《切韵》一书所代表的音系的性质问题的分歧与讨论,由来已久,主要表现为两种观点,其一为单一音系说,持此观点的主要有陈寅恪、高本汉等。其一为综合音系说,持此观点的主要有章太炎、黄侃等。在早期的讨论中,两派意见内部也不统一。单一音系说中,有的认为这一音系是吴音,有的认为这一音系是长安音,有的认为这一音系是洛阳音,等等。综合音系说中,有的认为只综合了古音,有的认为既包含了古音,也包含了方音。有的认为它基本上是当时的语音系统,但也吸收了一些方音和古音。就目前学术界争议的焦点而言, The differences and discussions on the nature of the phonological systems represented by the “Qie Yun” have a long history and they are mainly manifested in two kinds of views. One of them is a single phonetic system, and the main ones are Chen Yinke and Gao Benhan. One of them is an integrated phonology, which says Zhang Taiyan, Huang Kan and others hold this view. In the early discussions, the views of the two schools were not uniform either. In the case of a single phonology, some think this phonology is Wu sound, while others think this phonology is Chang an accent, while others think it is Luoyang tone, and so on. Integrated phonology said, and some think that only integrated ancient sound, and some think that both contains the ancient sound, but also contains the square tone. Some think it is basically the phonetic system of the time, but it also absorbs some of the square and ancient sounds. In the current academic controversy focus,