《汉语动结式的句法语义研究》综合运用了结构主义语法、生成语法、从属关系语法、配价语法、认知语法、构式语法、语言类型学等多种理论来研究动结式。作者没有拘泥于一种理论框架或研究基础，而是根据描写和解释语言事实的需要，采用了多角度多侧面的研究。对所运用的理论理解得比较到位，运用得比较合理，使得《汉语动结式的句法语义研究》具有较高的理论含量。特别是较好地坚持了句法形式和语义关系相互验证、共时分析和历史考察相结合的研究原则，使得所得出的结论比以前的研究更有解释力。
近年来，句式构造和句式意义的关系成为句法理论的热点问题，其中对致使结构句法语义特点的研究生成、检验和发展了很多新的句法观念和理论。动结式作为致使结构系统的一种类型，是汉语句法系统中非常重要且颇具特色的句法结构，其句法语义特点引起了学界的极大关注。正是在这种背景下，本项研究试图从动结式的论元结构和配位方式这两个角度来比较系统地考察动结式在句法和语义这两个方面的特点，从而探讨句法结构的形式和意义之间的互动关系。

This volume has been compiled as a tribute to a scholar who has devoted his prodigiously productive career to the study of Chinese and Sino-Tibetan linguistics: W. South Coblin. To honor this man whose depth and range of scholarly interests and accomplishments are nothing short of awe-inspiring, and whose influence on the field is broad and powerful, on the occasion of his seventieth birthday we have gathered together a collection of studies that speak to those interests in various ways and that also provide new and diverse contributions to the field.
South Coblin (known in Chinese as Kē Wèinán 柯蔚南) has exerted a profound impact on the field of Chinese and Sino-Tibetan linguistics as a researcher, teacher, mentor, and colleague. His career thus far has spanned over four decades, and his research has touched upon areas as varied as Sino-Tibetan comparative and historical linguistics, Chinese historical phonology, Chinese historical and comparative dialectology, Classical Chinese grammar, Old Tibetan, the language of early Chinese vernacular texts, the history and development of Chinese koines and pre-modern Mandarin, Chinese transcriptions in 'Phags-pa script, and most recently, in Korean. He has written groundbreaking and seminal studies in all of these fields, and many of his published works have become essential references. At present writing, he is author of eleven monographs and over eighty articles and book chapters, and these numbers will surely continue to grow. After this introduction appears a brief biography that gives an overview of South Coblin’s scholarly career and traces the trajectory of development of his many and various interests and projects, and this in turn is followed by a complete bibliography of his publications to date.
Among the twenty-three contributors to this volume are South Coblin’s graduate school classmates, colleagues and peers in the field, and students and others he has mentored. In gathering the papers we endeavored to assemble a selection of research that reflects the diversity of South’s scholarship and that engages with his scholarly interests. The resulting compilation comprises twenty-two papers, which have been arranged topically into five sections: Chinese historical linguistics, Chinese dialects, Tibetan and Tibeto-Burman, language contact and transcription, and texts and written Chinese. Each section corresponds to an area in which South Coblin himself has engaged in research, and thus the collection as a whole reflects the breadth of his scholarship. Many papers are at the forefront of their respective fields, and build on South’s earlier work to arrive at significant new conclusions.
The opening section of this volume, “Chinese Historical Linguistics,” represents the area in which South Coblin began his scholarly career, and the first paper was written by the late Professor Jerry Norman, the scholar who perhaps had the deepest influence on his scholarly work. Norman’s “A Model for Chinese Dialect Evolution” is a distillation of ideas he developed over the years, many in conversations with South, and provides an alternative model for the comparative study of Chinese dialects, a model that we anticipate will ultimately supersede and replace the conventional approach of relying primarily on the phonological categories of the Qièyùn 切韻. Norman outlines two historical stages of Chinese, Common Dialectal Chinese (CDC) and Early Chinese (EC), which he developed using a strictly comparative approach based entirely on observable and documented dialect data. In his paper, he deliberately eschews the incorporation of distinctions supported only by written evidence, which might be artifacts of the literary tradition, and without basis in the actual spoken dialects. He intended that CDC and EC would provide an objectively realistic framework for understanding Chinese linguistic evolution and the phonological development of the Chinese dialects, one from which the modern dialectal forms of Chinese could be easily and naturally derived. Jerry Norman had discussed many of the details of this work with South Coblin, and thus decided to contribute it to this volume as a tribute to his close friend. He sent the final version to the editors just twelve days before his death on July 7, 2012.
