论文部分内容阅读
在《红楼梦》后四十回的作者问题上,自清代杨继振藏抄本一九六三年影印行世后,一场新的高续说与非高续说之争发生了.这场论争是范宁、吴世昌先生引发的,论争的双方都是以杨藏本后四十回中的十九回原抄正文和添补文字为据的.这场论争至今虽已历时三十来年,但仍在持续.近几年来,笔者阅读了论述杨藏本的一些论著,又校勘了杨藏本、程甲本、程乙本的后四十回,发觉这实是一场自误误人之争,应该停息才好.为此,曾撰写《谈杨继振藏本后四十回中的十九回原抄正文》一文(一载《红楼梦学刊》一九九三年第四辑,下简称“谈原抄正文”),论述这原抄正文不是程甲本刊行前高鹗或他人的“初稿”,而是据程乙本的删改本过录的,它不能作为高续说或非高续说的依据.现再就杨藏本这十九回的添补文字论述于下.
On the issue of the authorship of the latter 40 chapters of A Dream of Red Mansions, a dispute between high-renewal and non-high-renewing took place after the publication of the 1936 copy of Yang Zhizhen in the Qing Dynasty Fanning and Wu Shichang triggered the controversy on the basis of the nineteen original copies and the supplementary texts of the 19 accounts returned by Yang Zang in the past 30 years, but this dispute has lasted for 30 years but still continues In recent years, the author has read some books on Yang Zangben and collated the last 40 backs of Yang Zangben, Cheng Jiaben and Cheng Yi Ben, and found out that this is really a dispute over mistaken people and should be stopped , Had written << on Yang Jizhen possession of forty back in the first nineteen copies of the original text >> article (a << A Dream of Red Mansions >> 1993 fourth series, hereinafter referred to as << original copy the main text >>), discusses this The original copy of the text is not a copy of Gao Cheng or other people before the publication of Cheng A, but according to the record of Cheng Bensheng’s censorship, it can not be used as a basis for high or non-high renewal. The added text is discussed below.