论文部分内容阅读
早在去年就听说河北丰润曹家研究又有新发现,并被某些新闻媒介炒得沸沸扬扬,什么“曹雪芹祖籍研究有新发现”“丰润发现曹氏重要墓志铭和墓碑”“曹雪芹祖籍丰润已成定论”等等,但令人遗憾的是人们一直未能见到有关发现的详细介绍.今年春节,蒙友人见告,说《文艺报》一月八日版发表了几篇与丰润发现有关系的文章,年后急忙找来拜读,本希望能看到一些新的材料,结果大失所望.刘润为先生《曹渊:<红楼>的原始作者》一文,观点可谓新鲜别致,但整篇文章却没有一条令人信服的材料,只有大胆的猜测和丰富的联想,常识性的错误太多,以至人们搞不清楚,刘先生的文章算是学术论文还是文艺创作.关于这篇文章我实在不想再多谈什么了,这里我想就《文艺报》同一版发表的另一篇文章,即王家惠先生《曹渊即曹颜——曹寅曾过继曹(钅分)之子》一文谈点不同意见.
As early as last year, I heard that there were new discoveries in the study of Feng-juo Cao in Hebei Province and was aroused by some news media. What is “discovered by Cao Xueqin’s ancestral home research”, “Fengrun’s discovery of Cao’s important epitaph and tombstone” Has become a conclusion “and so on, but it is regrettable that people have not been able to see the details of the discovery this year, the Spring Festival, Meng Youren see, said” Arts “January 8 published a few articles with the abundance found Related articles, hurriedly came to read after the year, hoping to see some new material, the results disappointed .Liu Runwei ”Cao Yuan:“ The original author of Red Mansions ”, the view is fresh and unique, but the whole The article does not have a convincing material, only a bold guess and rich association, common sense, too many mistakes, and even people do not know, Mr. Liu’s article is academic or literary creation. I really do not want this article To talk about anything more, here I would like to comment on another article published in the same edition of “The Arts and Literature”, namely, one article by Mr. Wang Jiahui, "Cao Yuan is Cao Yan - Cao Yin’s son who succeeded Cao See.