In ancient Chinese, “shou (首) and “tou (頭)”, both of which were synonyms, referred to the human head. However, they were different from each other in the senses of the original, extended, and style meaning, respectively. The original meaning of “shou” refers to “head” with emphasis on the face, and “tou” refers specifically to “top of head”. In terms of the extended meaning, the most remarkable difference between “shou” and “tou” is that “shou” has the usage of verb while “tou” does not. “Tou” is grammaticalized as a suffix while “shou” is not. Therefore, we deduce the reason why “shou” and “tou” are not extended synchronously, and reach a conclusion that the core meanings of the two words are different. The core meanings confine the semantic changes of the synonym. In addition, the usage of verb of “shou” and the grammaticalization of “tou” have been explained at the core meaning level, respectively. As for the style meaning, “shou” is thought to be more elegant than “tou”.

古代文章當中有叫‘反訓’的特殊訓詁現象, 所謂‘反訓’是指一個詞同時具 有相反對立的意味而言的。例如, ≪論語ㆍ泰伯篇≫有一句說, “舜有五臣, 而天下治. 武王曰: 予有亂臣十人。” 這兒的‘亂臣’表示‘治臣’的意思, 但在 ≪孟子ㆍ滕文公下≫的“孔子成春秋, 而亂臣賊子懼。”中的‘亂’表示搗亂的意 思。如此, 把一個詞同時有相反或相對的意項的詞, 在訓詁學上叫‘反訓詞’。 本稿從這一思路出發, 觀察反訓的由來, 幷通過分析其例子, 要査明反 訓的産生原因和類型。 反訓可分爲內部與外部的成因。內部的成因是由起因於本意的分化和引 伸而産生的。外部的成因是由起因於本意和通假關係而産生的。本意分化反 訓又可分爲‘美惡同詞’, ‘施受同詞’, ‘相對同詞’。通假反訓可有本意和通假意 之間的反訓與通假意之間的反訓兩種。有一些學者根本不同意通假反訓, 但 我認爲一個詞不僅有包括本意和引伸意內部的意項, 而且有起因於假借和通 假的外部的意項, 詞意之間的關係幷不重要, 一個詞旣然有着相反意或相對 意活用的話, 按照其活用結果, 反訓現象也是自然而然地産生的。

Through a deep research of the Grammatical fetures and Syntax function of the Classical Chinese Pronoun—“Zi”, while it is in the time known as separatedly-used, this paper finds that the Classical “Zi” owns three functions known as Correlative, Emphasis and Analogy. Sincet he Antecedents of “Zi” is able to be discovered in its jurisdictional term regions, it proves that “Zi” accept local binding, which follows the First principle of Binding theory. Since the Classical “Zi” is more similar to the Correlatives in Western languages including the English language, it can be categorized as reflexive pronoun among all Correlatives. Where ever the position of “Zi” in the terms, it is just a regional reflexive pronoun, and can only find its Antecedents in its jurisdictional regions which bound to the Binding theory of Chomsky. Therefore, “Zi” is not the factor which explains the reason why “Ziji” is able to accept Long-distance binding.