论文部分内容阅读
张国光在《“两种〈水浒〉说”与“两截〈水浒〉说”》一文中 ,称罗尔纲先生的《水浒》研究是“袭用”他的“双两说” ,指责后者“学风不纯”。这是一种污蔑不实之词。罗先生自 2 0世纪 2 0年代后期起 ,追随其师胡适、郑振铎 ,悉心研究《水浒传》。经过长期艰苦的努力 ,突破了 6 0多年来定下的《水浒传》原本为一百回的框框 ,提出了许多有影响的真知灼见。罗先生研究《水浒传》有着与张国光完全不同的出发点、立论基础、研究方法以至结论。如果非要说两人有什么相同的话 ,那只能是张国光的主要论点同罗先生几十年前曾有过的观点在本质上相同
In his article “Two Types of Water Margin” and “Two Stories of Water Margin,” Zhang Guoguang said Mr. Luo Ergang’s study of “Water Margin” is “attacking” his “double talk” and accusing the latter of “ pure”. This is a slander. Since the late 20s of the 20th century, Mr. Luo has followed his teachers Hu Shih and Zheng Zhenduo and studied “Outlaws of the Marsh” with great care. After a long period of painstaking efforts, it broke through the original framework of “Outlaws of the Marsh” set forth for over 60 years and put forward many influential insights. Luo study “Outlaws of the Marsh” has a completely different starting point with Zhang Guoguang, based on the theory, research methods and conclusions. If we must say that the two men have the same thing, then Zhang Guoguang’s main argument can be essentially the same as that which Mr. Luo had had decades ago