2018年10月14日 星期日

全球化浪潮下的蒙藏文化永續與保存研討會






活動簡介
文化部為增進國人認識多元民族文化,尊重不同民族因應環境發展出獨特的文化風格,同時為拓展臺灣蒙藏學研究的領域,特於本年度11月3日在蒙藏文化館舉辦「全球化浪潮下的蒙藏文化永續與保存研討會」。 本次研討會將以蒙藏文化的永續保存與發展為主軸,邀請國內專精於民族學以及文化藝術領域之學者專家與會研討,會中將分別就文化、語言、文字、音樂之復振與創新等議題發表7篇論文,邀請大家一起來參與。


活動內容介紹
時間:107年11月3日(星期六) ,上午10時至下午5時20分。
地點:文化部蒙藏文化中心(臺北市大安區青田街8巷3號)。日期:2018-11-03 。


議程表

 
         
0930~1000
報到、入座
1000~1005
開幕典禮 長官致詞
1005~1135
第 一 場 研 討 會

1005
1135
主持人:趙教授竹成    

發表人:藍副教授美華
題目:蒙古民主化之後的文化復振與創新
與談人: 張副教授登及
發表人:蕭副研究員素英
題目:中央研究院近現代蒙古語語料庫之建置與應用
與談人: 洪研究員金富
1135~1330
午膳、休息
1330~1530
第 二 場 研 討 會

1330
1530
主持人:藍副教授美華  

發表人:甘副教授德星
題目:被忽略的蒙古原鄉:額爾古納流域
與談人: 藍副教授美華
發表人:楊研究委員嘉銘
題目:馬頭琴奏起寶島弘揚蒙古文化的序曲
與談人: 吳教授榮順
發表人:林教授冠群
題目:吐蕃圖強與《史記》關連性之探討
與談人:蕭所長金松
1530~1550
休息
1550~1720
第 三 場 研 討 會

1550
 1720

主持人:林教授冠群  

發表人:梅助理教授靜軒
題目:全球化視角下的西藏語言文化
與談人: 楊研究委員嘉銘
發表人:陳助理教授又新
題目:試論西藏文字與文化發展
與談人: 胡副處長進杉
    1720

賦歸


2018年9月18日 星期二

滿文字典中沒有的字和詞:Xai Šen Wei



海參崴=海邊的小漁村?



中國國家圖書館館藏文物研究叢書 《明清檔案卷  清代 》,上海古籍出版社,2007,
頁162-63


年前,我到俄國Владивосток參加國際阿爾泰學年會,Владивосток( владеть+Boctok)即「東方統治者」或「征服東方」之意。這個俄文地名,滿文怎麼說?

Владивосток原屬中國,地名海參崴。1689年的《尼布楚條約》訂明海參崴屬大清所有。嘉慶之後,國力不振,1858年的《璦琿條約》,將海參崴改為中俄共管之地。1860年,《北京條約》最終將海參崴割讓給俄國。

1909年,宣統任命桂芳為駐俄國海參崴總領事官。敕諭上的漢文,按大清稱謂,記作海參崴,滿文則按漢文分寫作 Xai Šen Wei三字,不用俄文Владивосток的對音。

海參崴之地名乃來自漢文。海參的主要產地在中國東北及朝鮮半島。漢文「崴」,指山、水彎曲處,多用於地名,如吉林省的三道崴子、遼寧省的遲家崴子。海參崴意即盛產海參的水灣。或曰漢文的海參崴乃源自滿文的xaiišenwei ᡥᠠᡳᡧᡝᠨᠸᡝᡳ,意為「海邊的小漁村」云云,但中外滿文字書皆無此字的記載。






(中正大學滿洲研究班甘德星)
2018─09─27、29,10─1、2補訂


2018年9月14日 星期五

Believe it or not: Emperor Ch'ien Lung is still alive!




