启蒙话语下的白话文论争
|
摘要
白话文从清末时的提倡到“五四”时的全面完成，前后只有二十多年的时间，但这一完成从文化内涵上来看是发生了质的改变。白话文取代文言文代表着传统文化向现代文化转型的完成，也显示了启蒙话语取代传统话语而走上它的主流位置。其后从30年代到世纪末的几十年时间里，白话文的论争也始终处在启蒙话语或显或隐的主宰下。本文试图通过对这一个世纪的白话文论争作一重新审视，阐释启蒙话语在这一次次的论争中所起到的主宰作用。全文共分四部分：
第一部分：白话文取代文言文的具有历史必然性，但近代提倡者却没有能够完成这一历史重任也具有其必然的历史原因。
第二部分：“五四”时期白话文的胜利是启蒙者、反启蒙者、文白折中论者以及汉字拼音化论者等几种历史合力共同作用的结果，其中启蒙话语在这些合力中居于主流位置，它支配着论争的方向。
第三部分：大众化文艺运动是对“五四”白话文的反思与推进，但此期政治话语的显性支配使得白话文论争离开学术而进入政治派别之争，其后大众语的提倡是反对“文言复古”论调的一种策略。
第四部分：世纪末知识分子地位的恢复，政治话语的消退，启蒙话语再次走入显性支配地位，对“五四”白话文的价值重估又成为了人们论争的焦点，显示了学理关怀下的人文精神。
Since written vernacular Chinese was recommended at the end of The Qing dynasty, it took only more than 20 years for it to be completed throughout the May Fourth Movement. But it was just this completion that brought the change of the quality seen from cultural intension. Written vernacular Chinese replacing writing in classical Chinese had completed the transition from traditional culture to modern culture, having shown that the enlightened words were in the position of mainstream replacing the traditional words. Thereafter in dozens of years from the thirties to the end of century, controversies of written vernacular Chinese had been dominated either apparently or latently by the enlightened words. This text attempts to do an examination of the controversy of written vernacular Chinese of this century, explaining that the enlightened words had played a domination role in these controversies. The full text includes four parts:
The first part: Written vernacular Chinese replacing writing in classical Chinese was historically necessary. But it had its inevitable historical reasons that persons who recommended hadn't finished this historical important task at the end of Qing dynasty.
The second part: The victory of written vernacular Chinese in the May Fourth Movement owed to the several kinds of historical joint efforts that included enlightener, anti-enlightener, persons who were eclecticism and persons who advocated alphabetic writings. Among them, the enlighten words occupied position of mainstream and arranged the direction of these controversies.
The third part: The popular literature and art sport was the introspection and moving forward of written vernacular Chinese of the May Fourth Movement. But it made the controversy of written vernacular Chinese leave academy and enter the political faction battle that dominance of the political words was apparent this period. Thereafter, to recommend masses languages was just a tactics against classical Chinese restoring ancient ways of view.
The fourth part: With the recovering of Intellectual status and disappearing of political words, the enlightened words had entered into apparent dominance status again at the end of the century. Revaluation of written vernacular Chinese sports during the May Fourth Movement became the focus of controversy, showing human spirits under the academy care.
第一部分：白话文取代文言文的具有历史必然性，但近代提倡者却没有能够完成这一历史重任也具有其必然的历史原因。
第二部分：“五四”时期白话文的胜利是启蒙者、反启蒙者、文白折中论者以及汉字拼音化论者等几种历史合力共同作用的结果，其中启蒙话语在这些合力中居于主流位置，它支配着论争的方向。
第三部分：大众化文艺运动是对“五四”白话文的反思与推进，但此期政治话语的显性支配使得白话文论争离开学术而进入政治派别之争，其后大众语的提倡是反对“文言复古”论调的一种策略。
第四部分：世纪末知识分子地位的恢复，政治话语的消退，启蒙话语再次走入显性支配地位，对“五四”白话文的价值重估又成为了人们论争的焦点，显示了学理关怀下的人文精神。
Since written vernacular Chinese was recommended at the end of The Qing dynasty, it took only more than 20 years for it to be completed throughout the May Fourth Movement. But it was just this completion that brought the change of the quality seen from cultural intension. Written vernacular Chinese replacing writing in classical Chinese had completed the transition from traditional culture to modern culture, having shown that the enlightened words were in the position of mainstream replacing the traditional words. Thereafter in dozens of years from the thirties to the end of century, controversies of written vernacular Chinese had been dominated either apparently or latently by the enlightened words. This text attempts to do an examination of the controversy of written vernacular Chinese of this century, explaining that the enlightened words had played a domination role in these controversies. The full text includes four parts:
The first part: Written vernacular Chinese replacing writing in classical Chinese was historically necessary. But it had its inevitable historical reasons that persons who recommended hadn't finished this historical important task at the end of Qing dynasty.
