郵二王之學的研究開拓新的方向。韋澤輝.Parallel title from English abstract.Thesis M.Phil. Chinese University of Hong Kong 2018.Includes bibliographical references (leaves 156-166).Abstracts in English and Chinese.Title from PDF title page (viewed on July 23, 2020).Wei Zehui