四庫全書文淵、文溯、文津三閣書前提要之文字比勘：以三百六十五種書前提要為例

The Collation of Three Versions of Front Annotations of the ＂Siku Quanshu＂: Based on 365 Pieces of Front Annotations

藍文欽(Wen-Chin Lan)

《圖書資訊學刊》 13卷1期 (2015/06) Pp. 33-68

https://doi.org/10.6182/jlis.2015.13(1).033

摘要

提要是有關一書之作者生平及其內容大要、優劣得失的概述，為中國傳統目錄的體制與特色之一。清代乾隆年間修纂的《四庫全書總目》，其提要能承續劉向敘錄之義例，發揮辨章學術、考鏡源流之功用，為後世學者所推崇。四庫提要的撰寫，歷經分纂稿、書前提要、總目提要等階段，由於卷帙浩繁，加上纂修、抄寫、補抄、覆核的歷程前後有二十餘年，以致各階段與各版本之提要間產生差異。有學者主張，四庫提要各種版本的校勘工作，應作為四庫學發展的重點之一，以釐清其間致異之故。本研究旨在比勘現存三種書前提要文字之差異，自四庫著錄圖書中選取三百六十五種，以文淵閣庫本之書前提要為底本，比勘文溯閣與文津閣之書前提要，核其異同。比勘結果，文淵、文溯、文津三閣之書前提要確實存有許多差異，本文略舉若干實例說明。三種書前提要之差異，較常見的是異體字、同義字或文字誤乙（如：冬秋作秋冬，貧賤作賤貧）的情形，可能是因底本不同或抄手的習慣或疏忽所致。而三閣圖書校寫上呈的日期不同，反映的是四庫七閣完成時間不同與長期抄校覆核的事實。在題名、作者、卷數方面，亦有一些出入，有些差異明顯是筆誤或疏忽造成，有些則原因未明，尚待釐清。文字比勘中，最值得注意的是內容的差異，在內容多寡與文字排比方面，文淵閣本與文溯、文津閣本有較多出入。但亦有文淵、文溯閣本相同（似），文津閣本不同；或文淵、文津閣本相同（似），文溯閣本不同；也有三閣內容均有異同的情形。本研究目前只是初步整理出文字的差異，後續有待對內容做進一步分析。

關鍵字

四庫全書書前提要 ； 文淵閣 ； 文津閣 ； 文溯閣 ； 文字校勘

並列摘要

A bibliographic annotation (tiyao提要) is a brief description of the author and content of a book as well as a comment on, or a critique of, the book. The Siku Quanshu Zongmu (四庫全書總目) has long been viewed as a model of the traditional Chinese annotated bibliography and its bibliographic annotations have been praised by many scholars. It is suggested that these annotations can be used as examples for learning how to write bibliographic annotations. The compilation of the Siku Quanshu Zongmu went through three stages: (1) individual draft annotations (分纂稿) written by various scholars, (2) front annotations (書前提要) revised and modified by the officials of the Siku Quanshu Project, and (3) finalized annotations (總目提要) mainly edited and compiled by Ji Yun (紀昀). Initially, the Siku Quanshu had seven written copies and there were seven sets of front annotations. They were housed separately in the seven chambers that Qianlong Emperor (乾隆, r. 1736-1795) built to store the Siku Quanshu. Currently, only three of the seven sets are intact and extant, including Wenyuange (文淵閣), Wensuge (文溯閣), and Wenjinge (文津閣). This study attempts to conduct a collation project of the three versions of front annotations. We chose 365 pieces of front annotations from the aforementioned three sets, respectively. The results corroborate that there exist variations and differences among the three sets of front annotations. This paper presents three examples to illustrate how the collation task was done. Since these annotations were transcribed manually, it is quite common to notice that the three sets might use variant forms for the same character. The descriptions of author, title, or number of volumes might be different as well. In particular, the annotation for the same book might be different slightly or significantly among the three sets. This paper is a summary report of the preliminary findings of the collation task.

並列關鍵字

Siku Quanshu ； Siku Quanshu Zongmu ； Tiyao ； Bibliographic Annotation ； Wenyuange ； Wensuge ； Wenjinge ； Text Collation

參考文獻

昌彼得（1998）。「四庫學」的展望。在淡江大學中國文學系（編），兩岸四庫學：第一屆中國文獻學學術硏討會論文集（頁i-vi）。臺北市：臺灣學生。【Chang, Bide (1998). [“Si Ku Xue” de zhan wang]. In Tamkang University, Department of Chinese (Ed.), [Liang an Si Ku xue: Di yi jie Zhong Guo wen xian xue xue shu yan tao hui lun wen ji] (pp. i-vi). Taipei: Student Book. (in Chinese)】

侯美珍（編）（1999）。四庫學相關書目續編。書目季刊，33(2)，35-117。【[Hou, Mei-Zhen] (Ed.). (1999). [Si Ku xue xiang guan shu mu xu bian]. Bibliography quarterly, 33(2), 35-117. (in Chinese)】

段又瑄（2008）。四庫分纂稿、閣書提要和總目提要之內容比較分析—以集部為例（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所，臺北市。【Tuan, Yu-Hsuan (2008). The three stage process of Siku Quanshu Zongmu Tiyao: A comparative study of the division of collections (Unpublished master’s thesis). Department and Graduate Institute of Library and Information Science, National Taiwan University, Taipei. (in Chinese)】

龔鵬程（2007）。《四庫全書總目提要•經部小學類》校文津閣本記。書目季刊，41(1)，49-69。【[Gong, Peng-Cheng] (2007). [“Si Ku Quan Shu Zong Mu Ti Yao - Jing Bu Xiao Xue Lei” jiao Wen Jin Ge ben ji]. Biliography Quarterly, 41(1), 49-69. (in Chinese)】

陳東輝（2006）。20世紀上半葉「四庫學」研究綜述。漢學研究通訊，25(2)，29-38。【Chen, Dong-Hui (2006). The merits and demerits on the study of the four treasures (Siku Quanshu Xue) in the first of the 20th century. Newsletter for Research in Chinese Studies, 25(2), 29-38. (in Chinese)】