 郎世寧繪乾隆帝南苑閱兵的《大閱鎧甲騎馬像》



自稱乾隆皇帝長生不老  
內地男子騙婦220萬港元

國廢除帝制多年,內地近來出現假冒皇帝事件,內地一名男子自稱是長生不老的乾隆皇帝,詐騙婦人約220萬港元,被告上法院,自稱是清朝乾隆皇帝的男子今天將出庭受審。


報道指,這名被告自稱是乾隆皇帝,吃了長生不老藥,已經活了300多歲,是全世界27個皇室家族之一,掌握大清皇室資產。但因為資產遭到凍結,需要找人投資,以便啟動資金。

和「乾隆皇」合謀的男子則自稱是金融大鱷索羅斯(George Soros)弟子。他在2012年時和「乾隆皇」聯手詐騙一名打算開設村鎮銀行的女子,誘騙婦人投資資金,讓皇室資產得以解凍,並購買玉白菜,騙取222萬元。婦人丈夫覺得有詐,秘密錄下雙方溝通時的對話,並以此為據,向檢調單位控告。




                                                                           (星島日報2017年5月22


2018年9月12日 星期三

FRANCIS WOODMAN CLEAVES






IN MEMORIAM
FRANCIS WOODMAN CLEAVES
(July 13th) 1911-1995 (Dec. 3Ist)


Another giant is gone! Surely that is the only way to describe the Standing of Professor Cleaves, the dean of American-born Mongolists, a scholar of high standing in Sino-Mongolian studies. From the late 1940s up to the present year, his contributions to our field flowed.

He was by origin a New Englander, taking his B.A. at Dartmouth, and Master’s in 1934 at Harvard University, rising to be Professor of Far Eastern Languages there, and later retiring to his New Hampshire farm. Thus he saw much of early 20th century America, and almost reached the next millennium. Beginning in Classics, his Greek and Latin were of use to him later as well; he undertook Chinese (a requirement of the Indo-European program was to have a non-IE language), and in 1934-35 attended university in Paris for two years. There he came under the influence of the great Master Pelliot, whose standing and interest in Mongolian are known.

Around 1937 came his first travel in China, where he may have first met Father Mostaert, perhaps other figures as well, and collected Manchu and Chinese books, particularly gathering copies and rubbings of various Sino-Mongolian inscriptions, which he later utilized for publication. He stayed in China until about 1941. But lest we think this devoted scholar was some shy bookworm, after he received his Ph.D. at Harvard in 1942, he became a U.S. Naval Officer detached to the U.S. Marine Corps in China. His main assignment was to assist in the repatriation of Japanese officers, and at this time he rescued many libraries and documents from destruction, some sent to the Harvard Oriental collections.

After the war, he returned to Harvard and taught the entry-level course in College Chinese, sharing with other professors. He was always au courant with Sinological studies. His main field of publication was the Sino-Mongolian inscriptions, concentrating of course on transcription, analysis, translation and detailed commentary of the Mongolian texts. Beginning in the early 1950s, he wrote numerous detailed philological articles presenting studies of the Mongolian halves of bi-lingual inscriptions. Indeed, they are classics of scholarship in detail and knowledge. 

Cleaves deserves to be called “a scholar’s scholar”, but this is not to say that everyone took as much interest in these subjects as he could and did. Nearly all his early scholarship appeared in the Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, sometimes filling the major part of an issue. Unmarried, Cleaves devoted his entire time to research, and during the years that Father Mostaert was in the USA, they were in constant touch by correspondence, and Mostaert shared his deep knowledge freely. He made two other major trips abroad, one to Teheran, and one to the Vatican, to work on the documents of Mongolian origin there. Though a New England Protestant, he was friendly with Catholic Cardinais in Rome during his stay.

During his Harvard teaching days he spent long hours with colleagues, especially William Hung, discussing academic problems, but his devotion to his students and his efforts on their behalf were also great, and there was always time for an undergraduate to discuss matters. I recall him once grumbling to me that he spent the equivalent of weeks in preparing letters of recommendation for the government foreign language scholarships. On their part, the students had a tradition of year-end commemorative T-Shirts to be worn by those who had survived First-Year Chinese under Cleaves. There are many stories told about his excessive attention to detail, resulting from his high standards of scholarship and accuracy. He also told some stories about himself with glee: e.g., on the Normandie en route to Paris, he consumed an entire artichoke, stem and all, having never been faced with this vegetable previously. He was aware of how he appeared to others; his manners were polished and courtly, despite the tales of objecting to minute errors.

He retired in 1984 and removed to his New Hampshire farm, rebuilding and restoring buildings, digging a well, keeping his books, of which there were so many that he virtually lived in the kitchen, sharing the house with 3 or 4 dogs too. Even at that age, he could read without glasses, and only in the last year or two did he install a telephone.

