中國古代原生性「源流文學史觀」詮釋模型之重構初論

A primary study on reconstructing the “Interpretation Model” of the Chinese Ancient original “Sourcing Viewpoint of Literature History”

光緒30年（1904）左右，林傳甲、竇警凡、黃人等各自撰作「中國文學史」。這門知識與學科，乃邁向現代化之路。至今百年間，「中國文學史」之著作，累計已近千餘種。然而，合格而質優者為數不多。其因在於本質論、認識論與方法學之匱乏或失當。其中，尤以「文學史觀」更為焦點問題：或無自覺之文學史觀；或因追求現代化及文界革命，而深受西方生物學與社會學之「進化論」影響，一時「文學進化史觀」蔚為風潮；或受教條化之馬列思想與政治意識型態所支配，「唯物辯證文學史觀」一時成為僵化的框架。這二種史觀乃時代環境之產物，並且挪借自西方。其適當性，自1990年代興起的「文學史理論」熱潮開始，已備受批判。然而至今學界仍破而不立，還沒人能從中國古代既存的文學史觀，重構系統嚴整的「詮釋模型」，以做為「中國文學史」書寫之理論基礎。本論文即針對中國古代原生性的「源流文學史觀」，經由相關文本的理解、詮釋、分析、綜合，將隱涵、零散的觀念加以揭明、統整，而在「文學史觀」的理論設準下，將它「重構」為系統嚴整的「詮釋模型」。此一「詮釋模型」還可分別為「文體形質因變關係」與「文體價值本末關係」二個次類。前者從不同文體的形質，詮釋它們在時間歷程中的發生、因變，甚至終結的規律，以建構不同文體之間的「源流終始」關係；這是對「過去」之文學歷史的反思與詮釋。後者從文體的源流，溯末以尋本，從而規定此一文體存在的價值性依據，再建構出創化、開展的實踐規範；這是對「未來」之文學歷史的導向與創造。而經由二者相互辯證為用，則實存之文學歷史，其過去、現在、未來的時間三維，乃有如源流之「連續」；雖在抽象概念上可做區別，但在實存情境中卻無法切分。

About the 30th year of Guangxu (1904), Lin Chuanjia, Dou Jingfan, Huang Ren and so on have written their own “The history of Chinese literature”. This knowledge and subject has been forwarded to the modernization. During the hundred years until now, the works of “The history of Chinese literature” have been already more than a thousand. However, the qualified and superior ones are few. The reason is because of the lack or improper of the essentialism, the epistemology and the methodology. Among these, “the history viewpoint of literature” is the more focal point. Probably being without a conscious history viewpoint of literature, or because of seeking for the modernization and the revolution of academic circle, they have been deeply influenced by “the doctrine of evolution” of western biology and sociology. During that period of time, “the evolution history viewpoint of literature” was quite popular. Or being controlled by the dogmatic Marx and Lenin thought and political conscious states, “the materialistic dialectical history viewpoint of literature” became an ossified frame during that period of time. These two history viewpoints are the products of the time and the environments. They are both from the west. Their aptness has been criticized from 1990, when “the theory on the history of literature” started to be the upsurge. However until now, the academic circle still just broke it but not construct it. Nobody could restructure a systematic and arranged “interpretation model” from the existing history viewpoint of literature in Chinese ancient times. Then take it as the theory foundation of writing “The history of Chinese literature”. The research aims at the Chinese ancient primary “sourcing history viewpoint of literature”. By the way of the related text's understanding, interpretation, analysis and synthesis, the author tries to clarify and arrange the hidden and scattered idea. In the theory suppose of “history viewpoint of literature”, the systematic and arranged “interpretation model” can be restructured.