[+3] [0] [回复]

[+1] [0] [回复]

[+1] [0] [回复]

[+1] [0] [回复]

[0] [0] [回复]

[0] [0] [回复]

[0] [0] [回复]

[+2] [0] [回复]

[+2] [0] [回复]

[0] [0] [回复]

[0] [0] [回复]

[0] [0] [回复]

[+2] [0] [回复]

[0] [0] [回复]

[0] [0] [回复]

引用(123474321 @ 2011-02-14, 12:53 PM)

好东西。。。下不动。。。

放著下吧.我一直都有供源的.現因在發新書,故有時會撤源半日吧。

日前幫業師查找出處,方知此版與台北:廣文書局及鼎文書局所影者不同.疑亦金陵重栞本.蓋廣文應乃原刻,所對之文不誤;鼎文乃影學海堂皇清經解本,有些字畫不如廣文本清晰,而此本竟將廣韻撍速之速訛作使(見朋盍簪條),乃至四部備要本亦作使.初見備要本,以為備要又誤,惜其版本之陋,陸費之耻.而再取吾本對校,竟乃作"使",則始作俑者應即此本也.則四部備要本所祖者,應即此本乎?猶俟閒者考焉.

[+1] [0] [回复]

[+2] [0] [回复]

[+1] [0] [回复]

[+1] [0] [回复]

[0] [0] [回复]