The next two papers in this section address other aspects of Chinese language history. Ho Dah-an’s study, “Phonological Problems in Imperial Naming Taboos” (史諱中的音韻問題) presents an examination of Chén Yuán’s 陳垣 1928 Examples of Imperial Naming Taboos 史諱舉例 and, following a brief critique, explores the issue of taboo names and their relationship to Chinese phonological history. Ho’s discussion underscores the importance of historical phonology in any examination of issues bearing on Chinese linguistic history. Through a demonstration of the ways in which changes in the language affect the particularities of which graphs were taboo at different periods, Ho shows that once we obtain a clear understanding of the pertinent phonological issues, we may find that ostensible errors or exceptions to expected practice were not in fact departures from regular convention. Ting Pang-Hsin’s contribution, “A Comparative Study of Frequently Used Action Verbs in Hàn and Táng-Sòng Times” (漢與唐宋兩代若干常用動作動詞的比較), seeks clues to trends in Chinese lexical change through an examination of frequently used action verbs in Hàn times, as glossed in Xǔ Shèn’s許慎 Shuōwén jiězì 說文解字, and through comparison of the Hàn vocabulary with the Táng-Sòng lexicon as recorded in the complete editions of Wáng Rénxù’s 王仁昫 Kānmiù bǔquē Qièyùn 刊謬補缺切韻and the Guǎngyùn 廣韻. Ting concludes that overall, the Chinese lexicon shows a strong trend toward continuity, and consequently was only minimally influenced by other neighboring language families.
The second section, “Chinese Dialects,” comprises five essays that explore Chinese dialects from historical and descriptive perspectives. The first three papers examine various issues related to initials in dialect phonology. William H. Baxter’s “Northern Mǐn ‘Softened’ Initials in Borrowed Vocabulary” presents evidence for early Mandarin influence on southern dialects, arguing that the softened initials in the Northern Mǐn dialects have two origins. One appears in a set of words native to the dialects and originating very early therein; the other occurs in a set of words forming a borrowed literary stratum that the author’s analysis shows entered the Mǐn dialects from an early form of Mandarin. This early form of Mandarin would have been a southern type that retained the voiced obstruents of Middle Chinese. The second paper, by Zhongmin Chen, “On the Relationship between Tones and Initials of the Dialects in the Shànghǎi Area,” analyzes the correlation between tones and initials in the Shànghǎi region dialects. Chen first looks at the general relationship between tones and various types of initials, and then proceeds to examine a specific set of issues regarding the nature of voiceless stops followed by vowels with breathy phonation. These issues include the relationship between stops and tones, the influence of aspirated stops on tones, and the nature and distribution of pre-glottalized stops. Chen demonstrates that aspiration is a factor in the split of tone categories into different tone values and in the development of new tone categories owing to the influence of the initial type. The evolution of initials is also the subject of the next paper, “A Study of Diachronic Evolution and Age Variation in the Three Initials Groups of Zhī, Zhuāng and Zhāng in Nánjīng Dialect” (南京方言知莊章三組歷時演變與年齡差異研究), by Gù Qián 顧黔 and Zhāng Zhìlíng 張志凌. Gù and Zhāng examine the distribution in Nánjīng dialect of retroflex affricate initials [tʂ, tʂh, ʂ] and dental sibilant initials [ts, tsh, s] that reflect the three Qièyùn initial groups identified in the title. They conclude that variation in the distribution of the two groups of initials correlates to speaker age. Their paper explores the reasons for this age variation and investigates the course and diachronic direction of the evolution of the differing distribution of these groups of initials.
