成體系的戲論：論高友工的抒情傳統

The Systematic Invalid Argument: On Kao Yu-Kung's Lyrical Tradition

龔鵬程(Peng-Cheng Kung)

《清華中文學報》 3期 (2009/12) Pp. 155-189

https://doi.org/10.6466/THJCL.200912.0155

摘要

高友工是陳世驤之後最重要的抒情論者，其「抒情美典」相關論述，影響甚大。但高氏雖反覆說抒情，可是對中國文化中「心、性、情、氣、志、意，才、理」之間的複雜關係，並無辨析疏理，僅以抒情一辭籠統言之，使其論述不能深談精神之內在有機發展，且一方面搭著史事的框架，一方面運用語言分析，去討論具體詩、書、畫的形構問題，以此來說明精神理念逐步實現之狀況。是以其所構造的抒情傳統論，雖體系儼然，自足自適，但用在中國文學的解釋上，卻是一套戲論。本文從理論與史實各方面說明其不足。

關鍵字

高友工 ； 抒情 ； 抒情美典 ； 抒情傳統

並列摘要

After Chen Shih-hsiang, Kao Yu-Kung is the most significant theorist of Chinese Lyricism. His theories concerning ”lyrical aesthetics” have exerted a profound influence on the study of Chinese literature. Yet, even though Kao repeatedly discoursed on lyricism, he provided no exposition of the complex relations inhering among the following important concepts in Chinese culture: xin 心(heart and mind), xing性(human nature), qing情(feelings, sentiments and emotions ), qi氣(material force ), zhi志(ambition), yi意(intention), cai才(inborn endowments and talents), and li理(principle/pattern). Kao's use of the term ”lyricism” to discuss these relations makes it impossible for his theory to probe the internal organic development of the spirit in any depth. On the one hand, he employs a historical narrative framework; on the other, he utilizes linguistic analysis to discuss problems regarding the formation of actual poems, books, and works of art. By means of this method, he explains the gradual realization of a spiritual ideal. Thus, although Kao's Chinese lyricism is well-organized and self-contained, it nevertheless is an untenable theory for interpreting Chinese literature. This paper will elucidate its weaknesses from the perspectives of theory and historical facts.

並列關鍵字

Kao Yu-Kung ； lyricism ； lyrical aesthetics ； lyrical tradition

參考文獻

牟宗三(2003)。牟宗三全集。臺北:聯經。

高友工(2008)。美典：中國文學研究論集。北京:三聯。

蔡英俊(1986)。比興物色與情景交融。台北:大安。

顏崑陽(2009)。從混融、交涉、衍變到別用分流、佈體─「抒情文學史」的反思與「完境文學史」的構想。清華中文學報。3，113-154。