刘洪强, 张慧玲. 从《青城县志》看《聊斋志异》载唐梦赉女婿为假考[J]. 内江师范学院学报, 2023, 38(11): 1-8. DOI: 10.13603/j.cnki.51-1621/z.2023.11.001
    引用本文: 刘洪强, 张慧玲. 从《青城县志》看《聊斋志异》载唐梦赉女婿为假考[J]. 内江师范学院学报, 2023, 38(11): 1-8. DOI: 10.13603/j.cnki.51-1621/z.2023.11.001
    LIU Hongqiang, ZHANG Huiling. Textual Criticism on TANG Menglai’s Son-in-law in Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio Base on County Annals of Qingcheng[J]. Journal of Neijiang Normal University, 2023, 38(11): 1-8. DOI: 10.13603/j.cnki.51-1621/z.2023.11.001
    Citation: LIU Hongqiang, ZHANG Huiling. Textual Criticism on TANG Menglai’s Son-in-law in Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio Base on County Annals of Qingcheng[J]. Journal of Neijiang Normal University, 2023, 38(11): 1-8. DOI: 10.13603/j.cnki.51-1621/z.2023.11.001

    从《青城县志》看《聊斋志异》载唐梦赉女婿为假考

    Textual Criticism on TANG Menglai’s Son-in-law in Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio Base on County Annals of Qingcheng

    • 摘要: 从清朝康熙年间起,就有文献记载唐梦赉选青州神童为女婿,并且还有《聊斋志异》曾经记载此事的传闻,然而当下《聊斋志异》的所有版本中均未见有关内容。经考证,唐梦赉确实招过一位神童女婿,但《聊斋志异》却不可能载过此事。之所以出现《聊斋志异》曾经载过唐梦赉招女婿一事的观点,很可能是人们把《秋灯丛话》误认为是《聊斋志异》。

       

      Abstract: Since the Kangxi Regime of the Qing Dynasty, there have been records in literature about TANG Menglai selecting a prodigy from Qingzhou as his son-in-law. It was also rumored that this incident was recorded in Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio. However, none of the existing versions of Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio currently include TANG’s story. After close examination, it has been verified that TANG did take a prodigy as his son-in-law, and it is unlikely that this event was ever recorded in Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio. The belief that the book included the story of TANG selecting a son-in-law most likely stems from the misconception of people mistaking Autumn Lantern Cluster for Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回