本文選題：清代 + 《清儒學(xué)案》　； 參考：《福建師范大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：《清儒學(xué)案》是一部具有較高價值的學(xué)案體著作,但學(xué)術(shù)界對它的研究還不夠全面,尚沒有一篇專門系統(tǒng)地研究該著作的論文,甚至以《清儒學(xué)案》為研究對象的論文也是甚少,這很大程度地影響了其學(xué)術(shù)價值的發(fā)揮。 《清儒學(xué)案》成書于民國年間,由于其原刻板尚存,所以其版本主要是以民國刻本為基礎(chǔ)的影印本和近年來各出版社出版的點校本,該書成于眾手,記載了清一代的學(xué)術(shù)淵源,涉及經(jīng)學(xué)、理學(xué)、史學(xué)、先秦諸子、天文歷算、文字音韻、方輿地志、詩文金石等各個方面,因此該書的內(nèi)容涉及面極廣。對于清代學(xué)術(shù),也大都囊括其中,書中收錄的學(xué)人著述及編者對其的評述,可與一些清代學(xué)術(shù)著作形成互補；此外《清儒學(xué)案》也有極高的史料價值和學(xué)術(shù)史價值,總而言之該書具有豐富的文獻價值。 《清儒學(xué)案》也有不足之處,如體例不夠完善,內(nèi)容太過龐雜和記載存在錯誤等缺陷。此外,筆者對使用文獻時發(fā)現(xiàn)了中華書局點校本的一些問題,并對此進行了分析,提出自己的看法。
[Abstract]:"the case of Confucianism in Qing Dynasty" is a highly valuable academic case book, but the academic research on it is not comprehensive enough, and there is not a paper devoted to the systematic study of this work. Even the "Qing Confucianism case" as the object of study is very few, which to a large extent affects the exertion of its academic value. The "Qing Confucianism case" was written in the Republic of China, because of its original stereotype still exists. Therefore, its version is mainly a photocopy based on the inscriptions of the Republic of China and a school edition published by various publishing houses in recent years. The book, which is a popular book, records the academic origins of the Qing Dynasty, covering the studies of classics, Confucianism, history, pre-Qin schools of thought, and astronomical calculations. Phonetics, Fang Yu Zhi, Shi Wen Jin Shi and other aspects, so the book covers a wide range of content. Most of the academic works in the Qing Dynasty are also included in it. The scholarly writings and the comments made by the editors in the books can complement some academic works of the Qing Dynasty. In addition, the case of Confucianism in the Qing Dynasty also has a very high historical and academic historical value. In a word, the book has abundant literature value. "the case of Confucianism in Qing Dynasty" also has some shortcomings, such as imperfect style, too complex content and errors in recording, etc. In addition, the author finds some problems in the use of the literature, analyzes the problems and puts forward his own views.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：福建師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：K249

【相似文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 劉鳳強;;《清儒學(xué)案》選錄資料原則探析[J];蘭臺世界;2011年16期

2 陳祖武;錢賓四先生與《清儒學(xué)案》[J];北京師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2004年01期

3 官大梁;《明史》正誤二則[J];史學(xué)月刊;1986年06期

4 謝忠明;《資治通鑒》辨誤一則[J];史學(xué)月刊;1987年03期

5 賈二強;《北史》勘誤一則[J];陜西師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1990年01期

6 于學(xué)義;《舊五代史》、《資治通鑒》證誤各一則[J];史學(xué)月刊;1991年02期

7 王青霞;《敕勒歌》應(yīng)是民歌[J];內(nèi)蒙古師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(教育科學(xué)版);1992年03期

8 王友敏;;《資治通鑒》標(biāo)點糾謬[J];史學(xué)月刊;1997年01期

9 方原;;《史記》刊誤一則[J];陜西師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2007年01期

10 張文冠;;《宋史》“勾索”勘誤[J];中國典籍與文化;2011年03期

相關(guān)會議論文 前2條

1 杝，

本文編號：2109488