The second part: The victory of written vernacular Chinese in the May Fourth Movement owed to the several kinds of historical joint efforts that included enlightener, anti-enlightener, persons who were eclecticism and persons who advocated alphabetic writings. Among them, the enlighten words occupied position of mainstream and arranged the direction of these controversies.
The third part: The popular literature and art sport was the introspection and moving forward of written vernacular Chinese of the May Fourth Movement. But it made the controversy of written vernacular Chinese leave academy and enter the political faction battle that dominance of the political words was apparent this period. Thereafter, to recommend masses languages was just a tactics against classical Chinese restoring ancient ways of view.
The fourth part: With the recovering of Intellectual status and disappearing of political words, the enlightened words had entered into apparent dominance status again at the end of the century. Revaluation of written vernacular Chinese sports during the May Fourth Movement became the focus of controversy, showing human spirits under the academy care.
引文
[1] 郭延礼．中国近代文学发展史(三卷本)．北京：高等教育出版社，2001．7．
[2] 郭延礼．中西文化碰撞与近代文学．济南：山东教育出版社，1999．12．
[3] 范伯群．朱栋霖．1898——1949中外文学比较史．南京：江苏教育出版社，1993．9．
[4] 马亚中．中华文学通览·近代卷·暮鼓晨钟．北京：中华书局，1997．3．
[5] 叶易．中国近代文艺思想论稿．上海：复旦大学出版社，1985．1．
[6] 时萌．中国近代文学论稿．上海：上海古籍出版社，1986．10．
[7] 近代文学史料．中国社会科学院文学研究所《近代文学史料》编辑部．北京：中国社会科学院出版社，1985．12．
[8] 刘炎生．中国现代文学论争史．广州：广东人民出版社，1999．12．
[9] 皇甫晓涛．现代中国新文学与新文化．太原：山西人民出版社，1997．3．
[10] 李世涛．知识分子立场——民族主义与转型期中国的命运．北京：时代文艺出版社，2001．1．
[11] 陈旭麓．近代中国社会的新陈代谢．上海：上海人民出版社，1992．7．
[12] 丁守和．中国近代启蒙思潮(上、中、下)．北京：社会科学文献出版社，1999．11．
[13] 陶东风．社会转型与当代知识分子．上海：三联书店，1999．9．
[14] 姜义华．胡适学术文集．北京：中华书局，1993．9．
[15] 李世涛．知识分子立场——激进与保守之间的动荡．北京：时代文艺出版社，2002．1．
[16] 简·爱切生．语言的变化：进步还是退化．北京：语文出版社，1997．
[17] 胡明扬编．西方语言学名著选读(上、下)．北京：中国人民大学出版社，1988．6．
[18] 罗兰·巴特尔．符号学原理．北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店，1999．
[19] 文学运动史料选．上海：上海教育出版社，1979．
[20] 赵家璧主编．中国新文学大系·史料·索引．上海：上海文艺出版社，1987．
[21] 许纪霖、陈达凯主编．中国现代化史．第1卷．北京：三联书店，1995．
[22] 贾植芳主编．中国现代代文学主潮．上海：复旦大学出版社，1990．
[23] 赵家璧主编．中国新文学大系·建设理论集．上海：上海文艺出版社，1987．
[24] 罗成琰．阎真．儒家文化与二十世纪中国文学．文学评论，2000．1．
[25] 谭桂林．二十世纪初文言白话论争的中西之辩．理论与创作，2003．3．
[26] 洪峻峰．瞿秋白与五四中西文化论争．厦门大学学报哲社版，1989．2．
