CAJ | 학술논문

学者大都将马王堆?天文气象杂占?、?睡虎地秦墓竹简?日书甲种?、?天水放马滩秦简?日书乙种?等出土文献中“是〓”释为“是是”，也有学者将“是〓”释为“是謂”。“是〓”释为“是谓”，其理据缺乏相应资料做观点支撑，不符合重文号的使用条件，且违背语言的社会性原则。出土文献中“是〓”应释为“是是”。
학자대도장마왕퇴?천문기상잡점?、?수호지진묘죽간?일서갑충?、?천수방마탄진간?일서을충?등출토문헌중“시〓”석위“시시”，야유학자장“시〓”석위“시위”。“시〓”석위“시위”，기리거결핍상응자료주관점지탱，불부합중문호적사용조건，차위배어언적사회성원칙。출토문헌중“시〓”응석위“시시”。
There were some sentences of “shi〓”(是〓) found in Divination about Astronomical and Meteorological Phenomena unearthed in Mawangdui,and in ri shu jia zhong (日书·甲种) from tombs of Qin Dynasty in Shuihudi,and also in ri shu · yi zhong (日书·乙种) from Qin tombs in Fangmatan, Tianshui. The word “shi〓”(是〓) was generally interpreted as“shi shi ”(是是) . From 2008,some scholars believed that the word should be interpreted as “shi wei”(是谓) . This explanation could not be accepted because it lacked enough supporting facts and violated social principles of language. The “shi〓”(是〓) in unearthed literatures should be interpreted as “shi shi ”(是是) .