论文部分内容阅读
臨時應用産生的修辭含義和作爲詞義類型的修辭義具有不同的特徵,學界對此尚無明確的結論。與此相應,因界限不明,《漢語大詞典》《古漢語大詞典》及《古代漢語詞典》誤收了相當數量的臨時修辭用法作詞目、誤立了很多修辭含義爲義項。本文以三部詞典對《史記》詞目的收録爲範圍,對此類失誤進行了較爲系統的調查和分析,首次提出修辭含義與修辭義在語言單位、認知機制、結構形式和是否有指稱找回機制等方面存在著差異,爲區别兩類不同的對象提供了較爲明確的判斷依據,爲詞典編纂提供理論參考和實踐幫助。
The rhetorical meaning produced by the temporary application has different characteristics from the rhetorical meaning as the semantic type. The academic circles have no definite conclusion on this. Correspondingly, due to the unclear boundary, “Ancient Chinese Dictionary” and “Ancient Chinese Dictionary” have mistakenly received a considerable amount of temporary rhetorical usage for “Chinese Dictionary”, misinterpreting many rhetorical meanings. In this paper, the three dictionaries of the “Historical Records” included as a range of words, a systematic investigation and analysis of such mistakes, the first rhetorical meaning and rhetoric in language units, cognitive mechanisms, structural forms and whether there is allegation Recovery mechanisms and other aspects of the differences exist for the distinction between two different types of objects provides a more clear basis for judgments for the dictionary to provide a theoretical reference and practical help.