[27] 沈卫威．中国文学的现代转型——现代文化意义上的阐释．青海师范大学学报(社会科学版)，1994．2．
[28] 姜振昌．邢光．中国文学现代转型的内趋力和基本倾向．理论学刊，2002．5．
[29] 骆寒超．论中国诗歌向现代转型前夕的格局．浙江学刊，1994．5．
[30] 王确．儒文化与中国现代文学的精神走向．东北师大学报(哲学社会科学版)，2000．1．
[31] 王桂妹．话语系统转换的历史合法性——“五四”文化激进主义与白话文运动．东北师大学报(哲学社会科学版)，2001．6．
[32] 殷国明．“体用之争”与白话文运动——20世纪中国语言变革与文学发展关系的探讨．河北学刊，2001．6．
[33] 高玉．胡适白话文理论新评——从胡适与“学衡派”的分野入手．学术研究，2001．10．
[34] 高玉．胡适白话文学理论检讨．湖北大学学报(哲学社会科学版)，2000．2．
[35] 徐国利．叶挺松．胡适与白话文教育改革．安徽大学学报(哲学社会科学版)1998．1．
[36] 郑国民．近代普及教育思想的发展对文言文和白话文教学的选择．北京师范大学学报(社会科学版)，1999．4．
[37] 胡逢祥．试论中国近代史上的文化保守主义．华东师范大学学报．哲社版，2000．1．
[38] 张法．百年文学三次转型浅议．天津社会科学，1998．1．
[2] 郭延礼．中西文化碰撞与近代文学．济南：山东教育出版社，1999．12．
[3] 范伯群．朱栋霖．1898——1949中外文学比较史．南京：江苏教育出版社，1993．9．
[4] 马亚中．中华文学通览·近代卷·暮鼓晨钟．北京：中华书局，1997．3．
[5] 叶易．中国近代文艺思想论稿．上海：复旦大学出版社，1985．1．
[6] 时萌．中国近代文学论稿．上海：上海古籍出版社，1986．10．
[7] 近代文学史料．中国社会科学院文学研究所《近代文学史料》编辑部．北京：中国社会科学院出版社，1985．12．
[8] 刘炎生．中国现代文学论争史．广州：广东人民出版社，1999．12．
[9] 皇甫晓涛．现代中国新文学与新文化．太原：山西人民出版社，1997．3．
[10] 李世涛．知识分子立场——民族主义与转型期中国的命运．北京：时代文艺出版社，2001．1．
[11] 陈旭麓．近代中国社会的新陈代谢．上海：上海人民出版社，1992．7．
[12] 丁守和．中国近代启蒙思潮(上、中、下)．北京：社会科学文献出版社，1999．11．
[13] 陶东风．社会转型与当代知识分子．上海：三联书店，1999．9．
[14] 姜义华．胡适学术文集．北京：中华书局，1993．9．
[15] 李世涛．知识分子立场——激进与保守之间的动荡．北京：时代文艺出版社，2002．1．
[16] 简·爱切生．语言的变化：进步还是退化．北京：语文出版社，1997．
[17] 胡明扬编．西方语言学名著选读(上、下)．北京：中国人民大学出版社，1988．6．
[18] 罗兰·巴特尔．符号学原理．北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店，1999．
[19] 文学运动史料选．上海：上海教育出版社，1979．
[20] 赵家璧主编．中国新文学大系·史料·索引．上海：上海文艺出版社，1987．
[21] 许纪霖、陈达凯主编．中国现代化史．第1卷．北京：三联书店，1995．
[22] 贾植芳主编．中国现代代文学主潮．上海：复旦大学出版社，1990．
[23] 赵家璧主编．中国新文学大系·建设理论集．上海：上海文艺出版社，1987．
[24] 罗成琰．阎真．儒家文化与二十世纪中国文学．文学评论，2000．1．
[25] 谭桂林．二十世纪初文言白话论争的中西之辩．理论与创作，2003．3．
[26] 洪峻峰．瞿秋白与五四中西文化论争．厦门大学学报哲社版，1989．2．
[27] 沈卫威．中国文学的现代转型——现代文化意义上的阐释．青海师范大学学报(社会科学版)，1994．2．
[28] 姜振昌．邢光．中国文学现代转型的内趋力和基本倾向．理论学刊，2002．5．
[29] 骆寒超．论中国诗歌向现代转型前夕的格局．浙江学刊，1994．5．
[30] 王确．儒文化与中国现代文学的精神走向．东北师大学报(哲学社会科学版)，2000．1．
[31] 王桂妹．话语系统转换的历史合法性——“五四”文化激进主义与白话文运动．东北师大学报(哲学社会科学版)，2001．6．
[32] 殷国明．“体用之争”与白话文运动——20世纪中国语言变革与文学发展关系的探讨．河北学刊，2001．6．
[33] 高玉．胡适白话文理论新评——从胡适与“学衡派”的分野入手．学术研究，2001．10．
[34] 高玉．胡适白话文学理论检讨．湖北大学学报(哲学社会科学版)，2000．2．
[35] 徐国利．叶挺松．胡适与白话文教育改革．安徽大学学报(哲学社会科学版)1998．1．
[36] 郑国民．近代普及教育思想的发展对文言文和白话文教学的选择．北京师范大学学报(社会科学版)，1999．4．
[37] 胡逢祥．试论中国近代史上的文化保守主义．华东师范大学学报．哲社版，2000．1．
[38] 张法．百年文学三次转型浅议．天津社会科学，1998．1．
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |