<p>again, the text is korean related, in 17-18 century.</p>
<p>let’s started from “尤丈”, the <strong>尤</strong>菴先生, aka <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_Si-yeol" rel="nofollow noreferrer">宋時烈</a> was the father-in-law (<strong>丈</strong>人) of the author of the text in the question.</p>
<p>next, i think that the name provided in bracket are, incorrect. they did not match the terms used, or the flow of hidden meanings.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I just want to make sure whether the obituary (行狀) was composed about the deceased grandfather (祖考) or by the grandfather of 宋炳夏?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>the verse “再昨招宋炳夏商量，又更審其祖考所撰行狀” already stated, clearly:</p>
<p>and further (又更) examine (審) his (其 -&gt; 宋炳夏) grandfather (祖考) written (撰 -&gt; 撰寫) obituary (行狀)</p>
<p>the obituary (行狀) was written by 宋炳夏’s grandfather. well, who’s his grandpa, one need to check many documentations to find out.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-14T12:37:10.870Z
2021-12-14T12:37:10.870Z
水巷孑蠻
<p>Here is a sentence I have a problem with:</p>
<p>再昨招宋炳夏商量，又更審其祖考所撰行狀...</p>
<p>I just want to make sure whether the obituary (行狀) was composed <strong>about</strong> the deceased grandfather (祖考) or <strong>by</strong> the grandfather of 宋炳夏?</p>
<p>(EDIT) The context:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>比因人聞一種論議。則以為尤丈（宋時烈）於鑴以改注中庸等事，斥絕之既嚴，至其黨與，亦甚痛斥。以是輾轉，致有今日之事。浦渚趙相（趙翼），亦於大學改注，至曰沉潛三十年，不知朱說之是，愚說之非也。其為說若是，則難免非責，而拒闢之事終不加焉。今於墓道文字，讚揚無餘，則鑴之黨與見斥者，其可服罪乎。或已撰出則還推滅去，似無彼此取笑之資云云。⋯⋯此文若出，必有一場紛紜，以增斯文之厄，不是小事也。再昨招宋炳夏商量，
又更審其祖考（宋浚吉）所撰行狀，則記先老爺（趙翼）雅言，以為孔子之後集群儒而大成者，朱子也。其功多於孟子云云。若於大學，果有如言者之說，則其雅言豈有如此之理耶。以故使炳夏搜送刊行文集，則歸報以不得，極可歎也。</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-13T18:29:29.957Z
?再昨招宋炳夏商量. Again, inadequate information about the event.
r13
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-13T18:49:30.500Z
I edited the post
McCzajnik
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-13T19:22:32.710Z
Who 再昨招宋炳夏商量? I think 宋炳夏 was working with the "who" to exam the biography written by someone's (其) ancestor, and drew the conclusion that 孔子之後集群儒而大成者，朱子也。 Can you include more texts?
r13
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-13T19:33:58.367Z
I included full passage I have. From what I understand this means more or less:   宋炳夏 was summoned to discuss [certain matter],  and to further  examine what to include in his grandfather's obituary (?i.e. obituary devoted to his deceased grandfather?), as a result he wrote/recorded [?in the obituary?] fine words by 老爺.
McCzajnik
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-13T19:58:51.033Z
I still have difficulty connect 宋炳夏 to "其"祖考. I think the "此文" in 此文若出 holes the key - who wrote what that would stir up the chaos/controversy, and the "who (the author)" here can be the "其", who may be a third person other than 宋炳夏. By the way, 行狀 can be 行述或事略 of a  deceased person.
r13
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-13T22:20:53.217Z
Most likely the author is the ancestor (the passes away father, 先老爺)  of 宋炳夏. That's why 宋 was asked to collect the works (of his father). Preceding text to the quote may help to further clarify this.
joehua
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-13T22:48:30.417Z
Ok, I found a  longer version of this text (宋時烈 is its author): 比因人聞一種論議。則以為尤丈（宋時烈）於鑴以改注中庸等事，斥絕之既嚴，至其黨與，亦甚痛斥。以是輾轉，致有今日之事。浦渚趙相（趙翼），亦於大學改注，至曰沉潛三十年，不知朱說之是，愚說之非也。其為說若是，則難免非責，而拒闢之事終不加焉。今於墓道文字，讚揚無餘，則鑴之黨與見斥者，其可服罪乎。或已撰出則還推滅去，似無彼此取笑之資云云。⋯⋯此文若出，必有一場紛紜，以增斯文之厄，不是小事也。再昨招宋炳夏商量， 又更審其祖考（宋浚吉）所撰行狀，則記先老爺（趙翼）雅言，以為孔子之後集群儒而大成者，朱子也。其功多於孟子云云。若於大學，果有如言者之說，則其雅言豈有如此之理耶。以故使炳夏搜送刊行文集，則歸報以不得，極可歎也。
McCzajnik
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-12-13T23:03:32.307Z
Making better sense now. Why don't you move the above to your question, so someone can sort out the relationship between 宋時烈, 宋浚吉, and 宋炳夏. It seems 宋浚吉 is the grandfather of 宋時烈, who wrote something which was quite controversial. 宋炳夏 could be the 後人 of 宋時烈 and 宋浚吉, or non-related, but a consultant on this matter.
r13
<translation><grammar><classical-chinese>
who is the author of 行狀 in the phrase " 其祖考所撰行狀"
# who is the author of 行狀 in the phrase " 其祖考所撰行狀"

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-12-13)

Here is a sentence I have a problem with:

再昨招宋炳夏商量，又更審其祖考所撰行狀...

