重评胡适与“学衡派”关于语言的论争

Re-evaluation on the Debate of Language between Hu Shi and Xue Heng School

胡适提倡白话文和白话文学,主张废除文言,但总体上来看,其观点存在着一定的偏差,论据和论述过程也有值得商榷之处,新文学派急功近利的行为一定程度上导致了新文学的直白化和艺术性欠缺。"学衡派"在极力反对白话文的基调下,也有对白话文较为合理的认识。他们并非完全排斥白话,而是反对以白话文代替文言文,主张语言的渐进并在新的历史条件下对文言进行现代化的改造。"学衡派"对新文学阵营相关论点的反驳和论争,使得新文学在发生期对于白话文和文言文的认识趋于合理化,客观上对新文学发展起到了纠偏的作用。

Hu Shi advocated the vernacular language and the vernacular literature and was for the abolition of the classical language.Generally speaking,there is some deviation in his viewpoint.Both his argument and process of exposition can be discussed.The utilitarianism of the new literature has led the new-vernacular literature to albinism and the art short.Despite their opposition of vernacular language,Xueheng School had a reasonable recognition of the vernacular language.They did not repel the vernacular language completely,but repelled the idea of replacing the classical language with the vernacular language.They advocated the evolution of the language and the modernizing transformation of the classic language.The debate and disagreement from Xue Heng School on the view of the new literature facilitated the rational understanding of the vernacular and classic language in the occurrence period of the new literature and objectively has played a corrective role in the development of new literature.