Fenbiewenand Leizengziare two kinds of complex phenomenon ofChinese character which were coming from WangYun's research on Chongwen,both ofthem were from the point of view of character creation,they are different fromGujinzi,the term of contacting the usage of characters in ancient bibliography.Fenbiewen, LeizengZiand GujinZiare heterogeneous concepts due to theirdifferent academic backgrounds and research purposes.Beacuse of different pointof view，they have intersection of materials,so WangYun occasionally use Fenbiewenor Leizengzito explain those Jinziof Gujinziis in order to explain the causeof Jinzi,but doesn't mean he changed the historical definitions of Gujinzi. XuHaois the origin of the Gujinzidistortion,the different usage of a word in differentages' documents had been paralleled by XuHao with the terms like FenbiewenandLiezengzi,and then he inclined to tell that Gujinzimeans the phenomenon thatcharacters creation with the radicals increasing,so later misled people becomesto believe Gujinzimeans the phenomenon that characters creation with the radicalsincreasing just like Fenbiewenand Leizengzi,then they usually believe this isWangYun'sGujinziconcept but in fact this is not true.

“分別文”、“累增字”是王筠研究漢字“重文”時從造字角度提出的文字增繁現象，與溝通文獻用字的“古今字”有著不同的學術背景和研究目的，屬於不同性質的概念。由於角度不同，它們在材料分析上有交集，所以王筠偶爾用“分別文”或“累增字”指稱“古今字”的“今字”，意在解釋這些“今字”的成因，並未改變“古今字”的歷史定義。徐灝是曲解“古今字”本義的源頭，他把王筠的“分別文”、“累增字”跟“載籍古今本”並列，而且在分析說明時把“古今字”主要指向“造字相承，增偏旁”現象。後人受此誤導，進一步將“古今字”完全等同於具有“造字相承”關係的“分別文”、“累增字”，並認為這是王筠的“古今字”觀念，其實不符合王筠的本意。

• 李運富
• 蔣志遠