The final two articles of this section examine dialect phonologies from a broader perspective. Chāng Méixiāng’s昌梅香contribution, “A Homophone Syllabary of the Yúnlóu Dialect in Jí’ān County, Jiāngxī Province” (江西吉安縣雲樓方言同音字彙) presents primary dialect data. Her report describes the phonological system of the dialect spoken in Yúnlóu 雲樓 in Jí’ān County, Jiāngxī and provides an extensive syllabary of homophonous morphemes. Chāng was a recent visiting scholar at the University of Iowa, and during extensive discussions with South Coblin about this dialect material, he encouraged her to make data set available for scholarly reference. The last paper of the section investigates a dialect data source that dates back to the Qīng period. In “A Comparative Look at Common Southern Jiāng-Huái and the Southern Mandarin Influences in Hé Xuān’s Yùnshǐ,” Richard VanNess Simmons examines the phonology presented in the Yùnshǐ 韻史 (History of Rimes) compiled by Hé Xuān 何萱 (1774-1841). Hé Xuān, a native of Tàixīng 泰興 and Rúgāo 如皋 Counties in Jiāngsū 江蘇, revised the traditional Qièyùn system of initials to accord more closely with the dialects of his native place. Hé developed a simplified system of 21 initials that do indeed match those of the Tàixīng and Rúgāo dialects. But Simmons finds that the Yùnshǐ also clearly evidences additional influence from the literary tradition and from nearby prestige Guānhuà 官話 dialects, with the result that its tonal system only partially reflects the local dialect phonology of Rúgāo and Tàixīng.
The third section in this collection comprises research concerning “Tibetan and Tibeto-Burman.” The first three papers reflect South Coblin’s impact in this field by exploring and refining some of his foundational contributions. Guillaume Jacques’ contribution, “On Coblin’s Law,” examines the empirical basis of Coblin’s law, which has become a key phonetic law in Tibetan historical phonology. Jacques notes that while this law was originally devised to explain alternations in the verbal system, its range of application is broader, and can be observed in the nominal system as well. Additionally, his paper proposes an extension of this law, namely *sNC- > sC-. Nathan W. Hill’s “Tibeto-Burman *dz- > Tibetan z- and Related Proposals” offers an adjustment to the sound laws proposed in Coblin 1976. Hill presents evidence for the changes *dz > z and *ǰ > ź and the other origins of ź, specifically *lj and *rj, and endeavors to establish the relative chronology of those changes. Laurent Sagart’s “A Note on Tibeto-Burman Bone Words and Chinese Pitch-pipes” also develops an issue inspired by a word treated by South Coblin (Coblin 1986). Exploring Tibetan gra ‘fish bones’ and rus ‘bone’, Sagart proposes an explanation to the observation that the Chinese names for odd- and even-numbered pitch-pipes exhibit sound correspondences with related terms in Sino-Tibetan languages.
The subsequent two papers focus on issues in modern Tibeto-Burman linguistics. James Matisoff’s “Using Native Lexical Resources to Create Technical Neologisms for Minority Languages” departs from a historical focus and offers an investigation of practical applicability to living languages. Matisoff examines the issues and challenges entailed in the creation of technical linguistic terminology for Lahu, a language that lacks a technical vocabulary with which to discuss scientific subjects such as linguistics. The hope is to obviate the need for Lahu speakers to resort to borrowing technical terminology from other, majority languages. Jackson T.-S. Sun, in “Typology of Generic-Person Marking in Tshobdun Rgyalrong,” focuses on expressions that languages use to refer to the generic person (GP), or ‘people in general’. His paper investigates GP-representation in Tshobdun Rgyalrong, a morphologically complex Sino-Tibetan language spoken in Sichuan, approaching the issue from a typological perspective. Sun shows that Tshobdun marks GP with an unusual encoding device, namely, dedicated verbal morphology that evolved from erstwhile nominalizers, and he proposes that the integration of the generic person into the inflectional person category as a ‘fourth person’ reveals the salience of humanness marking in Rgyalrong grammar.
The fourth section of the volume, entitled “Language Contact and Transcription,” contains essays that examine aspects of the interaction between Chinese and other languages. The first three papers treat transcriptional evidence, which has played a prominent role in South Coblin’s scholarship; that is, they deal with the use of non-Chinese phonetic scripts to record Chinese words and phrases or the transcription of foreign words using Chinese characters. This section begins with Axel Schuessler’s “Phonological Notes on Hàn Period Transcriptions of Foreign Names and Words.” Schuessler examines a corpus of Hàn time transcriptions of Central Asian and Indic terms into Chinese, identifying the phonological patterns