论联话的演进
|
摘要
联话滥觞于宋,清道光时与诗话、笔记小说分离而独立发展,民国时期完成了纯理论批评色彩的旅程。演进过程分为依附、独立著述、系统性纯文论三个阶段。宋初至清道光为依附阶段,此阶段联话依附于诗话、笔记小说,以纪事为主,兼以零星评点。道光至民国初为独立著述阶段,此阶段体例明确,先叙后评点的写作模式和相关审美范畴确立,辨源流、评工拙、品次第、溯师承、述规矩、采故实、兼说部等传统话体著作要素具备。民国时期进入系统的纯文论阶段,此阶段体例、主题、行文模式为纯文论体。
Lian Hua originated in Song dynasty. During the Qing Dynasty it developed and independed from Shi Hua and the sketches. During the Republic of China,the journey of pure theoretical criticism was completed. The evolution process is divided into three stages: attachment,independent writing and systematic pure literary theory. As the attachment stage from the beginning of Song Dynasty to the Qing Dynasty,it combined words attached to Shi Hua and sketches,with the characteristics of chronicle and sporadic comments. During the Daoguang period of the Qing Dynasty to the early period of Republic of China,it was on the independent writing stage and the style is clear,because the comment writing mode and related aesthetic category established on the origin. During the period of the Republic of China,the system entered the stage of pure literary theory. At this stage,the style,subject and mode of writing were purely literary.
Lian Hua originated in Song dynasty. During the Qing Dynasty it developed and independed from Shi Hua and the sketches. During the Republic of China,the journey of pure theoretical criticism was completed. The evolution process is divided into three stages: attachment,independent writing and systematic pure literary theory. As the attachment stage from the beginning of Song Dynasty to the Qing Dynasty,it combined words attached to Shi Hua and sketches,with the characteristics of chronicle and sporadic comments. During the Daoguang period of the Qing Dynasty to the early period of Republic of China,it was on the independent writing stage and the style is clear,because the comment writing mode and related aesthetic category established on the origin. During the period of the Republic of China,the system entered the stage of pure literary theory. At this stage,the style,subject and mode of writing were purely literary.
引文
[1]张唐英.蜀桃杌[M].北京:中华书局,1985.
[2]韦居安.梅磵诗话[M].北京:中华书局,1985.
[3]尤玘.万柳溪边旧话[M].北京:中华书局,1985.
[4]任先大.袁枚随园诗话中的联话研究[J].云梦学刊,2009(5).
[5]梁绍壬.两般秋雨盦随笔[M]//沈云龙.近代中国史料丛刊续编:第16辑.上海扫叶山房石印本.
[6]梁章钜.楹联丛话[M].南昌:江西人民出版社,2000.
[7]张小华.中国楹联史[D].南京:南京师范大学,2012.
[8]刘大白.白屋联话[M].南昌:江西人民出版社,2000.
[9]向义.六碑龛贵山联语[M].南昌:江西人民出版社,2000.
[10]李澄宇.未晚楼联话[M].南昌:江西人民出版社,2000.
[2]韦居安.梅磵诗话[M].北京:中华书局,1985.
[3]尤玘.万柳溪边旧话[M].北京:中华书局,1985.
[4]任先大.袁枚随园诗话中的联话研究[J].云梦学刊,2009(5).
[5]梁绍壬.两般秋雨盦随笔[M]//沈云龙.近代中国史料丛刊续编:第16辑.上海扫叶山房石印本.
[6]梁章钜.楹联丛话[M].南昌:江西人民出版社,2000.
[7]张小华.中国楹联史[D].南京:南京师范大学,2012.
[8]刘大白.白屋联话[M].南昌:江西人民出版社,2000.
[9]向义.六碑龛贵山联语[M].南昌:江西人民出版社,2000.
[10]李澄宇.未晚楼联话[M].南昌:江西人民出版社,2000.