本研究は、清朝乾隆嘉慶期に活躍した学者翁方綱(1733～1818)の詩経研究書である手稿本『詩附記』に基づいて、その研究理念と方法論を解明することを目指す。翁方綱は、戴震・段玉裁・王念孫・王引之らといった、清朝考証学の方法論を確立し、学術界をリードした人々と同時代に活躍しながら、彼らとはやや異なるスタンスによって特色ある学問成果を残した人物である。そのような彼の詩経学を考察することにより、清朝詩経学の学術的多様性とその発展過程を探る手掛かりを得ることが期待される。
報告者は、他の時代、他の学者との比較という手法によって、翁方綱の詩経研究の特徴を明らかにすることを目指した。主に比較の対象としたのは、宋代詩経学の代表者である朱熹（1130～1200）と厳粲（生卒年不詳）、および清代の戴震（1723～1777）である。これによって、本年は以下のことを解明するに至った。
一、翁方綱は、詩経の詩篇が本来的な性格として、その意味内容を一義的または完全に確定できないものであると考え、正確な解釈を得るために過度に理屈や考証に頼る研究方法を批判した。これは、彼が詩経の詩篇を「古詩」として捉え、混沌として曖昧な部分を含んでおり、それが内容の豊かさ、味わい深さを生んでいると考えたためである。彼は、朱熹・厳粲・戴震と比較して、より詩経の文学性を重視した詩経研究を行ったと言うことができる。
二、翁方綱は、詩経の詩篇を「断章取義」するという伝統的な利用のあり方を考察し、利用者がどのような状況で断章取義したかという観点を導入することにより、断章取義の実例を詩篇の原義の解明に役立たせた。断章取義は、古典の原義には無頓着に、その表現のみを利用し自由に意味を付与することと理解され、故に一般には古典研究資料としては無価値と考えられていたが、翁方綱はそれを詩経研究に積極的に利用する道を開いたと言うことができる。かつ、彼の断章取義についての認識は、彼と同時代の江戸時代の日本の詩経学者と極めて対照的であり、これは日中の詩経観・古典観の差異を表す重要なポイントでもある。
This study is based on the Shijing Research Book, holograph of "Shifuji" by Weng Fanggang (1733～1818) a scholar from the Qing Dynasty Qianlong Jiaqing period. The objective is to clarify his research ideology and methodology. Weng Fanggang was a leading scholar of his time along with Dai Zhen, Duan Yucai, Wang Niansun and Wang Yinzhi. These scholars established the methodology of the study of ancient texts during the Qing Dynasty.  What set Weng Fanggang apart from his colleagues was his unique erspective, and he left a legacy of academic achievements. Through a discussion of his Shijing studies, it is hoped that some clues to the academic overview and the process of development of Qing Dynasty Shijing studies will be understood. 
The main purpose of this study is to define the essential characteristics of Weng Fanggang's Shijing studies, through a comparative study with his contemporaries, as well as scholars from other periods.  For this purpose, Zhu Xi 朱熹 (1130 – 1200), Yan Can 嚴粲 (exact date of birth and death unknown),authorities of the Shijing studies during the Song Dynasty, and Dai Zhen 戴震 (1723 – 1777) from the Qing Dynasty, was selected.  The following findings were made: 
Firstly, Weng Fanggang believed that because of its inherent characteristics, the verses in the Shijing could not be interpreted in an unequivocal manner nor could its meaning be understood in any absolute terms.  He criticized those who for the sake of accuracy in terms of interpretation, relied too heavily on logic and documentation in terms of their methodologies.  He argued that the verses in the Shijing could be defined as "ancient poetry", characterized by chaotic and ambiguous elements, and this at the same time is what makes them richer in terms of depth and profundity.  In comparison to Zhu Xi, Yan Can and Dai Zhen, his research placed more importance on the literary nature of the Shijing. 
Secondly, Weng Fanggang investigated the traditional "misappropriation" (「断章取義」) of the verses of the Shijing.  Through focusing on specific situations in which these were made, examples were used to shed light on  the primary meaning of these verses.  Traditionally, misappropriations were understood to be divorced from the original meaning of the classic and the author took the liberty to solely take advantage of the literary expression and attach his own meanings to the words.  Because of this, misappropriations were deemed to be without value in terms of reference materials for studies of the ancient texts.  However, it should be noted that Weng Fanggang was proactive in leveraging these to further Shijing research.  In addition, Weng Fanggang's perception of misappropriation is diametric to the extreme to his contemporaries in Japan from the Edo Period.  Hence, this is an important point when making a comparative study of the perceptions of Chinese and Japanese scholars with regards to the Shijing, as well as discourses on any Chinese classics.