More pages could be written, but those hundreds he published will prove to be a greater memorial than any words given here.

He thus leaves behind a full body of Sino-Mongolian inscriptionary studies, but we have only touched on the work with which his name will always be linked, the famed Secret History of the Mongols, to which he devoted decades of study. To be sure, that was almost a full-time occupation, and even in the 1950s, it was a task to keep abreast.

Many discussions with Prof. Wm Hung led to Hung’s famous article on the transmission of the Secret History. Cleaves could not agree with all of Hung’s views, but his respect for Hung was so great, that this contributed greatly to the delay in publication of his Volume One of the Secret History. He disliked opposing Hung’s opinions, and as Volume Two may have required stating those views more strongly, further delay resulted. I understand that he felt hurt that there was little acceptance of his efforts to cast the Secret History into King James’ Biblical English (and I confess I was one of those critics), increasing his reluctance to create Volume Two.

He had largely finished his basic translation, furnished with notes and commentary. Everyone waited for years for it to appear, especially as it long lay in page-proof, and some researchers had even used and consulted portions of it. His volume One, giving the core translation, did appear in 1982, furnished with the most essential remarks needed, but it merely served to increase our wish for Volume Two. We have all wondered in vain both why volume One was so delayed (for “personal reasons”), and whether Volume Two can or ever will appear.

As a result of Cleaves’ intense approach to details, his standards were high, and in personal interaction he did not find others sharing this devotion. Hence there circulate many stories about demands, pedantry and impossible requests, which must have some reason for origin; yet everyone who personally met the Lion in his Den spoke of his courtesy, charm and affability.

The PIAC recognized Cleaves’ exceptional achievements by awarding him in 1988 the Indiana University Prize for Altaic Studies.

Mongolian Studies have suffered a great loss, but the oeuvre left behind will long endure. Requiescat in pace!


                                                                                                                              John R. Krueger



(Source: Permanent International Altaistic Conference Newsletter No. 25, May 1997, pp. 2–3)




2018年8月11日 星期六

民族融合與發展——紀念八旗制度創建400周年學術研討會論文集






編者 : 白文煜
出版社 : 遼寧民族出版社
ISBN : 9787549712397
出版時間 : 2016-04-01
Number of Pages : 397



簡介

《民族融合與發展:紀念八旗制度創建400周年學術研討會論文集》是瀋陽故宮博物院,在八旗建制400周年之際,所召開的學術研討會的論文文集。 本論文集以八旗建制與清初政治經濟發展為主題,從政治、經濟、社會、文化等諸多方面,對明末清初的女真政權的發展與演進,進行了深入淺出的論述。



目錄
“民族融合與發展——紀念八旗制度創建400周年學術研討會”開幕式致辭
李治亭先生在開幕式上的致辭
趙志強先生在閉幕式上的致辭
“民族融合與發展——紀念八旗制度創建400周年學術研討會”閉幕式致辭
滿洲家族的權力傳承、地位與利益——以八旗文武官員“兼佐領”為視角
論滿洲皇權形成中的兩藍旗
融合與隔閡:八旗制度下的民族意識與民族關係
八旗制度的誕生地——佛阿拉城、赫圖阿拉城及首次對明戰役
清代遼寧地區鄉里居民概況
清代陝甘地區八旗駐防研究
八旗滿洲領下的蒙古牛錄、五牛錄編設考釋
皇太極吞併正藍旗始末
試論後金在遼沈地區的都堂衙門
清入關前軍事統領權
盟旗制度與八旗制度比較研究
試論八旗漢軍的組建及意義
清入關前八旗滿洲固山額真考
清入關前八旗駐防研究
八旗兵制對中國古代兵制的繼承與創新
皇太極與滿漢關係
評清初五藩的興滅
清代八旗都統的職能與作用
清代詩集《欽定熙朝雅頌集》與八旗文學
《滿營所屬各門志》校注
清前期滿洲“著姓”大族舉隅
從滿語語義看清代民族文化融合
從承德清王朝的皇家廟宇看康乾盛世時期民族與宗教的融合
薩滿“跳大神”、婚俗、葬俗文化側記
論清代的八旗義學
淺議八旗漢軍文化的形成及其特徵——從漢軍旗人譜書說起
試論努爾哈赤、皇太極創建滿蒙漢八旗與家族統治之嬗變
努爾哈赤時期法律及刑罰特點管窺
八旗與弓矢


