《史传》《诸子》非“亚枢纽”辨  

Shi Zhuan and Zhu Zi in Wen Xin Diao Long are not Sub-pivot

作　　者：高宏洲 Gao Hongzhou(People’s Literature Publishing House,Beijing,100705)

机构地区：[1]人民文学出版社古典文学编辑室,北京100705

出　　处：《语文学刊》2021年第6期1-7,共7页Journal of Language and Literature Studies

基　　金：中国博士后科学基金资助项目“‘文以载道’命题释疑”(2015M581033)阶段性研究成果。

摘　　要：周勋初《文心雕龙解析》认为,《文心雕龙》中的《史传》和《诸子》具有“亚枢纽”的作用。理由有二:一是刘勰对《史传》和《诸子》的论述不符合他提出的论述文体的四原则;二是子、史对文士的影响巨大。周先生提出的理由,不能成为判断《史传》和《诸子》属于“亚枢纽”的充要条件。周先生的判断没有注意到子、史对文学创作的重要性,与《史传》和《诸子》论述史书和诸子的写作规范,立论角度的差异。另外,从刘勰的文学观念也能证明《史传》和《诸子》属于文体论。In the analysis of Wen Xin Diao Long,Mr.Zhou Xunchu thinks that Shi Zhuan and Zhu Zi in Wen Xin Diao Long play a sub-pivotal role.There are two reasons.One is that Liu Xie’s discussion on Shi Zhuan and Zhu Zi does not accord with the four principles of treatise style he put forward;the other is that Zhu Zi and hisory have a great influence on the litterateur.The view of Mr.Zhou is hard to hold.Shi Zhuan and Zhu Zi fully implemented the four principles of treatise style he put forward.The great influence of Zhu Zi and hisory on the litterateur can not be the sufficient and necessary condition for judging that Shi Zhuan and Zhu Zi belong to sub-pivot.Mr.Zhou did not pay attention to the importance of Zhu Zi and hisory to literary creation,which was different from the discussion of the writing of Zhu Zi and hisory.From Liu Xie’s literary concept,we can also prove that Shi Zhuan and Zhu Zi belong to stylistic theory.

关 键 词：《文心雕龙》 《史传》 《诸子》 “亚枢纽” 

分 类 号：I206.2[文学—中国文学]