revealed by the transcriptional choices and exploring what they reveal about the Chinese language of the time, and about the foreign languages they transcribe. To this paper is appended an extensive dataset that collects transcriptions of Central Asian and Indic names from pre-Hàn, Former (Western) Hàn, and Later (Eastern) Hàn Chinese textual sources. The second paper, Zev Handel’s “Why did Sin Sukju Transcribe the Coda of the Yào 藥 Rime of 15th Century Guānhuà with the letter ㅸ <f>?” addresses Sin Sukju’s 申叔舟transcriptions of Mandarin into Korean in the Saseong tonggo 四聲通解, a Korean rimebook of Chinese that has also been of great use to South Coblin in his work on the history of Guānhuà. Handel focuses on the transcription of Chinese entering-tone syllables, most of which were transcribed with a final glottal stop. Handel seeks to account for the previously unexplained transcription of a subset of syllables (those in the Yào 藥rime) with the Hangul letter for <f>. He proposes that the transcriptions in fact represented a single Mandarin sound with two different graphs, and that this was the result of the orthographic structure of Hangul, and not of a phonological distinction in Mandarin. The following paper treats transcriptional materials that yield new insights into a yet earlier stage of Mandarin. In “The Chē-Zhē syllables of Old Mandarin,” Zhongwei Shen draws on evidence from ancient Altaic scripts, including ḥP’ags-pa ('Phags-pa), Jurchen, and Khitan materials, to demonstrate that although the earliest Chinese rimebook to treat jɛ and ɥɛ type finals as an independent rime, chē-zhē 車遮, was the Zhōngyuán yīnyùn 中原音韻 of 1324, transcriptional evidence reveals that this type of syllable existed earlier, by the Khitan Liáo 遼 dynasty (916-1125). Shen proposes that the vowel system represented by these finals was maintained until the nineteenth century, when a new final -ɤ became distinctive in coda-less syllables, as part of the transformation from Old Mandarin to modern Mandarin.
Following are two papers that treat the interaction between Chinese and Western languages. Lǔ Guóyáo 魯國堯 contributed a pair of notes entitled “Trivial Musings from Dull Lǔ’s Cottage Study” (愚魯廬學思脞錄二則). Lǔ is well-known for his work in the history of Mandarin, an interest he shares with South Coblin. But in this whimsical pair of notes he ventures off in new directions. The first note is a commentary on an essay by Qián Zhōngshū 錢鍾書 (1910-1998) focusing on late Qīng English to Chinese translation, and the second concerns Chinese nomenclature pertaining to binomes, that is, simple (non-compound) bisyllabic words, which in Chinese are conventionally divided into three separate categories. Lǔ proposes a single Chinese term (yīn’ǒu 音耦) that would encompasses all three types. This section concludes with a paper by Joseph A. Levi, who together with South Coblin co-authored Franciso Varo’s Glossary of the Mandarin Language. Levi addresses a different aspect of early missionary dictionaries of Chinese in his paper, “The Ricci-Ruggieri Dicionário Europeu-Chinês: Linguistic and Philological Notes on Some Portuguese and Italian Entries.” The Dicionário was the first bilingual dictionary composed by and for European missionaries to assist them in learning Chinese. Rather than focusing on Chinese, Levi explores the Dicionário as a source for understanding the evolution of Portuguese and, to a lesser extent, Italian, through a series of notes on various linguistic and philological points.
The final section, “Texts and Written Chinese”, brings together four papers that explore various aspects of written texts and individual graphs or words. The first two concern the Chinese writing system and examine issues regarding the interpretation of individual characters. In “Two Competing Interpretations: Cóng 从 or Bì 比 in Oracle-Bone Inscriptions,” Ken-ichi Takashima explores the graphic ambivalence between the oracle bone graphs conventionally transcribed as bì 比 ‘side by side’ and cóng 从 ‘to follow’. He revisits earlier claims concerning the form and meaning of these graphs, and draws on both palaeographic and philological evidence to support his conclusion that these OBI forms all may be understood as cóng 从. The next piece, by David Prager Branner, “The Lingering Puzzle of Yán 焉: A Problem of Oral Language in the Chinese Reading Tradition,” examines the origins of the graph 焉, long thought to represent a contraction of yú 於 plus another unknown element, meaning “at this [place].” Branner argues