关于姚鼐章学诚批评《文选》分类之得失问题——兼论“七”“设论”与赋的关系

On the Gain and Loss of YAO Nai, ZHANG Xuecheng’s Criticism on the Selection’s Classification——Concurrently on the Relationship Between“Seven”,“Assumption” and Fu

《文选》分类的确有可议之处 ,尤其是其小类。然这往往是“天然地”存在的 ,故只要对一大批文章进行较细的分类 ,就难以完全避免他人之“议”。姚鼐、章学诚诸家的批评主要是因其没有充分地考虑到实际操作与理论要求间的差异及其“不思当时事实”所致。姚说似是而非 ,《古文辞类纂》亦多类似《文选》之“失” ;章说太半责非其所当责 ,少半或有理而萧统“持之有故”。《文选》在文体分类方面的历史贡献是巨大的 。

Although there are some weak points in the Selection Classifications,esp.In the sub-classifications,the paper claims that they are“naturally” unavoidable errors since once you start to classify articles in details on a large scale, the errors are always there. Yao Nai and ZHANG Xuecheng’s criticism is partial because it doesn’t take into the consideration the differences between theoretical requirements and practical operations.Yao thinks that the Selectionis ambiguous, but the same errors could be found in the compile of ancient poems and songs. ZHANG believes that most of the classifications are inappropriate while XIAO Tong insists that they are self-proven. By analyzing both the shortcomings of YAO and ZHANG, the paper claims that Selection historically contributes a lot to the style classification historically although most of the classifications are a kind of inheritance instead of a kind of creation.