2018年7月18日 星期三

《馬可福音》的滿漢文對譯



滿漢對照的版本



前些日子看到珍本聖經數位典藏這個網站,發現內中除了俄國傳道團的留學生斯捷潘.瓦西里耶維奇.利波夫措夫(Степан.Васильевич.Липовцов)[1]翻譯的滿文《新約全書》(《Ice hese》)外,還可以看到《滿漢合璧新約聖書》。

  《滿漢合璧新約聖書》是滿漢文對照的版本,但若對照滿漢文,可發現兩者有些不同。這裡以馬可福音一章12節(這是中文和合本的12節)為例來説明:

porofiyetasai bithe-de henduhengge tuwa bi sini derei juleri sini yabuci acara juγôn-be dasatara mini selgiyesi-be taqôrambi biγan-de xôlara niyalmai jilγan ejen-i jalin juγôn-be dasata talu juγôn-be necin obu sehengge abqai ejen-i jui isus heristos-i ewanggelinum-i deribun oho.

這段滿文可直譯成漢文:「先知們的書說:『看!我派遣我的使者修理你面前應行走的道路。在曠野有呼叫的人的聲音說:『修主的路,將狹窄的路變為平坦』』此乃天主之子耶穌基督的福音的起啟。」《滿漢合璧新約聖書》的漢文翻譯則翻作:「上帝之子耶穌基督福音之始也,先知載曰:『我遣我使在爾前備爾道,野有聲呼云:『備主道,直其徑』』。」

          這兩種對照的文字明顯有兩個差異:第一個是順序的問題,滿文將先知書的內容放前面,最後再說這是耶穌基督福音的起頭,但是對照的中文翻譯卻將順序顛倒,把先知書的話放後面。第二個差異是滿文的「天主」在中文的翻譯變成了「上帝」。


 

《委辦譯本》


  從這兩點看就知道,漢文本並不是照滿文翻譯的,但漢文究竟是哪來的呢?在珍本聖經數位典藏這個網站的說明中說到漢文的來源是1855年的新舊約全書《委辦譯本》。且網站的簡介這樣說:「《委辦譯本》為基督新教西方宣教士在華為統一中文譯本,首次集結眾人之力合作翻譯的成果。該譯本於1843年開始翻譯,在1852年出版新約,舊約在1854年出版,並全書於1858年出版。由於當時各差會與宣教士期望與意見的分歧,以致《委辦譯本》最終並未達成統一中文譯本的目的,但卻實在為中文聖經翻譯史上的重要里程碑。《委辦譯本》激發了當時在華宣教士對翻譯中文聖經的熱誠。《委辦譯本》出版後的70年間,許多修訂與新譯本的出現,開啟了中文聖經翻譯的新時代。也為之後《和合譯本》的翻譯奠定相當的基礎。」[2]

  簡言之,《滿漢合璧新約聖書》滿漢文翻譯之所以對不上,是因滿文是出自東正教傳教團學生的手,而漢文則出自1855年的基督新教的翻譯。因此,不僅滿漢文的語順對不上,還出現了「天主」和「上帝」兩種不同的翻譯(基督新教一般用上帝,天主教、東正教一般用天主)。


(中正大學滿洲研究班彭楨儒)




──────────────
[1] 這位留學生在中國史料中叫「四貼班」。在嘉慶十年正月十八日的軍機處録副中曾提及他幫清廷翻譯西洋字的事情。
[2] 珍本聖經數位典藏/新舊約全書(委辦譯本)https://bible.fhl.net/ob/s.php?DETAIL=1&LIMIT=id=214(查詢日期:201873


2018年7月7日 星期六

如何在4個月學懂滿語



滿文並不難。學習一學期,再加上一本好字典,即能讀懂大部分的滿文資料。我以前覺得這是不太可能的事,對沒有滿文背景的插班生,更不可能。

我所以如此說是來自我以前的教學經驗。我在美國荷花大學教過一個韓國學生,他來上課的時候,學期已過了快一半,字母都已教完。我勸他不要為難自己,但他堅持要來,我只好改用滿朝雙語的老乞大做教材。這本書,每一個滿文字旁都加了諺文,發音貼近滿文,每一滿文句子下面又有朝鮮文翻譯。雖然滿韓文的語法基本上相同,但不管我怎麼解說他仍然跟不上進度。因此以後我都勸沒有基礎的學生不宜躐等躁進。

