文章 - - 文章列表 - 全部

在学习西方、创造汉字新名词方面，近代的中日双方曾有过双向交流。大体说来，明治初期及以前，日本受中国方面的汉译西书词汇影响较多，而甲午以后尤其是20世纪初年，则是日本"和制"汉字新名词大量涌入中国、并深深影响了中国政治和学术文化发展的时期。在清末民初引入日本汉字新名词方面，戊戌前后作为规模引进的起点期值得特别重视，而黄遵宪、康有为、梁启超等人，则属于那个时期除古城贞吉等日人之外最值得关注的先驱人物。本文旨在对康有为戊戌时期使用和传播日本新名词的政治文化实践活动，以及此后他对相关问题的民族主义反思与批评，作一初步探讨。&nbsp;一、日本新名词引入、传播的动力和途径甲午中日战争日本打败中国，致使中国士人发奋向这一学习西方获得成功的国家取经，以寻求变法富强的"速成"之路。此种社会心态，乃是戊戌前后康有为等维新思想家和张之洞等后期洋务派官僚提倡向日本派遣留学生、大量翻译"东文"、主张国家全面改革的直接动力。日本汉字新名词的有规模引入，正是在这样一种背景下发生的。戊戌时期，日本汉字新名词进入中国并得到一定传播，主要通过以下三种途径：首先，是来到中国的日本学者特别是日本汉学家通过中文报刊亲自传播。甲午战争之后，一些日本早期汉学家出于影响中国变革的政治或文化目的，曾活跃于中国的一些重要报刊上，这对日本汉字新名词在华传播起到极为重要的作用。这一现象，目前在中日学界还只有几个学者开始注意，并进行了初步探讨。戊戌时期影响最大的中文报刊，莫过于梁启超、汪康年、黄遵宪等创办的《时务报》，其中传播日本汉字新名词最为有力的，又莫过于日本汉学家古城贞吉主持的"东文报译"栏[1]。当时，在中国得到较多传播的日本新名词，大多都出现在类似的栏目里。《昌言报》有"东文译编"栏，主持人也是古城贞吉。《译书公会报》有"东文汇译"栏，主持人为另一日本汉学家安藤虎雄。此外，值得一提的还有罗振玉主编的《农学报》，其中的内容也主要译自日文，最初的重要译者有日人藤田丰八、古城贞吉等。1898年6月，日本人山根虎之助还直接在上海创办了中文《亚东时报》，主要内容也是来自日本报刊。1896年复刊于武汉的《汉报》，其主笔也曾为通汉语的日本人冈幸七郎。当然，这些日本汉学家和来华人士，许多又是中国人主动请来的，如古城贞吉，就是汪康年等特意从日本请来，负责《时务报》的"东文报译"栏的。当时，这些日本人不仅在著名的中文报刊上大量传播日本汉字新名词，有的还以中文翻译出版了一些有一定影响的著作，自觉不自觉地使用了不少日本汉字新名词，如1893年藤田丰八翻译出版过《蜜蜂饲养法》一书，1898年古城贞吉翻译的《中国工艺商业考》一书等，就是例子。可以肯定地说，戊戌时期在传播日本汉字新名词方面，以古城贞吉为代表的日本人默默发挥着重要影响，贡献很大。这是戊戌时期日本汉字新名词在华传播最为重要的途径之一。为什么在戊戌时期，日本汉学家会活跃在中国的报刊上，并在传播日本汉字新名词方面扮演一个特殊的角色呢？除了前文提到的背景和原因之外，还有一个重要因素，就是当时的中国完全缺乏日语人才，只好直接引进像古城贞吉这样的汉学家来帮忙救急。由于日本汉学家毕竟不像严复等人那样，在翻译日文过程中严格地遵循古文遣词造句的规矩，而报刊出版的短周期，也容不得他们像严译那样"一名之立、旬月踯躅"。更重要的是，他们在中国既找不到现成的对译词，而对他们来说，那些新汉字造词在日本国内的含义和用法又早已习惯，再加上他们内心深处先行一步的文化优越感，这种种因素就促成了他们在汉译日文的过程中，直接地照搬了不少现成的日本汉字新词[2]。事实上，由于上述原因，戊戌时期梁启超等《时务报》主笔人即便不愿意"东文报译"栏里日本新名词的大量"涌现"，也无可如何，何况他们当时对使用这些新名词不仅不讨厌，还往往乐于尝试呢？