新时期中国前十年和后二十年的文学研究,出于知识社会学动机的变易,在“诗性”一词的使用兴趣和频率上呈现出鲜明反差。但三十年来“诗性”概念在文学研究中经常被随意使用,却值得注意。“诗性”概念源自维柯。中国学界关于“诗性”的大量谈论,却习惯于从海德格尔的“诗思”角度发挥。前者的认识论背景和后者的本体论背景存在着重要差异,无法简单混淆,两者对想像的不同态度有力说明了这一点。以文学语言为纽带,两种“诗性”在文学活动中才可能转化、融合。在这一点上,雅各布逊对“诗性”的使用实践可以成为我们继续探讨的起点。当不再将“诗性”望文生义理解为诗歌式特性或“诗意”等、避免让“诗性”作为名词随意接受修饰、谨慎地将“诗性”作为副词去修饰其他概念,我们才获得了合理使用“诗性”一词来研究文学的现代性学术信念。 The literary studies in the first decade and the second two decades after the start of the new era in China were out of sharp contrast in the interest and frequency of the use of the term “poetic” because of the change of motivation of knowledge sociology. However, the concept of “poetic nature” has often been arbitrarily used in literary studies for thirty years, but it is worth noting. “Poetic ” concept originated from Vico. Chinese academics have talked a lot about “poetic nature”, but they are accustomed to play from Heidegger’s “poetic thoughts.” There is an important difference between the former epistemological background and the latter’s ontological background, which can not be easily confused. The two attitudes towards imagination strongly illustrate this point. With the language of literature as a link, the two kinds of “poeticity” may be transformed and integrated in literary activities. At this point, Jacobson’s use of “poetic ” can be the starting point for us to continue our discussion. When we no longer understand “poetic” literary meaning as a poetic or “poetic”, we should avoid letting “poeticity” freely as a noun and carefully modifying “poetic nature” as an adverb By modifying other concepts, we have obtained the rational use of the word “poetic” to study the modern academic beliefs of literature.