不過,中正大學的學生似乎跟我以前的學生不太一樣。有幾個我教過的插班生,沒有滿文背景,但都能後來居上,成為班中成績最好的幾個。這學期2018年春)武漢大學的碩士交換生曹振禹又是一例。振禹從零開始,和上了一學期的同學一起上課,不到三週即趕上進度。這當然離不開一個「勤」字。因此,我特別請他把他的學習經驗寫出來,以供後之來者參考。(甘德星附識)





─────────────────────────

我的滿文學習經歷



本學期我有幸來到中正大學歷史系交流學習,選修了甘德星老師所開《滿文閱讀入門》課程,本課程每週上課一次,一次三個課時,強度不算特別大,但因為本課原為一學年課程,而本學期為課程下半部分,我實際上錯過了最初的入門部分,所以前幾周只能通過課後自習趕上進度。
首先是對滿文字母的學習和熟悉,對照課本《滿文講義》第一至十五課及穆麟德轉寫法字母表,通過抄寫瞭解滿文字母的單獨形式、詞首形式、詞中形式與詞尾形式以及相對應的羅馬字母轉寫,其中元音字母共有六個(aeiou、ū),輔音字母則可根據字形分為幾組以便記憶(nkghbps、š,tdlmcjyrfw),還要注意ng的字形的詞中和詞尾形式,此外根據廣定遠YouTube“滿語教學”視頻練習滿文發音。
其次是學習單詞,主要是練習將滿文單詞先轉寫為羅馬字母,再通過胡增益主編《新滿漢大詞典》查出單詞意思,以此檢查轉寫正確與否,並不斷鞏固對滿文字母的記憶與轉寫。此外還要瞭解動詞詞尾變化。動詞原形詞尾為-mbi一般表示句子的結束,表示中間停頓的未完成同動詞,詞尾改為-me,表示完成的同動詞,尾改為-fi。動詞的現在時與未來時,詞尾改為-ra、-re、-ro,過去時,詞尾改為-ha、-he、-ho。在句子中遇到這些情況就需要將動詞還原為原形再查字典。
再次就是開始學習單獨的句子,滿文最基本的句式是賓動結構,即主語-賓語-動詞,與漢語動賓結構不同,句子其他部分則相差不大,其餘特殊用法及語法問題可在實際閱讀過程中通過教材文法索引查找教材中相關部分或查找語法書解決。
趕上進度後開始學習課文,本學期總共學習四篇課文,分別是《愚公移山》、《請假折》、《奉到敕諭事題本》、《永安莽喀詩》。對於課文的學習,課前預習是極其重要的,首先是將滿文單詞逐一轉寫為拉丁字母,據此查字典標出每個單詞的意思,之後嘗試貼著滿文單詞與句式將句子直譯為漢文,可對照教材原有翻譯,但應注意教材原有翻譯為意譯,可能不能百分之百地呈現原滿文的句式和意思,所以為了更好地瞭解滿文原意與句式還應以直譯作為練習,翻譯時有不懂處即做標記。上課時注意老師如何分析句子結構,與課前自己的翻譯相互對照,不同及不懂處及時向老師發問,以使問題得到解決,進而理解句子及課文。
我經過四個月的滿文學習,對滿文有了初步的瞭解,而要更好地讀懂滿文當然還需要更多的學習與練習。


武漢大學歷史學院 曹振禹)



2018年6月24日 星期日

目前發現的康熙遺詔的總數


中央研究院藏 298464001


康熙遺詔,以前認為存世的只有四份。二份在北京第一歷史檔案館,二份在台北中央研究院。近來,北京和台北陸續有新本發現。

除繼明堂全滿文本,即台茂本[見滿文康熙遺詔(台茂本)]外,中研院在整理檔案時,又發現另一全漢文的殘本(見上)。換句話說,康熙遺詔,中央研究院的三份,再加上台茂本,台灣一共有四份,而北京,在原來的二份之外,又有遺詔謄黃一份,即一共三份。

