Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 1968. / Also available in print.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Hong Kong Baptist University, 2006. / Thesis submitted to the Dept. of Chinese Language and Literature. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 319-336).

published_or_final_version / Chinese / Master / Master of Arts

稿本 / 論文(碩士)--香港中文大學硏究院中國語言及文學學部,1992. / 參考文獻: leaves 243-257 / 林世鳴. / Chapter 第一章： --- 緒言 --- p.1 / 註釋 --- p.5 / Chapter 第二章： --- 本原論 --- p.8 / Chapter 第一節： --- 據自然之規律 --- p.8 / Chapter 第二節： --- 載儒家之義理 --- p.12 / Chapter 第三節： --- 本作者之修養 --- p.21 / Chapter 第四節： --- 文與道之合一 --- p.26 / Chapter 第五節： --- 文以致用為本 --- p.35 / 小結 --- p.46 / 註釋 --- p.51 / Chapter 第三章： --- 文體論 --- p.61 / Chapter 第一節： --- 文體之重要性 --- p.61 / Chapter 第二節： --- 文體論之源流 --- p.63 / Chapter 一、 --- 文體之源起 --- p.63 / Chapter 二、 --- 文體區分及文體論興起之原因 --- p.66 / Chapter 第三節： --- 姚、曾文體論述評 --- p.70 / Chapter 一、 --- 論著類 --- p.72 / Chapter 二、 --- 詞賦類 --- p.76 / Chapter 三、 --- 序跋類 --- p.80 / Chapter 四、 --- 詔令類 --- p.85 / Chapter 五、 --- 奏議類 --- p.87 / Chapter 六、 --- 書牘類 --- p.89 / Chapter 七、 --- 哀祭類 --- p.93 / Chapter 八、 --- 傳誌類 --- p.95 / Chapter 九、 --- 敘記類及典志類 --- p.98 / Chapter 十、 --- 雜記類 --- p.100 / Chapter 第四節： --- 姚、曾文體論之特色 --- p.102 / Chapter 一、 --- 以簡馭繁，摒除分類繁雜之流弊 --- p.102 / Chapter 二、 --- 駢散兼宗，而不違家法 --- p.104 / Chapter 第五節： --- 桐城後學之補充 --- p.105 / 小結 --- p.108 / 註釋 --- p.110 / Chapter 第四章： --- 創作論 --- p.118 / Chapter 第一節： --- 積學 --- p.118 / Chapter ´ؤ、 --- 博覽 --- p.120 / Chapter 二、 --- 約取 --- p.121 / Chapter 三、 --- 專攻與有恒 --- p.124 / Chapter 第二節： --- 精誦 --- p.127 / Chapter 第三節： --- 圏點 --- p.138 / Chapter 第四節： --- 鈔纂 --- p.142 / Chapter 第五節： --- 摹擬 --- p.145 / Chapter 第六節： --- 命意 --- p.154 / Chapter 第七節： --- 立格 --- p.156 / Chapter 第八節： --- 行氣 --- p.160 / Chapter 第九節： --- 選辭 --- p.163 / Chapter 第十節： --- 增删 --- p.168 / 小結 --- p.169 / 註釋 --- p.171 / Chapter 第五章： --- 風格論 --- p.182 / Chapter 第一節： --- 風格釋義 --- p.182 / Chapter 第二節： --- 風格之形成 --- p.183 / Chapter 第三節： --- 桐城派風格論之發展 --- p.185 / Chapter 一、 --- 方苞以「清真古雅」為宗 --- p.185 / Chapter 二、 --- 劉大櫆對風格多樣性之認識 --- p.189 / Chapter 三、 --- 姚鼐以陽剛陰柔概括文章之風格 --- p.193 / Chapter 四、 --- 桐城派後學之增補 --- p.196 / Chapter 第四節： --- 桐城派風格論之特色 --- p.199 / Chapter 一、 --- 偏好陽剛 --- p.199 / Chapter 二、 --- 不棄陰柔 --- p.216 / Chapter 三、 --- 以陰陽剛柔兼具為文章之至境 --- p.218 / Chapter 第五節： --- 小結 --- p.224 / 註釋 --- p.225 / Chapter 第六章： --- 總結 --- p.235 / 註釋 --- p.241 / 參者書目: --- p.243

