格言．修辭．證道－高一志《譬學》語義辭格分析

Aphorism, Rhetoric, and Preaching: A Metasememic Analysis of Alfonso Vagnoni's "Pixue"

林熙強(Hsi-Chiang Lin)

《漢學研究》 31卷3期 (2013/09) Pp. 69-102

摘要

耶穌會士高一志〈譬學．自引〉的論述主軸是一則譬喻中的兩端現象，即一則譬喻中「已明的所取之端」與「未明的所求之端」間，「如何」能達到合胡越而成肝膽的修辭勸說效果。本文依列日學派在《普通修辭學》中的辭格分類，以語義辭格的分析，解答上述「如何能以彼端代替此端」的修辭設譬問題：按韓霖所題〈譬學．序〉中所謂「理有不可遽達者，必以所知，喻所未知焉」，以及〈譬學．自引〉中高一志所謂「由顯推隱，以所已曉，測所未曉」等設譬原則，譬喻中「如何能以彼端代替此端」的修辭問題解讀，應由兩個語彙單位間如何形成表達形式的轉換著手。易言之，「如何能以彼端代替此端」的修辭設譬問題，同時也是語言符號中符表與符旨的形式與內容問題。在結構語言及符號的層面外，本文最後將辭格的結構討論引導至譬喻在證道上的功能，即高一志「為何」要以彼端代替此端。

關鍵字

高一志 ； 格言 ； 譬喻 ； 列日學派 ； 語義辭格

並列摘要

This paper presents a thorough scientific analysis of ”Pixue” (”The Science of Comparison”, 1633), a rhetorical work written by the Italian Jesuit Alfonso Vagnoni 高一志 (c. 1568-1640), according to a neo-rhetorical treatise, ”A General Rhetoric” (1981) by Group μ. In the introduction to his late-Ming text ”Pixue”, Vagnoni illustrates ten kinds of comparison in the form of religious aphorisms. As Group μ concisely notes in ”Poetics and Rhetoric,” the introduction to ”A General Rhetoric”, that ancient rhetoricians have a ”mania for naming” and these endless nomenclatures have been the evident sign for rhetoric's decline. Rhetoric, in Group μ's sense, merits being called a science and falls within the cope of structuralism and semiotics. For this reason they rethink rhetoric in structural terms and formulate a new classification of metaboles: metaplasms, metataxes, metasememes, and metalogisms. By means of structural analyses, this paper deals with the nucleus of a rhetorical comparison, that is, how and why the ”adduced term” (the visible) can be used to clarify the ”solicited term” (the invisible). In the structural linguistic sense, this rhetorical question relates to the alternation of expressions and contents of lexemes, and consequently it must also be taken as a semiotic question.

並列關鍵字

Alfonso Vagnoni ； aphorism ； trope ； Group μ ； metasememe

參考文獻

（義）高一志譯著，《譬學》下卷（崇禎四年夏至譯完六年中秋刻完、西曆 1633 年）。現藏梵蒂岡圖書館（Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana），封面有高第（Henry Cordier）編號 Mus. Borg. P. F. Cinese 324(26)。縮影檔案見《天主教教區檔案》（Hong Kong Catholic Diocesan Archives）網站，檢索網址：http://archives.catholic.org.hk/Rare%20Books/FPH1/index.htm（2013.8.1）。

Richards, Ivor Armstrong. 1936 The Philosophy of Rhetoric. London: Oxford University Press.

明李之藻輯(1965)。天學初函。臺北:臺灣學生書局。

Adams, Hazard(ed.)(1971).Critical Theory since Plato.San Diego:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Aristotle,Freese, John Henry(Trans.)(2006).The Art of Rhetoric.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.