因此,到目前為止,已知的遺詔合共七份。


(中正大學滿洲研究班甘德星)


2018年6月8日 星期五

喀爾喀車臣汗部研究






出版社: 遼寧民族出版社
作者:姑茹瑪
頁數:精裝/338頁
出版日:2016/07/01
ISBN13:9787549713615

全書由三個部分組成。一、介紹該書的研究價值、國內外研究狀況、內容和目標創新、史料來源等。二、1.17世紀以前的喀爾喀萬戶,勾勒喀爾喀萬戶總體面貌和發展脈絡。2.車臣汗部的形成和發展,對車臣汗碩壘早期的政治活動、車臣汗部的成立以及車臣汗部遊牧地等問題作一考察。3.碩壘車臣汗的政治活動及其影響,將對碩壘汗的政教活動進行全面研究。4.車臣汗家族與車臣汗部的構成,主要對碩壘及其父祖的姻親關係、構成車臣汗部的諸鄂托克與部族進行梳理。5.車臣汗部與俄羅斯的關係。6.17世紀後半葉的車臣汗部,主要是阿海哈屯監管汗部、清朝欽定第四、第五代車臣汗以及喀爾喀戰敗後投服清朝等內容。三、對車臣汗部歷史作一簡要總結,提出自己的基本看法和認識。

2018年6月5日 星期二

Mount Wutai: Visions of a Sacred Buddhist Mountain







Chou, Wen-Shing 周文欣Princeton: Princeton University Press
April, 2018


The northern Chinese mountain range of Mount Wutai has been a preeminent site of international pilgrimage for over a millennium. Home to more than one hundred temples, the entire range is considered a Buddhist paradise on earth, and has received visitors ranging from emperors to monastic and lay devotees. Mount Wutai explores how Qing Buddhist rulers and clerics from Inner Asia, including Manchus, Tibetans, and Mongols, reimagined the mountain as their own during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

Wen-Shing Chou examines a wealth of original source materials in multiple languages and media--many never before published or translated—such as temple replicas, pilgrimage guides, hagiographic representations, and panoramic maps. She shows how literary, artistic, and architectural depictions of the mountain permanently transformed the site's religious landscape and redefined Inner Asia's relations with China. Chou addresses the pivotal but previously unacknowledged history of artistic and intellectual exchange between the varying religious, linguistic, and cultural traditions of the region. The reimagining of Mount Wutai was a fluid endeavor that proved central to the cosmopolitanism of the Qing Empire, and the mountain range became a unique site of shared diplomacy, trade, and religious devotion between different constituents, as well as a spiritual bridge between China and Tibet.

A compelling exploration of the changing meaning and significance of one of the world's great religious sites, Mount Wutai offers an important new framework for understanding Buddhist sacred geography.


Author Bio
Wen-Shing Chou is assistant professor of art history at Hunter College, City University of New York. She specializes in art of China and the Himalayas. She holds a BA in Art History from the University of Chicago (2001), and an MA and a PhD in History of Art from University of California, Berkeley (2011). Chou’s research focuses on the relationship between religion and empiricism in early modern visuality, and the intersection of history, geography, and biography in Buddhist traditions. She is a native speaker of Chinese, and has a reading knowledge of Sanskrit, Tibetan, Japanese, German, and Italian. Her current project explores the production of multilingual and multimedia objects at the Qing Court.



2018年6月2日 星期六

滿文檔案圖像識別軟體




「滿文檔案圖像識別軟體」研發項目已於2016 年7月22日下午正式結項。該軟體在對滿文檔案掃描圖像進行識別後,能自動轉換成拉丁字母,也可以轉換成標準的滿文,大大提高了手寫體滿文向拉丁字母和滿文標準字體的轉化效率。

滿文專家吳元豐先生說:「200多萬件檔案,靠我們這輩子能翻譯多少?不藉助這些現代的新技術,將來非爛在庫裏不可!」 ,「經專家評審,認為此次研發的滿文輸入法和軟體達到了國內外領先水準,具有重要的推廣實用價值,可用以建立滿文檔案全文檢索資料庫,為實現滿文檔案的數字化和資訊化提供新的現代化途徑。」


(滿族文化網 2016/08/23. 原文網址:https://read01.com/j2jnBP.html)