《廈門音新字典》研究 The research of “A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular Spoken”

dc.contributor 姚榮松 zh_TW
dc.contributor Rung-sung, Yao en_US
dc.contributor.author 杜向榮 zh_TW
dc.contributor.author Hsiang-Junh, Tu en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2019-08-29T08:38:42Z
dc.date.available 2009-6-16
dc.date.available 2019-08-29T08:38:42Z
dc.date.issued 2009
dc.description.abstract 《廈門音新字典》初版於1913年,至2002年為止,共修訂十九版。編輯方式是以羅馬字注漢字,所收漢字多達15230餘字;比1874《中西字典》9451字,可說是大幅擴增,更比1894《廈門音ê字典》所收6474字(第三版) 足足多了一倍有餘。 對於以台、閩語為母語者來說,方便檢視及查索漢字音義,實屬至關緊要!《廈門音新字典》正應需求。因此,書一出即大受歡迎,廣為各界稱賞利用,成書近百年來,已出至十九版,尚歷久不衰! 但《廈門音新字典》所收漢字之釋義是否可靠?同音字及同義字是否正確歸類?其編輯體例是否適當?歷來之增改版是改良或改錯?全書是以廈門音主?或參酌大量台南音?所附「民家个字姓」之音讀是否正確?凡此種種,對字典之信用及利用價值關係重大;但不見專文探討。筆者雖學識淺薄,但願勉力一試!以上述問題為本文探究之重心。 本文經長久考究,以大量資料細密比對,發現《廈門音新字典》引據失當,錯訛處處可見,舉其大者而言: 1. 錯字、錯詞 如:gun2-tai7-koe1;應作gun2-tai7-ke1(阮大家)。 seng1-ti1 e5 ji7?先知的字?應作/chian5-ti3 e5 ji7/;「前置的字」;意即前綴! phang2-soe1;應作phang2-se1(紡紗) 2. 文白錯亂 (1) 以次方言差作文白音讀;如「豬」Tu1(文) ;ti1(白)。 (2) 以訓讀音作文白音讀;如「挖」oo2(文); uih4(白)。 (3) 以音韻型態變化當文白異讀;「媳」sek(文);sim(白);如/sim-pu/(媳婦)。 實際上應是「新婦」sin-pu>sim-pu。 3. 釋義中確實有參雜台南腔與台南漳腔如: 蟮蟲/sin5-tang5/(壁虎);/ka-ti7/(自己)。 4. 「民家个字姓」音讀錯訛如: 姓 錯讀 正音 賁 hui5 phun1 費 hui5 pi3 篡 ki5 tshuan3 共 kiong1 kiong7 筆者以為《廈門音新字典》充其量僅是一本「多方檢輯」之「簡明湊合本」,而且「錯訛不少,語音駁雜」,但鑒於其巨大影響力,實應延聘專家,深入校勘,定其舛誤,正其音讀,增補新字詞,以應時代所需。 zh_TW
dc.description.abstract The “A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular Spoken” that have been attented continually by many people between almost one hundred years. This book was already reprinted 19 times. Speaking of common people what the most important is that, dictionary should be convenience and have literture word that can be search directly. The “A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular Spoken” contain all of this condition, so it became a very popular dictionary more than the others. Even if his superiority, the “A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular Spoken” still have some problem in it. Example: Is the meaning of the word in the dictionary would be correct? Is the system of dictionary would be suitable? Is it wrong when it reprinting? What the mainly dialect of the dictionary like? Is it Amoy or tai-lam dialect? Is the first name form of appendix would be right? This thing is very important, and that would impact somethings if the dictionary is avalible or not. Though its difficult I’ll to do my best. What the focus of my artile is that things I had said before. According to my studies and compares, I found somethings wrong with the “A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular Spoken”, example: 1. The mistake of the word 如:gun2-tai7-koe;should be gun2-tai7-ke(阮大家)。 seng1-ti1 e5 ji7?先知的字?should be /chian5-ti3 e5 ji7/;「前置的字」;the meaning is prefix! phang2-soe1;should be phang2-se1(紡紗) 2. The problem of literature and gossip (1) Mix the sub-dialect and gossip:「豬」Tu1(文) ;ti1(白)。 (2) Mix the literature and gossip;「挖」oo2(文); uih4(白)。 (3) Mix the phonetic change and gossip;「媳」sek(文);sim(白); /sim-pu/(媳婦)。It should be「新婦」sin-pu>sim-pu。 The dictionary have some tai-lam dialect: 蟮蟲/sin5-tang5/(壁虎);/ka-ti7/(自己)。 3. the mistake of the first name: First name mistake correct 賁 hui5 phun1 費 hui5 pi3 篡 ki5 tshuan3 共 kiong1 kiong7 I think the “A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular Spoken” is a synthesis dictionary, that contain some phenomenon of mistake, so we should investment more manpower to do study. en_US
dc.description.sponsorship 台灣語文學系 zh_TW
dc.identifier GN0695260089
dc.identifier.uri http://etds.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&s=id=%22GN0695260089%22.&%22.id.&
dc.identifier.uri http://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw:80/handle/20.500.12235/93311
dc.language 中文
dc.subject 廈門音新字典 zh_TW
dc.subject 廈門音 zh_TW
dc.subject 廈門方言 zh_TW
dc.subject 甘為霖 zh_TW
dc.subject 甘典 zh_TW
dc.subject A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular Spoken en_US
dc.subject Amoy dialect en_US
dc.subject Campbell en_US
dc.title 《廈門音新字典》研究 zh_TW
dc.title The research of “A Dictionary of the Amoy Vernacular Spoken” en_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
n069526008901.pdf
Size:
3.36 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Collections