剖情析采：王夢鷗的《文心雕龍》研究

王夢鷗的《文心雕龍》研究的價值，在當今學界中存有分岐。就中國學者而言，王夢鷗的研究在臺灣龍學史上可以佔有一席之地；反觀，臺灣學者在臺灣龍學史的分析中幾乎不提王夢鷗。本文便由此分歧出發，透過梳理王夢鷗對《文心雕龍》的研究，來重探其以「語言美學」來研究《文心雕龍》的價值與地位。除了第一章緒論外，第二章談王夢鷗的文學理論之架構與詮釋。透過與韋勒克《文學論》的比對，可以發現王夢鷗多採用韋氏的架構與觀點來構成其文學理論。兩者雖都認為文學是「語言的藝術」，但王夢鷗將文學區分「語言」、「意象」兩部分，顯示他化韋氏理論為己用，構成了自己的「語言美學」文學理論體系。第三章、第四章、第五章乃是談論王夢鷗對《文心雕龍》之研究。王夢鷗將「語言美學」理論中的「語言」、「意象」兩大觀點融入對《文心雕龍》的研究中，形成他的獨特詮釋。也因此，《文心雕龍》的論理順序也被大幅改動，而本文將依循這個改動，以「文原論」、「創作論」、「文體論」與「文評論」三個章節來分析。總結來說，王夢鷗實以自己的「語言美學」視角來詮釋《文心雕龍》，致使他將「創作論」作為《文心雕龍》核心，而該書也成論「創作」之書了。第六章檢討現有的臺灣龍學史論述，以求能正確闡述王夢鷗以「語言美學」來研究《文心雕龍》的定位與價值，本文將此定為「深刻的偏見」，認為王夢鷗透過自己的「語言美學」文學理論，突破了過去臺灣學界普遍以傳統視角來研究《文心雕龍》的常態，走出自己的路，為臺灣《文心雕龍》研究史注入了新的活力。

關鍵字

劉勰；王夢鷗；文心雕龍；語言美學

並列摘要

Surprisingly, it is ambiguous (or opposite?) that researchers look at the Study of Wenxin Diaolong (《文心雕龍》)as interpreted by Wang Meng-ou(王夢鷗). On the one hand, Chinese researchers think Wang Meng-ou plays an important role in the research history of Wenxin Diaolong in Taiwan ;on the other hand, Taiwanese researchers think he did little. Thus, this thesis is themed with the question above, and wants to figure out what is more likely true to the judgements about the Study of Wenxin Diaolong as interpreted by Wang Meng-ou between Chinese and Taiwanese researchers. The thesis starts with the introduction and explanation about previous, prevalent studies and papers of Wenxin Diaolong in Chapter1. In Chapter2, the thesis will interpret the theorical structures—called ”linguistic aesthetics”—created by Wang Meng-ou. Based on the comparison between “中國文學理論” and Rene Welker & Austin Warren ”Theory of Literature”, we can find the high similarity both ; although Wang Meng-ou agrees Welker & Warrens’ idea” Literature is the art of languages”, he divides literatures into two aspects：”Languages” and “Images”. Therefore, we can assure Wang Meng-Ou borrows the ideas from Welker and Warren to establish his “linguistic aesthetics” theory. In next three chapters, Ch3-5, the thesis will focus on how Wang Meng-Ou utilizes his theory to interpret Wenxin Diaolong. As the theorical structure in Chapter 2, we can find Wang Meng-Ou uses “Language” and “Images” a lot to understand and explain what Wenxin Diaolong said. As a result, Wang Meng-Ou changes the rule of original Chapters in Wenxin Diaolong, making his study unique. The thesis will discuss the issues by three traditional categories : “the nature of literatures”(文原論)、”the creativity of literatures”(創作論), “the styles of literatures”(文體論) and “the critics of literatures”(文評論). In conclusion, because Wang Meng-Ou applies his theory to interpret Wenxin Diaolong, he takes ”the creativity of literatures” as a core of whole book, which is a guidebook of creativities. In last chapter, Chapter 6, according to the discuss before, we can reflect on the opinions of Taiwanese and Chinese researchers in the research history in Taiwan. The thesis concludes that Wang Meng-Ou using his theory breaks the restrain of traditional study of Wenxin Diaolong, and creates a new perspective to study Wenxin Diaolong. He swam against the tide, animating the study of Wenxin Diaolong in Taiwan.

並列關鍵字

Liu Xie ； Wang Meng-Ou ； Wenxin Diaolong ； Lingustic Aesthetics

參考文獻

（一）傳統文獻：

Google Scholar

[義] Benedetto Croce, translated by Douglas Ainslie（1995）, Aesthetic as science of expression and general linguistic : translated from the Italian of Benedetto Croce, Charleston : Bibliolife.