that the character 焉 is a “portmanteau” character, or a semantic ligature of two graphs equivalent to modern 於+是, but that it is far from certain that it represents a spoken contraction. The essay by Morten Schlütter, “Textual Criticism and the Turbulent Life of the Platform Sūtra,” explores the textual history of the Platform Sūtra, and proposes a new understanding of the stemmatic relationships among multiple distinct versions that span over five centuries. Schlütter assembles detailed evidence concerning these versions of the Platform Sūtra, to which he applies the methodology of textual criticism, demonstrating among other things that what he refers to as the “longer version” of the Platform Sūtra, which was both the orthodox and most popular version, was actually a later version of the text. This paper is an elegant demonstration of the ways in which textual criticism can lead us to revise our understanding of the relationships among texts, and more broadly, of the history of ideas or religious developments. The final paper in this section, “Spring and Autumn Use of Jí 及and its Interpretation in the Gōngyáng and Gǔliáng Commentaries” by Newell Ann Van Auken, analyzes usage of the word jí 及, which functions as a comitative marker ‘and, with’ in the Spring and Autumn (Chūnqiū 春秋), and proposes that some Gōngyáng 公羊 and Gǔliáng 穀梁 readings of jí resulted from the fact that the commentators understood jí in a different way, as a full verb. Common wisdom tells us that grammatical particles such as the comitative marker jí are derived from full verbs, and thus it is unexpected to find the same word as a particle in an earlier text and a full verb in a later one; Van Auken ascribes this apparent discrepancy to dialect differences, and explains this unusual situation by proposing that the language of the Spring and Autumn was probably not ancestral to that of either Gōngyáng or Gǔliáng.
* * *
We owe a debt of gratitude to many friends and colleagues who have supported us in this tribute to South Coblin, and most of all, to the contributors to this volume. Two in particular deserve special acknowledgment, the late Jerry L. Norman, who gave us initial encouragement, pronouncing this endeavor “a splendid idea!” and Axel Schuessler, who has provided unfailing and enthusiastic support at every step as we have prepared this volume. Other contributors who have provided additional assistance in various ways include (in alphabetical order) David Branner, Zev Handel, Nathan Hill, Ho Dah-an, Jackson T.-S. Sun, Morten Schlütter, and Zhongwei Shen.
We would also like to express our deep appreciation to the editorial staff of Language and Linguistics at the Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica. The former Executive Editor, Dr. Elizabeth Zeitoun, took on primary responsibility for managing the onerous editorial labor, tirelessly continuing her hard work even after her term as Executive Editor of Language and Linguistics had officially ended. Special thanks are due also to Kuo Chun-yu (Joyce) for her meticulous and patient work in copy-editing and typesetting this volume. Dr. Wu Rui-wen at the Institute of Linguistics has likewise gone out of his way to provide assistance and support. We also thank Lin Chih-hsien, Lin Hsiu-lien, Chuang Ya-ying, Chen Yu-kuan (Vicky), and others for their help. We are grateful to the anonymous reviewers of each paper for their assistance and insightful comments.
The Norman family warrants our special thanks for working with us in preparing Jerry Norman’s paper for this publication, and for their continued support, even as they were grieving the loss of their husband and father. Jing Coblin kindly provided the photograph of her husband, which appears as the frontispiece, and gave us warm, enthusiastic, and helpful encouragement from the outset. Russ Ganim provided helpful advice as we began this project, and Eden Lunde assisted with numerous proof-reading tasks. Zhāng Yànhóng assisted with translations of a number of abstracts. Matthias Richter, Brandon Dotson, Steve Wadley, and Young Oh, together with a number of our contributors, provided help with the cover images, and Oliver Emery assisted with the cover design.
Finally and most importantly, we join with our contributors in thanking our honoree, W. South Coblin, for teaching us all so much, whether directly in the classroom and conversations, or indirectly through his research and publications, and for thereby inspiring the research contained in this volume.

