A Study On The Interpretation Of "Liushu Fu Yin Yi"

"Liushu Fuyinyi" is a book compiled by Zhang Shipei,a scholar of Ming Dynasty,based on "Hongwu Zhengyun",which has its own characteristics in the collection,phonetic notation and annotation.In order to enrich the materials of the history of ancient Chinese dictionaries,this thesis studies the interpretation system of "Liushu Fuyinyi" to clarify the interpretation style and characteristics,demonstrate the author’s understanding of the word meaning system,meanwhile present the changes of the compilation concept and style of dictionaries indifferent periods.The major study of this thesis is as follows: firstly,it adopts the method of statistics and comparison,study the interpretation of the meaning of the words from the radicals of the"Liushu Fuyinyi".Secondly,it analyzes and summarizes the style,language and way of interpretation in Liushu Fuyinyi".Thirdly,it compares the interpretation of "Liushu Fuyinyi"with "Shuowen Jiezi","Yu Pian" and "Hongwu Zhengyun" by tabular way,and determines the source of the interpretation of"Liushu Fuyinyi" by integrating the interpretation in other dictionaries.Lastly,it analyzes the value and limitation of the interpretation of "Liushu Fuyinyi".It is found that there are 136 radicals in "Liushu Fuyinyi",which basically take into account the meaning category and body structure;in the style of annotation,the classification and the phonology of the annotated word in "Hongwu Zhengyun" are clarified.The phonetic notation is corresponded with the interpretation one by one,which is supported by documentary evidence;There are abundant annotation terms,with the main method of meaning annotation and assist with structural annotation;The source of annotation is mainly from "Hongwu Zhengyun",but also from other dictionaries.The annotation of the collected words is based on the common meaning.There are some limitations in the book.Compared with the traditional Chinese dictionary books,there are too many radical combinations of "Liushu Fuyinyi",which leads to the confusion of the radical summary of the word,and there are errors in the annotation and documentary evidence.