曹美秀.pdf

2006 3 219 256 (1858-1927) (1846-1894) 1 2 3 1 1988 70 2 1998 51 3 5 1991 12 37-219-

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 4 1998 5 1998 6 1988 7 1994 8 1995 725-732 9 1987 170 10 52 11 1994 121 12 2000 51 13 1990 14 1997 214-215 15 1994 80-220-

(1889) (1894) 16 17 18 19 20 16 1991 43 482 13298 17 [1896] 2a 18 11-12 19 25-26 20 (1883) (1884) (1885) (1886) -221-

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 21 2a 22 53 23 55 24 9a 25 1995 172-173 (1887) 92 95 1999 43 26 53 27 10a -222-

28 (1891) 29 30 (1890) 31 32 33 34 28 1988 156 29 15a 30 31 12b 32 15a 33 161 34 1998 20-223-

35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 35 174 36 183 37 165 173 38 171 39 40 2000 1 1-3 1 42-46 41 26a 42 43 44 157-224-

45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 45 156 46 173 47 178 48 1999 18 49 180 50 183 51 15b-18a 52 1 11 1 30 2004 53 157 54 3 118 55 4 147-225-

56 57 58 59 (1894) 60 61 56 3 118 57 1b 58 1b-2a 59 5a 60 733 61 1985 129-226-

62 (1897) 63 64 65 66 62 112 63 140-141 64 171 65 66 15a -227-

1. (1890) 67 68 69 70 67 174 68 172 69 18a 70 10b -228-

71 72 73 74 75 76 77 71 15b 72 10b 73 11a 74 75 11b 76 11a 77 11b -229-

78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 78 11a 79 80 ( 1988 ) 125 139-141 81 11b 82 83 160-167 84 12a 85 12b 86 16b 87 88 89-230-

90 91 92 93 90 12b 91 92 1 23 93 16b -231-

94 95 96 97 94 732 95 11a 96 17a 97 159-232-

98 99 100 101 102 98 16b 99 17a 100 18b 101 18b-19a 102 159-233-

103 104 105 106 103 723 104 128 105 14a 106 45b -234-

107 108 109 110 111 112 107 10a-14b 108 1 23 109 110 2 77 111 4 158 112 1 26-27 -235-

113 114 115 116 117 118 119 113 1 28 114 19a-b 115 12a 116 18a 117 16a 118 1 21 119 167-236-

120 121 122 123 124 125 120 1998 174 121 4 75 122 4 5 123 3 118 124 3 94-95 2 75 125-237-

126 127 128 129 130 131 1 7 12a 126 1 2 127 128 3 119 129 195 130 171 131 172-238-

132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 132 133 159 134 166 135 136 1 47 137 2 81-82 138 17a 139 13b 140 15a 141 157 142 20b -239-

143 144 145 146 147 2. 148 143 15a-b 144 15b 145 15a 146 14a 147 737 148 95-240-

149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 149 13a 150 271 156-159 270-273 151 28a 152 153 154 132 155 19b 156 1987 2 6-7 -241-

157 158 159 160 161 162 3. 163 164 165 157 13a 158 1 13 159 13a 160 16b 161 1 20 162 13a 163 156 164 161 165 174-242-

166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 166 167 15a 168 18a 169 178 170 14b 171 14a-b 172 697 173 1a 174 14a 175 9a 9a -243-

176 177 178 179 176 14a 177 14b 178 2 77 179-244-

180 181 182 183 180 4 143 181 39b-40a 182 166 183 1 23-245-

184 185 186 187 188 (1893) 189 190 191 192 193 184 173-174 185 26a 186 187 14a 188 92 189 172 190 166 191 171 192 159 193 2-246-

194 (1895) 195 196 197 194 1988 80 195 171 196 22a 197-247-

198 199 200 201 202 203 204 1. 205 206 198 23a 199 23b 200 40a 201 202 20a 203 180 204 179 178 205 179 206 180-248-

207 208 2. 209 210 3. 211 212 213 207 179 208 209 24a 210 211 179-180 212 180 213-249-

214 4. 215 216 5. 217 218 219 214 215 23a 216 181 217 180 218 219-250-

220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 220 37b 221 23a 222 180 223 224 181 225 182 226 181 227 182-251-

228 229 230 231 228 181 229 22b 230 180-181 231 23a -252-

232 233 232 181-182 233 24b -253-

-254-

-255-

Zhu Yixin and Kang Youwei: A Discussion Centering on Problems about Classical Studies CHAO Mei-shiou Even though the period of Kang Youwei s association with Zhu Yixin was not long, it was an important time for Kang. It was during that time that he advocated his theory of New Text Confucianism. But this fact has been neglected and misunderstood by modern scholars, whose viewpoints have generally been limited by Kang s great fame. In this paper, I more closely examine the relationship between Zhu and Kang and the time in which they lived in order to distinguish Zhu s scholarly character and to consider his contribution to classical studies. Based on this, I discuss the argument between Zhu and Kang. In so doing, we can see that Kang was of the younger generation who had not yet come to prominence, while Zhu was already well-known by that time. Furthermore, Zhu s criticism of Kang s New Text studies was based on Song Learning, not Old Text Confucianism. From the perspective of academic paradigms, the argument between Zhu and Kang was not an Old Text versus New Text debate; instead, the Han Learning versus Song Learning debate would be a more appropriate frame of reference in which to consider it. This study provides a new viewpoint from which we can examine the development of late Qing intellectual history. Keywords: Zhu Yixin Kang Youwei New Text Confucianism Han Learning versus Song Learning debate late Qing dynasty -256-