《行为经济学新进展》内容简介：行为经济学又称为“心理学的经济学”，就是在心理学的基础上研究经济行为和经济现象的经济学分支学科。经济学的祖师爷亚当·斯密早就对此有深入的讨论,但直到20世纪70年代，心理学家卡尼曼和特维斯基才开始通过吸收认知心理学等领域的最新研究成果和方法，通过改造新古典经济学中的效用函数，建立起全新的个体选择模型，并激发后来的经济学家把相关研究领域拓展到经济学的各主要分支，从而形成了比较系统的“行为经济学”。《行为经济学新进展》就是行为经济学家在这方面得出的最具代表性的成果。
《行为经济学新进展》是一本论文集，书中作者均是行为经济学领域的最杰出者。全书总共26章，每一章都是独立的学术论文，并都在重要的学术期刊上正式发表过。这些论文分为两大类：一类讨论经济学的基本问题——偏好和选择；一类则讨论一些具体的经济现象，属于行为经济学思想和理论模型的应用部分。《行为经济学新进展》第一部分（第1章）全面地综述了行为经济学的来龙去脉、主要思想、存在的问题以及未来的发展趋势。第二部分（第2至13章）讨论了经济活动中参与人的偏好和选择问题，主要涉及四个方面的内容：一是禀赋效应和心智账户；二是不确定下的决策和前景理论；三是跨期决策和时间偏好；四是公平和社会偏好。《行为经济学新进展》的第三部分（第14至24章）展示了行为经济学家对三个主要经济领域的看法：一是宏观经济领域，主要涉及心智账户和自我控制对储蓄的影响；双曲线贴现和货币幻觉等对宏观经济政策的影响；以及社会偏好对就业的影响。二是劳动经济学方面，主要涉及公平和互惠等社会偏好对劳动供给以及经济参与人激励的影响。三是金融领域，也就是现在流行的行为金融学。该领域的三篇代表性论文分别展示了短视损失厌恶等心理因素对于股权溢价之谜、投资者行为以及房地产市场价格波动的作用。该书的最后一部分（第25章和第26章）则专门收入两篇论文，探讨个体决策的本质和过程，以期构建行为经济学的未来基石。

