KKS 51: Difference between revisions
From My Wiki
No edit summary Tag: Reverted |
No edit summary Tag: Manual revert |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
山<ruby>桜<rt>ざくら</rt></ruby>わが<ruby>見<rt>身</rt></ruby>に<ruby>来<rt>く</rt></ruby>れば<ruby>春霞<rt>ゝるかすみ</rt></ruby>峯にも<ruby>尾<rt>お</rt></ruby>にも<ruby>立<rt>た</rt></ruby>ち<ruby>隠<rt>かく</rt></ruby>しつゝ | 山<ruby>桜<rt>ざくら</rt></ruby>わが<ruby>見<rt>身</rt></ruby>に<ruby>来<rt>く</rt></ruby>れば<ruby>春霞<rt>ゝるかすみ</rt></ruby>峯にも<ruby>尾<rt>お</rt></ruby>にも<ruby>立<rt>た</rt></ruby>ち<ruby>隠<rt>かく</rt></ruby>しつゝ | ||
* In the base text this poem is inserted in the upper margin above the preface for the next poem. No other text lacks this poem, so this was likely a copying mistake based on both 50 and 51 starting with 山. | * In the base text this poem is inserted in the upper margin above the preface for the next poem. No other text lacks this poem, so this was likely a copying mistake based on both 50 and 51 starting with 山. | ||
* It is difficult to tell whether the use of 身 in the base text instead of 見 indicates a difference in interpretation by the copyist. I have not seen a commentary (ancient or modern) that interprets this as 我が身に来れば so I am inclined to think that the 身 is simply a 変体仮名 form. | * It is difficult to tell whether the use of 身 in the base text instead of 見 indicates a difference in interpretation by the copyist. I have not seen a commentary (ancient or modern) that interprets this as 我が身に来れば so I am inclined to think that the 身 is simply a 変体仮名 form. | ||
* Takeoka notes that 山桜 is written without voicing in the 万葉集, but he thinks there is insufficient evidence to change the traditional voiced やまざすら reading. | * Takeoka notes that 山桜 is written without voicing in the 万葉集, but he thinks there is insufficient evidence to change the traditional voiced やまざすら reading. | ||
Revision as of 19:32, 20 October 2025
山桜わが見に来れば春霞峯にも尾にも立ち隠しつゝ
- In the base text this poem is inserted in the upper margin above the preface for the next poem. No other text lacks this poem, so this was likely a copying mistake based on both 50 and 51 starting with 山.
- It is difficult to tell whether the use of 身 in the base text instead of 見 indicates a difference in interpretation by the copyist. I have not seen a commentary (ancient or modern) that interprets this as 我が身に来れば so I am inclined to think that the 身 is simply a 変体仮名 form.
- Takeoka notes that 山桜 is written without voicing in the 万葉集, but he thinks there is insufficient evidence to change the traditional voiced やまざすら reading.
