论文部分内容阅读
从《切韵》序、《经典释文》序录和《颜氏家训·音辞篇》的记载可知,上古汉语到了六朝时期,至少已经分裂为南北两个主要的方言群,一是北方的河北方言(邺下音系),一是南方的江东方言(金陵音系)。(丁邦新2006:69)根据梅祖麟(2001、2012)的假设,现代南方方言中的闽语、吴语及北部赣语都存在一个江东方言的层次。在这个前提之下,本文准备构拟江东方言支、齐两韵的音值,使用的材料主要是闽语,旁及吴语和相关方言。关于闽语齐韵字的层次问题,由于现象相当丰富,早就吸引不少学者的注意。从事闽语音韵及层次分析的学者如杨秀芳(1982)、李如龙(1985)、张光宇(1990)、徐芳敏(1991)均曾注意及之。进入21世纪后,随着方言材料的揭露与比较方法的进展,则有吴瑞文(2002)、秋谷裕幸(2002)和陈忠敏(2006)等分别从音韵层次剖析、吴闽方言比较及整个南方方言的表现进行观察,并获致若干具体的结论。在这么丰厚的前人研究基础上,我们将进一步讨论相关的问题:第一、齐韵在闽语中究竟有几个语音层次?第二、哪一个层次可以用来构拟六朝时期的江东方言?以上的问题涉及语音层次的辨析和方言层次与时间的联系。在建构层次关系时,应当注意齐韵韵母在闽语内各次方言不同的条件分化。而在给方言层次断代时,则可以参考词汇及语法的证据。本文结论认为,从方言比较的证据来看,六朝江东方言的齐韵应构拟为*-i?i。
From the sequence of “cut rhyme”, the preface of “Classic Interpretation” and the records of “Yan’s Jia Xun Ci Ci Ci Ci”, we can see that in the period of the Six Dynasties, the ancient Chinese had been divided into at least two major dialect groups of North and South, Dialect (邺 下 音 系), one is the southern Jiangdong dialect (Jinling phonology). (Ding Bangxin 2006: 69) According to the assumption of Mei Zu-lin (2001, 2012), there exists a level of Jiangdong dialect in Min Dialects, Wu Dialects and northern Gan dialects in modern southern dialects. Under this premise, this article is intended to construct the phonetic values of Jiangdong dialect branch and Qi two rhyme. The materials used are mainly Min Dialect, beside Wu dialect and related dialects. As for the level of Qiyunzi in Min Dialect, the phenomenon has long attracted the attention of many scholars because of the abundant phenomena. Academics engaged in Phonology and Analytic Hierarchy in Min languages such as Yang Xiufang (1982), Li Rulong (1985), Zhang Guangyu (1990) and Xu Fangmin (1991) all paid attention to it. After the 21st century, with the disclosure of dialect materials and the progress of comparison methods, there are Wu Leiwen (2002), Yuji Akiu (2002) and Chen Zhongmin (2006) and so on respectively from phonological level analysis, Wu Min dialect comparison and the entire southern dialect Observed the performance, and reached a number of specific conclusions. On the basis of such a rich predecessor’s research, we will further discuss the related issues: First, how many phonetic levels does Qi Yun have in Min Dialects? Second, which level can be used to construct the Jiangdong dialect in the Six Dynasties period? The above questions involve the analysis of the phonetic level and the connection between the dialectal level and time. In the construction of the relationship between levels, we should pay attention to the different conditions of different dialects of Qi rhyme in Min Dialect. In the dialect level dating, you can refer to the evidence of vocabulary and grammar. The conclusion of this paper is that from the dialect comparison evidence, the Qidong dialects of the Six Dynasties should be formulated as * -i? I.