《国际汉藏语研究译丛:境外汉语历史语法研究文选》收录了15篇具有代表性的关于境外汉语历史语法研究的学术论文，包括《中国语法札记》《汉语语法的变迁》《从SVO到SOV语序变化的解释》《古汉语句法演变中的韵律制约》《上古汉语的语序》《说中古汉语的使成结构》等，代表了境外汉语历史语法研究的最高水平。

《古代文史研究新探》是作者在古代文史方面的论文结果,包括古籍整理、古代语文、古代历史、古器物4部分内容。

題名/著者 民國以來國史研究的回顧與展望研討會論文集/ 國立臺灣大學歷史學系編輯
版次 初版
出版項 [臺北市] : 國立臺灣大學歷史學系, 民81
稽核項 3冊 : 圖, 地圖; 27公分
ISBN 9579019118 (全套: 精裝 )
9579019126 (全套: 平裝 )
9579019169 (上冊: 平裝 )
9579019177 (中冊: 平裝 )
9579019185 (下冊: 平裝 )
附註 部份內容為英文、 日文

本书汇集了原中国历史博物馆馆长、考古学家俞伟超先生1982年 以来有关考古学理论的论述、对话录共十六篇。编成本书后，俞伟超先生曾对其中若干文章的内容，作过少量修改。这期间是他学术思想变化的重要阶段。读者从中不仅能看到他对考古学内涵理解的逐渐变化情况及其一系列看法，而且从中也能了解到考古学以外的一些东西，特别是一位学者对人生对事业不断探求的心境地。俞伟超先生是我国很有影响的考古学家，他的学术思想，特别是近几年关于新考古学理论的探索，在学术界产生了较大反响。

本丛书试图以浅显的文字和简明的方式，对大学、中学语言教师以及广大语文工作者和学习者介绍现代语言学各领域、各流派的基本理论。现代语言学是一门迅捷发展、方面极广的科学。它所研究的对象是语言，是承载信息的工具，而信息的传递和处理关系到社会文化的繁荣。因此它是现代杜会中的一门关键性科学。这门科学所提出的问题等待着有心的学习者去思考，它所提出的答案需要加以验证。

《思想与方法：近代中国的文化政治与知识建构》是2014年由北京师范大学举办的"思想与方法：近代中国的文化政治与知识建构"国际高端对话暨学术论坛会议文集。为迎接2015该论坛的再次召开，此次将2014年论坛成果集结出版。
《思想与方法：近代中国的文化政治与知识建构》汇编了海内外著名高校和研究机构的著名学者，如法兰西学院院士、人文及政治学院院士巴斯蒂，哥廷根大学汉学讲座教授施耐德，四川大学杰出教授罗志田等人的阐述，希望通过高层次的思想交锋，探讨如何在中国问题的内在脉络中探究近代变革的深刻意义。

隋唐时代国势强盛，周边各国使节络绎于途。学术界习惯按中国王朝兴替，将遣隋使与遣唐使分而视之，但从东亚区域交流的角度看，两者有机衔接，故《中国书籍文库：东亚坐标中的遣隋唐使研究》统称之为“遣隋唐使”。
《中国书籍文库：东亚坐标中的遣隋唐使研究》分“东亚视域”、“历史波澜”、“时代先觉”、“典章制度”、“文学艺术”5编，由中日韩三国学者共同执笔。
第一编以东亚为视角，探讨遣隋唐使的国际背景、历史意义、现实启示；第二编考察遣隋唐使产生、发展、变化、中止的历程；第三编为这一时代的奇人异士立传；第四编叙述隋唐时代的典章制度对周边国家的影响；第五编政治外交背后文人雅士的诗文交流。
东亚使节与西域使节不同之处，在于他们在完成外交任务之外，热衷于文化交流而非贸易活动，这是《中国书籍文库：东亚坐标中的遣隋唐使研究》叙述重点。

Phonetically Based Phonology is centred around the hypothesis that phonologies of languages are determined by phonetic principles; that is, phonetic patterns involving ease of articulation and perception are expressed linguistically as grammatical constraints. This book brings together a team of scholars to provide a wide-ranging study of phonetically based phonology. It investigates the role of phonetics in many phonological phenomena - such as assimilation, vowel reduction, vowel harmony, syllable weight, contour line distribution, metathesis, lenition, sonority sequencing, and the Obligatory Contour Principle (OCP) - exploring in particular the phonetic bases of phonological markedness in these key areas. The analyses also illustrate several analytical strategies whereby phonological sound patterns can be related to their phonological underpinnings. Each chapter includes a tutorial discussion of the phonetics on which the phonological discussion is based. Diverse and comprehensive in its coverage, Phonetically Based Phonology will be welcomed by all linguists interested in the relationship between phonetics and phonological theory.

