Ben Hammer
I have been living in mainland China for two decades teaching, translating, and researching Chinese classics at Shandong University. My particular fields of interest are textual scholarship, philology, Confucianism/Chinese philosophy.
I co-founded and edit the Journal of Chinese Humanities, an English language, peer-reviewed journal published by Brill. JOCH provides a platform for scholars from all over the world to publish new research primarily treating on traditional Chinese literature, history, culture, and philosophy. JOCH pays particular attention to giving mainland Chinese scholars a venue to have their research translated and published in the western academic world, This provides Chinese scholars an opportunity to participate in the international dialogue about Chinese culture, and also gives western scholars access to first hand research coming out of mainland China.
benkhammer@hotmail.com
Address: 山东省济南市历城区
山东大学儒学高等研究院
<孟巍隆>收
邮编250100
I co-founded and edit the Journal of Chinese Humanities, an English language, peer-reviewed journal published by Brill. JOCH provides a platform for scholars from all over the world to publish new research primarily treating on traditional Chinese literature, history, culture, and philosophy. JOCH pays particular attention to giving mainland Chinese scholars a venue to have their research translated and published in the western academic world, This provides Chinese scholars an opportunity to participate in the international dialogue about Chinese culture, and also gives western scholars access to first hand research coming out of mainland China.
benkhammer@hotmail.com
Address: 山东省济南市历城区
山东大学儒学高等研究院
<孟巍隆>收
邮编250100
less
Uploads
Papers by Ben Hammer
北京国家图书馆与上海华东师范大学图书馆分别收藏了俞樾《群经平议》的稿本残卷,都是尚未得到应有重视的罕见版本。二单位所藏稿本内容不重复,可以互补,加起来约相当于《群经平议》三分之二。稿本与通行刻本内容大同小异,然而其中不同之处,对于校勘、整理与阅读《群经平议》则大有裨益。本文在梳理探讨各版本基本情况的基础上,进行深入比较研究。从而揭示此两个手稿本具有很高校勘与文献价值,能够纠正通行刻本《群经平议》的若干文本错误,进而有助于理清俞樾的经学思想。
This article was a part of my master's thesis comparing Zheng Xuan's and Zhu Xi's differing versions of Da Xue Pian-- the Great Learning. One of the most outstanding characteristics of Zhu Xi's version is that he believed the Han Dynasty received version had bamboo strips that were out of order. To correct this purported error, he rearranged the text of Da Xue into what he believed was its original form, and added commentary where he believed it was missing. This article discusses the validity and academic integrity of Zhu Xi's thesis, and conjectures at Zheng Xuan's opinion on the issue. (Chinese language)
儒藏編纂與研究中心2014年出版了俞樾的經學著作《群經平議》。此書自從清朝末年付梓,只有木刻本可讀。儒藏本《群經平議》是本書第一次見以整理與排印,給學者們帶來了極大的裨益。此書篇帙浩繁,凡35卷,約四十萬字。因此很難從頭到尾做到“精校”。儒藏本《群經平議》的文本存在不少罅漏,倘若讀者在使用此書時未察覺其中謬誤,便會帶來一些誤會與麻煩。敝文試圖對其中問題較大者給予糾正,同時也歸納分類,闡明其致誤緣故。大體可以分為以下四種致誤原因:1、儒藏所依據的底本不佳;2、儒藏本未參考原初的勘誤表;3、儒藏本未參考俞樾的手稿本;4、儒藏整理者因疏忽而校勘不精。
The aim of this paper is to discuss the origins of this dichotomy, and to evaluate the extent to which it represents historical and contemporary reality. The thesis of this paper is that, although the clear division between the Western and Chinese approaches to the study of China is based on historical fact, the line that once served to distinguish between the two has diminished and blurred to such an extent that it is no longer relevant.
Books by Ben Hammer
北京国家图书馆与上海华东师范大学图书馆分别收藏了俞樾《群经平议》的稿本残卷,都是尚未得到应有重视的罕见版本。二单位所藏稿本内容不重复,可以互补,加起来约相当于《群经平议》三分之二。稿本与通行刻本内容大同小异,然而其中不同之处,对于校勘、整理与阅读《群经平议》则大有裨益。本文在梳理探讨各版本基本情况的基础上,进行深入比较研究。从而揭示此两个手稿本具有很高校勘与文献价值,能够纠正通行刻本《群经平议》的若干文本错误,进而有助于理清俞樾的经学思想。
This article was a part of my master's thesis comparing Zheng Xuan's and Zhu Xi's differing versions of Da Xue Pian-- the Great Learning. One of the most outstanding characteristics of Zhu Xi's version is that he believed the Han Dynasty received version had bamboo strips that were out of order. To correct this purported error, he rearranged the text of Da Xue into what he believed was its original form, and added commentary where he believed it was missing. This article discusses the validity and academic integrity of Zhu Xi's thesis, and conjectures at Zheng Xuan's opinion on the issue. (Chinese language)
儒藏編纂與研究中心2014年出版了俞樾的經學著作《群經平議》。此書自從清朝末年付梓,只有木刻本可讀。儒藏本《群經平議》是本書第一次見以整理與排印,給學者們帶來了極大的裨益。此書篇帙浩繁,凡35卷,約四十萬字。因此很難從頭到尾做到“精校”。儒藏本《群經平議》的文本存在不少罅漏,倘若讀者在使用此書時未察覺其中謬誤,便會帶來一些誤會與麻煩。敝文試圖對其中問題較大者給予糾正,同時也歸納分類,闡明其致誤緣故。大體可以分為以下四種致誤原因:1、儒藏所依據的底本不佳;2、儒藏本未參考原初的勘誤表;3、儒藏本未參考俞樾的手稿本;4、儒藏整理者因疏忽而校勘不精。
The aim of this paper is to discuss the origins of this dichotomy, and to evaluate the extent to which it represents historical and contemporary reality. The thesis of this paper is that, although the clear division between the Western and Chinese approaches to the study of China is based on historical fact, the line that once served to distinguish between the two has diminished and blurred to such an extent that it is no longer relevant.