【摘要】：在明清之際耶穌會士傳入中國的西學(xué)中,解剖生理學(xué)是比較特殊的一門。目前,已有的研究成果集中在耶穌會士具體傳入了哪些知識上,而對于這些知識的實質(zhì)以及背后的原因鮮有探討。文章主要分析對比了羅雅谷的《人身圖說》(包括《人身圖說五臟軀殼圖形》)和昂布魯瓦茲·帕雷(Ambroise Paré)的《著作集》,發(fā)現(xiàn)《人身圖說》與西方的這本解剖學(xué)著作無論是從結(jié)構(gòu)還是內(nèi)容上,都有很大的差別。不僅如此,《人身圖說》還借用了當時的中國醫(yī)學(xué)中的部分知識。這說明,《人身圖說》不能被認為是直接翻譯,甚或是節(jié)譯自某本西方解剖學(xué)著作,而是作者的重新編寫。為了讓中國人更容易接受,作者有意對傳播內(nèi)容采用了更"中國化"的方式。但是事與愿違,《人身圖說》中所載的西方解剖生理學(xué)知識對這一時期的中國醫(yī)學(xué)幾乎沒有產(chǎn)生任何影響。這應(yīng)該與書中所采取的這種"中國化"的方式有一定的關(guān)系。
[Abstract]:During the Ming and Qing dynasties, anatomical physiology was a special branch of western studies introduced by Jesuits in China. At present, the existing research results focus on the specific knowledge introduced by Jesuits, but there is little discussion about the essence of these knowledge and the reasons behind it. This paper mainly analyzes and compares the works of Luoya Valley's Theory of body Picture (including figure of the five Zang organs' Shell) and Ambroise (Ambroise Par 茅's works. It is found that there is a great difference in structure and content between this anatomical work of the West and the Theory of the person. Not only that, but also borrowed some of the knowledge of Chinese medicine at that time. This shows that the figure of person can not be regarded as a direct translation, or even an excerpt translation from a Western anatomical work, but a rewriting of the author. To make it easier for the Chinese, the author intends to adopt a more "Chinese" approach to the dissemination of content. However, contrary to expectations, the knowledge of Western anatomy and physiology contained in the personal Diagram had little effect on Chinese medicine during this period. This should have something to do with the "Chinese" approach adopted in the book.
【作者單位】： 東華大學(xué)人文學(xué)院;上海中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)基礎(chǔ)醫(yī)學(xué)部;
【分類號】：K248;R-09

【相似文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 白雅詩;董建中;;康熙宮廷耶穌會士醫(yī)學(xué): 皇帝的網(wǎng)絡(luò)與贊助[J];清史研究;2014年01期

，

本文編號：2296068