因循与渐变:20世纪前期初盛唐骈文研究述论
|
摘要
20世纪前期学界对初盛唐骈文研究分为两个阶段:新文化运动之前主要是复古派出于保存国粹而进行的维护骈文正宗的论争,他们以传统的治学方法来探讨骈文发展,对初盛唐骈文关注很少;新文化运动之后至新中国成立之前是现代学术体系建构的时期,骈文理论也渐趋现代性,这一时期初盛唐骈文研究在骈文史中已开始得到重视,突出了初盛唐骈文的独特性和重要性,但仅限于较为零散的探讨,而且没有专门的理论专著。因此,对20世纪前期初盛唐骈文研究史进行深入把握和细致勾勒,就具有了格外重要的研究意义。
The study of parallel prose in the early Tang Dynasty is divided into two stages in the early 20 th century.Prior to the new culture movement,it was mainly the argument of restoring ancient ways to preserve the quintessence of Chinese culture to maintain the authenticity of parallel prose.They discussed the development of parallel prose with traditional academic methods and paid little attention to it in the early Tang Dynasty.After the new cultural movement and before the founding of the People's Republic of China,it was the period when the modern academic system was constructed,and the parallel prose theory was becoming more and more modern.At the beginning of the prosperous Tang Dynasty,the research on parallel prose began to receive attention in the parallel prose history.This change highlights the uniqueness and importance of parallel prose of the early Tang Dynasty,but it is limited to scattered discussions and there is no special theoretical monograph.Therefore,it is of great significance to study the history of the early Tang Dynasty's parallel prose in the early 20 th century.
The study of parallel prose in the early Tang Dynasty is divided into two stages in the early 20 th century.Prior to the new culture movement,it was mainly the argument of restoring ancient ways to preserve the quintessence of Chinese culture to maintain the authenticity of parallel prose.They discussed the development of parallel prose with traditional academic methods and paid little attention to it in the early Tang Dynasty.After the new cultural movement and before the founding of the People's Republic of China,it was the period when the modern academic system was constructed,and the parallel prose theory was becoming more and more modern.At the beginning of the prosperous Tang Dynasty,the research on parallel prose began to receive attention in the parallel prose history.This change highlights the uniqueness and importance of parallel prose of the early Tang Dynasty,but it is limited to scattered discussions and there is no special theoretical monograph.Therefore,it is of great significance to study the history of the early Tang Dynasty's parallel prose in the early 20 th century.
引文
[1]孙梅.四六丛话[M].李金松,校点.北京:人民文学出版社,2010.
[2]刘纳.民初文学的一个奇景——骈文的兴盛[J].郑州大学学报:哲学社会科学版,1996(5).
[3]刘师培.文章源始[J].国粹学报,1905(1).
[4]刘师培.论文杂记[J].国粹学报,1905(4).
[5]刘师培.文说[J].国粹学报,1906(16).
[6]田北湖.论文章源流[J].国粹学报,1905(2).
[7]罗惇曧.文学源流[J].国粹学报,1906(16).
[8]刘师培.与人论文书.中古文学论集[M].陈引驰,编校.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1997.
[9]刘师培.骈文读本序.中古文学论集[M].陈引驰,编校.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1997.
[10]刘师培.广阮氏文言说.中古文学论集[M].陈引驰,编校.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1997.
[11]章太炎.讲文学.章太炎演讲集[M].章念驰,编订.上海:上海人民出版社,2011.
[12]章绛.文学论略[J].国粹学报,1907(21).
[13]谢无量.骈文指南[M]//谢无量文集:第7卷.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2011.
[14]洪迈.容斋随笔[M].孔凡礼,点校.北京:中华书局,2005.
[15]金秬香.骈文概论[M].上海:商务印书馆,1933.
[16]徐师曾.文体明辨序说[M].罗根泽,校点.北京:人民文学出版社,1962.
[17]钱基博.骈文通义[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2012.
[18]段玉裁.说文解字注[M].上海:上海书店出版社,1992.
[19]刘麟生.中国骈文史[M].北京:商务印书馆,1937.
[20]刘勰.文心雕龙[M].范文澜,校注.北京:人民文学出版社,1958.
[21]蒋伯潜,蒋祖怡.骈文与散文[M].上海:上海书店出版社,1997.
[22]朱一新.无邪堂答问[M].吕鸿儒,点校.北京:中华书局,2000.
[23]王先谦.骈文类纂[M].长春:吉林人民出版社,1998.
(1)按据明徐师曾《文体明辨序说》“批答”一条:“其后学士入院,试制诏批答共三篇,则求代言之人,而词华渐繁矣。盖自唐太宗答刘洎之后,未有不假手于词臣者。”[16](P114)唐太宗《答刘洎诏》一文作于贞观十七年(643年)。由此可见,金氏所论高祖李渊与太宗李世民的骈文均出自己手。
[2]刘纳.民初文学的一个奇景——骈文的兴盛[J].郑州大学学报:哲学社会科学版,1996(5).
[3]刘师培.文章源始[J].国粹学报,1905(1).
[4]刘师培.论文杂记[J].国粹学报,1905(4).
[5]刘师培.文说[J].国粹学报,1906(16).
[6]田北湖.论文章源流[J].国粹学报,1905(2).
[7]罗惇曧.文学源流[J].国粹学报,1906(16).
[8]刘师培.与人论文书.中古文学论集[M].陈引驰,编校.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1997.
[9]刘师培.骈文读本序.中古文学论集[M].陈引驰,编校.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1997.
[10]刘师培.广阮氏文言说.中古文学论集[M].陈引驰,编校.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1997.
[11]章太炎.讲文学.章太炎演讲集[M].章念驰,编订.上海:上海人民出版社,2011.
[12]章绛.文学论略[J].国粹学报,1907(21).
[13]谢无量.骈文指南[M]//谢无量文集:第7卷.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2011.
[14]洪迈.容斋随笔[M].孔凡礼,点校.北京:中华书局,2005.
[15]金秬香.骈文概论[M].上海:商务印书馆,1933.
[16]徐师曾.文体明辨序说[M].罗根泽,校点.北京:人民文学出版社,1962.
[17]钱基博.骈文通义[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2012.
[18]段玉裁.说文解字注[M].上海:上海书店出版社,1992.
[19]刘麟生.中国骈文史[M].北京:商务印书馆,1937.
[20]刘勰.文心雕龙[M].范文澜,校注.北京:人民文学出版社,1958.
[21]蒋伯潜,蒋祖怡.骈文与散文[M].上海:上海书店出版社,1997.
[22]朱一新.无邪堂答问[M].吕鸿儒,点校.北京:中华书局,2000.
[23]王先谦.骈文类纂[M].长春:吉林人民出版社,1998.
(1)按据明徐师曾《文体明辨序说》“批答”一条:“其后学士入院,试制诏批答共三篇,则求代言之人,而词华渐繁矣。盖自唐太宗答刘洎之后,未有不假手于词臣者。”[16](P114)唐太宗《答刘洎诏》一文作于贞观十七年(643年)。由此可见,金氏所论高祖李渊与太宗李世民的骈文均出自己手。