明末清初的散文發展，前人或以載道觀念論之，或以抒情觀念論之，又或以流派分梳論之，各有其理，亦各有其弊。本人認為，明末清初散文發展自有其一以貫之的內在邏輯，因而本文力圖探尋其內在邏輯，重建其發展軌跡。本文指出，文道關係正是影響明末清初散文發展的關鍵因素，時人對於文道關係的不同詮釋與理解，決定了當時散文發展的方向。 / 「古文傳統」與「小品傳統」，是理解明清之際散文發展的重要概念。特別是周作人等以抒情為宗旨建構的「小品傳統」，對理解這一段散文史，產生了深遠的影響。然而本文通過考察「小品傳統」的建構過程，以及其所反抗的「古文傳統」之內涵，並辨析二者關係，相比起「古文傳統」內部「載道、唐宋、法度」的體系，「小品傳統」自身存在局限，並不足以貫穿明清散文的發展。相反，考察晚明小品文家的古文觀，清初古文家的小品創作，本文以為小品儘管一度興盛，然而「古文傳統」才是其時古文發展的主軸。 / 「古文傳統」既是關鍵所在，則如何詮釋文道關係是其時文壇的重要問題。本文指出明清之際的文道論接續了唐宋以來古文家與理學家的討論，並面臨如何承繼二者而有所發展的問題。本文通過辨析各家對文道合一的詮釋，考索其時文道論與唐宋古文家、理學家的論述之關係，指出明清之際的文人一方面推崇理學家道的修養，一方面提倡古文家的文章造詣，來達到文道合一。並通過加強文與經之間的關係，強調文必本於經典，來彌合古文家與理學家的分歧。 / 本文同時以錢謙益、黃宗羲、侯方域、汪琬為中心，具體討論明清之際文道關係的發展過程。指出錢謙益通過批評復古派，推崇反經，提出性情、學問與世運的主張，以道決定文的思路，拉開重建古文傳統的序幕。黃宗羲則在錢謙益的基礎上，通過擴大性情的內涵，以及道在審美上的包容性，重新詮釋文道關係。然而明清之際對侯方域的評價之轉變，從肯定其古文主張，到批評其小說筆法，恰正體現道決定文的思路在重建古文傳統過程中遇到的困境。汪琬則從道的層面維護程朱理學，從文的層面肯定復古派，批評錢謙益，排斥小說筆法，試圖通過文道並重的方法來解決困境。可以說明清之際古文的發展，正是從道決定文走向文道並重的過程。 / Prose development in late Ming and early Qing periods is accounted for by scholars in terms of the theories of Confucianism, the concepts of lyricism or the summaries of different schools of classical prose. This study holds the belief that the prose development within this period of time has its consistent internal logic, and its aim is to establish a new theory to explain and restore the track of such development based on the existing theories by previous scholars. This study points out that the relationship between dao 道 and wen 文 is the major element influencing the prose development in late Ming and early Qing; the interpretation and comprehension of it dictates the direction of prose development. / The two different traditions of classical prose and familiar essay are key concepts in understanding the prose development in late Ming and early Qing, especially the latter, which was constructed by Zhou Zuo-ren under the principle of lyricism. Based on the examination of its establishment, the nature of classical prose tradition it defies, and the relationship between the two, this study reveals that the familiar essay tradition was bound by its limitations which rendered it insufficient in accounting for the entire prose development of the whole period, in contrast to the internal system of classical prose tradition. The review of the view on classical prose by familiar essay writers in late Ming and the familiar essay output of classical prose writers in early Qing indicate that the classical prose tradition was then the main pillar of prose development and familiar essay was its subsidiary, despite its once high popularity. / With classical prose tradition being the key to prose development in late Ming and early Qing, the interpretation of the relationship between dao and wen was a significant issue in the ancient literary society. This study points out that when the scholars in late Ming and early Qing discussed dao and wen, such discussion was a continuation of that contributed by the masters of prose writing and philosophers of Neo-Confucianism since Tang and Song Dynasties, which relates to the problem of finding ways to advance through inheriting the two notions. Literary society in the past upheld the idea of fusing dao and wen. By analyzing the different interpretations of such fusion by various parties, this study investigates the relationship between the discussion of dao and wen in late Ming and early Qing dynasties and also that in Tang and Song dynasties, pointing out that by strengthening the relationship between prose and classics and emphasizing the classical basis of prose, it bridges the gap between Neo-Confucian philosophers’ morality and classical prose writers’ literariness. / Lastly, this study discusses the specific development of the theory of dao and wen during late Ming and early Qing through four case studies, namely, Qian Qian-yi’s criticism on Revival Theory, Huang Zong-xi’s theory of qing 情, the changing reviews on Hou Fang-yu, and Wang Wan’s criticism on Qian Qian-yi and fictional prose. Qian’s criticism marked the beginning of the revival of classical prose tradition during late Ming and early Qing, where he promoted the returning to classic, proposing the concept of qing and knowledge being complementary and the idea of dao determining wen. Huang, based on Qian’s thoughts, reinterpreted the relationship between dao and wen by further expanding the pool of connotations of qing and the aesthetic comprehensiveness of dao. / However, the phenomenon of scholars agreeing on Hou Fang-yu’s stand on classical prose while excoriating his ‘fictional style of prose writing techniques’小說筆法 reflects the predicament faced by the idea of dao determining wen in the process of reconstructing the classical prose tradition. Wang tried to resolve such predicament through putting emphasis on both dao and wen, defending neo-confucianism from the aspect of dao and affirming Ming Classicalists from that of wen, while criticizing Qian and rejecting fictional style. All these illustrate that classical prose development during Late Ming and Early Qing is a process of the transition from dao determining wen to emphasizing both dao and wen. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / 李向昇. / Parallel title from added title page. / Thesis (Ph.D.) Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2014. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 215-229). / Abstracts in Chinese and English. / Li Xiangsheng.

published_or_final_version / Chinese / Master / Master of Philosophy

No description available.

No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 1983. / Vita. Bibliography: leaves [325]-352.

published_or_final_version / Chinese / Master / Master of Philosophy