I just want to make sure whether the obituary (行狀) was composed **about** the deceased grandfather (祖考) or **by** the grandfather of 宋炳夏?

(EDIT) The context:

> 比因人聞一種論議。則以為尤丈（宋時烈）於鑴以改注中庸等事，斥絕之既嚴，至其黨與，亦甚痛斥。以是輾轉，致有今日之事。浦渚趙相（趙翼），亦於大學改注，至曰沉潛三十年，不知朱說之是，愚說之非也。其為說若是，則難免非責，而拒闢之事終不加焉。今於墓道文字，讚揚無餘，則鑴之黨與見斥者，其可服罪乎。或已撰出則還推滅去，似無彼此取笑之資云云。⋯⋯此文若出，必有一場紛紜，以增斯文之厄，不是小事也。再昨招宋炳夏商量，
> 又更審其祖考（宋浚吉）所撰行狀，則記先老爺（趙翼）雅言，以為孔子之後集群儒而大成者，朱子也。其功多於孟子云云。若於大學，果有如言者之說，則其雅言豈有如此之理耶。以故使炳夏搜送刊行文集，則歸報以不得，極可歎也。

**Tags:** translation, grammar, classical-chinese
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: ?再昨招宋炳夏商量. Again, inadequate information about the event.  
> **username_0**: I edited the post  
> **username_1**: Who 再昨招宋炳夏商量? I think 宋炳夏 was working with the "who" to exam the biography written by someone's (其) ancestor, and drew the conclusion that 孔子之後集群儒而大成者，朱子也。 Can you include more texts?  
> **username_0**: I included full passage I have. From what I understand this means more or less:   宋炳夏 was summoned to discuss [certain matter],  and to further  examine what to include in his grandfather's obituary (?i.e. obituary devoted to his deceased grandfather?), as a result he wrote/recorded [?in the obituary?] fine words by 老爺.  
> **username_1**: I still have difficulty connect 宋炳夏 to "其"祖考. I think the "此文" in 此文若出 holes the key - who wrote what that would stir up the chaos/controversy, and the "who (the author)" here can be the "其", who may be a third person other than 宋炳夏. By the way, 行狀 can be 行述或事略 of a  deceased person.  
> **username_2**: Most likely the author is the ancestor (the passes away father, 先老爺)  of 宋炳夏. That's why 宋 was asked to collect the works (of his father). Preceding text to the quote may help to further clarify this.  
> **username_0**: Ok, I found a  longer version of this text (宋時烈 is its author): 比因人聞一種論議。則以為尤丈（宋時烈）於鑴以改注中庸等事，斥絕之既嚴，至其黨與，亦甚痛斥。以是輾轉，致有今日之事。浦渚趙相（趙翼），亦於大學改注，至曰沉潛三十年，不知朱說之是，愚說之非也。其為說若是，則難免非責，而拒闢之事終不加焉。今於墓道文字，讚揚無餘，則鑴之黨與見斥者，其可服罪乎。或已撰出則還推滅去，似無彼此取笑之資云云。⋯⋯此文若出，必有一場紛紜，以增斯文之厄，不是小事也。再昨招宋炳夏商量， 又更審其祖考（宋浚吉）所撰行狀，則記先老爺（趙翼）雅言，以為孔子之後集群儒而大成者，朱子也。其功多於孟子云云。若於大學，果有如言者之說，則其雅言豈有如此之理耶。以故使炳夏搜送刊行文集，則歸報以不得，極可歎也。  
> **username_1**: Making better sense now. Why don't you move the above to your question, so someone can sort out the relationship between 宋時烈, 宋浚吉, and 宋炳夏. It seems 宋浚吉 is the grandfather of 宋時烈, who wrote something which was quite controversial. 宋炳夏 could be the 後人 of 宋時烈 and 宋浚吉, or non-related, but a consultant on this matter.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2021-12-14. Score: 0 | Accepted answer

again, the text is korean related, in 17-18 century.

let’s started from “尤丈”, the **尤**菴先生, aka [宋時烈](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_Si-yeol) was the father-in-law (**丈**人) of the author of the text in the question.

next, i think that the name provided in bracket are, incorrect. they did not match the terms used, or the flow of hidden meanings.

> I just want to make sure whether the obituary (行狀) was composed about the deceased grandfather (祖考) or by the grandfather of 宋炳夏?

the verse “再昨招宋炳夏商量，又更審其祖考所撰行狀” already stated, clearly:

and further (又更) examine (審) his (其 -> 宋炳夏) grandfather (祖考) written (撰 -> 撰寫) obituary (行狀)

the obituary (行狀) was written by 宋炳夏’s grandfather. well, who’s his grandpa, one need to check many documentations to find out.


---