本书是作者六十多年来学术研究成果的汇集，全书大体包括以下几方面内容：考论《仪礼》写作年代、宗周礼乐文明以及汉代经学（尤其是礼学）的形成和发展；古文字研究；考述古代名物、风俗；介绍和评价有关古代礼仪、古典文献以及清代学者的未刊书稿等。作者说：“治经治礼不易，只有心除‘魔障’，胸臆如水，方能专注向学，趋于会通”。

制度、契约与组织：从新制度经济学角度的透视，ISBN：9787505832992，作者：（美）罗纳德·H.科斯（Ronald H.Coase）等著；（法）克劳德·梅纳尔（Claude Menard）编；刘刚[等]译；刘刚译

自十九世纪以来，西域考古研究领域出土了大量文献资料，特别是已经不再使用的丰富多彩的古典语言文字（即死文字），是我们了解当时东西方社会以及丝绸之路沿线各民族、文化、宗教等领域不为史料所记载的秘史的钥匙，也是复原丝绸之路昔日辉煌而兼容并蓄的古代文化不可或缺的重要实物资料。本论文集即收录了中外学术界著名学者对这些人类语言的“化石”的最新研究成果。

一 本书收录了20世纪汉语词汇研究的主要论著350余种及论文篇目11000余条。范围以现代汉语词汇学与语义学的理论研究与应用研究为主，兼及词汇史、词汇学史、词汇对比的研究，以及语言教学、中文信息处理、词典学、语法学中与词汇语义问题有关的部分研究成果。论文中还专门分出了一类词汇学论著评论。
二 所收著作大都撰写了提要，提供了书名、出版单位和时间、字数、印数等基本信息。这些信息以编者所藏之版次为准，而不求版次的最早与流传过程。尽量反映出书的主要篇章及后记、附录等，以给读者一个完整的印象，力求在有限的篇幅反映该书的基本内容与特点。一般不作评价，但在内容的取舍和叙述中自然会或多或少留下编者判断的痕迹。
三 所收论文的时间下限一般为2001年底，部分重要语言学刊物下限为2003年中。论文篇目包括篇我、作者、文章出处和出版时间。如2001.1即表示2000年第1期。高校学报未作特别注明的一般都为哲学社会科学版。
四 著作提要和论文索引均按类编排，提要部分共分6大类11小类，索引部分共分8大类71类。同类中按发表日期排列。著作按编者所读到版次年月排列。

《中国中古史集刊》第一辑共收录专题论文20篇。包括中古时期政治、经济、宗教、医疗等诸多方面，涉及面广，新论叠出，夹杂着宗教史、民族史、简牍学等一系列的学问。其中魏晋南北朝史方面的论文主要讨论了北方的世家大族、朝代事件新看法等一系列问题，隋唐史方面则涉及美术史、墓志考释等方面的内容。
《中国中古史集刊》是“中国中古史前沿论坛”的学术阵地。论坛由陕西师范大学历史文化学院与华中师范大学历史文化学院共同发起，致力于团结国内外中国中古史学界同仁，打造优异的交流平台与对话空间。论坛常设机构由“中国中古史前沿论坛”筹委会与《中国中古史集刊》编委会组成。集刊每年出版一辑，以会议论文为支撑，同时接受公开投稿，并严格遵守匿名审稿制度。我们期待同道携手，兼收并蓄，砥砺争鸣，充分展示杰出中青年学者的最新研究成果，促进学术事业的薪火相传与传统文化的开拓创新。