其次，康有为、梁启超、黄遵宪等不懂或略懂日语的著名维新人士，为了给维新变法活动制造舆论、提供新知识和新思想，在日本友人的帮助和有关翻译的影响下，通过阅读日本汉文新书，介绍日文书籍，或从日文资料中撮集、摘录并编撰有关西学知识和日本变法维新的历史，尝试着传播或懵懂地使用了一些日本汉字新名词，以为变法服务。此前已经译成中文出版的一些译著，或游历、考察日本的笔记之类书，它们对于有些日本汉字新名词的使用，戊戌时期也仍然得到继续传播，如黄遵宪1879年出版的《日本杂事诗》，姚文栋1884年编译出版的《日本地理兵要》，顾厚焜1888年完成的《日本新政考》，傅云龙1889年出版的《游历日本图经》等。这是当时引入和传播日本新名词的第二条途径。戊戌时期，康有为使用和传播日本新名词，与这些先期著作的影响也不无关系[3]。值得指出的是，中国人甲午战争以前完成的相关著作，有些实际上也是戊戌前后才正式刊刻、公开发行并产生较大政治文化影响的。以黄遵宪的《日本国志》为例，该书1887年就已完成并在1890年于广州付刻，但当时却并未刻成，其正式刊刻问世已是甲午战败后的1895年秋冬。1897年至1898年它至少再版4次。这也是该书出版最多的时期[4]。戊戌以前，在传播日本汉字新名词方面，虽然已有几个中国人作过一些工作，但总的说来社会影响并不大[5]。再次，同样出于为变法维新制造舆论的目的，戊戌时期还有部分在日的华侨维新派人士通过创办《东亚报》，向国内发行，输入和传播了部分新名词。这是当时日本汉字新名词在华传播的第三条途径。《东亚报》创办于1898年6月（光绪二十四年五月），在日本神户出版，属于旬刊。总理为新会简敬可，撰述为番禺韩昙首、南海康同文、番禺韩文举等。这是目前语言学界研究近代日本新名词在华传播时，至今尚被忽略的刊物。它在当时中国各地的大城市多有销售，可以说是戊戌维新高潮时期日本新名词引入中国值得注意的途径。比如，其中对"合群"思潮发挥作用的社会学系列名词的系统翻译，该刊就是最为早期的（见韩昙云译并连载于《东亚报》的日本涩江保之《社会学新义》），以往学界在谈到社会学名词的引入时，通常只从严复和章太炎的有关译著说起，其实未见妥当。其他如"哲学"、"经济学"和"法学"等领域的新名词，该刊中也有不少使用和传播。再比如倍受关注的"电话"一词，意大利学者马西尼的研究认为19世纪的中文文献里尚没有发现[6]，实际上《东亚报》中已有较多使用。其他如"领海"、"领土"、"时间"、"空间"、"抽象"、"具体"等从日本传来的现代政治文化名词和学术概念的使用，在该刊中也都是最为早期的，由此可见《东亚报》在早期传播日本汉字新名词方面的重要性之一斑。百日维新失败后，康、梁等流亡日本，梁启超等创办于1898年底的《清议报》，开始更加自觉地使用和传播日本新名词。这显然继承的是《时务报》"东文报译"栏的事业。但若就其在日本办刊、向国内传播的途径而言，它则又是《东亚报》的继续。&nbsp;二、从《日本书目志》到《日本变政考》--康有为使用和传播日本新名词的文本考察&nbsp;戊戌时期康有为得知、使用和传播日本新名词，是他长期关注西方"政学"和日本变法史的结果。当时，他并不懂日文，其了解日本新名词，主要是通过搜集日本书目，由略通日文的女儿帮助翻译，同时透过日文中所含的大量汉字，连蒙带猜而来。《康南海自编年谱》1896年条下曾写道："自丙午（1886）编日本政变记，披罗事迹，至今十年"。虽然，康氏自述经历的话通常都需要打些折扣，但一般认为他在19世纪80年代后期已开始对日本的政治变革发生兴趣，则大体属实。[7]这在当时的中国，已属难能可贵的先觉之士。康有为产生组织人翻译日文书的念头，时间也较早。用他自己在《日本书目志》自序中的话来说，即"欲结会以译日本书久矣，而力薄不能成也"。他曾感慨和惋惜这一想法和计划在甲午以前未能实现，否则"岂有割台之事乎？"[8]不过康有为公开呼吁成立专门机构大力翻译日文书并亲自实践，特别是集中编译、消化和思考有关日本变法的事情，还是戊戌时期之事[9]。其《日本变政考序》中写道："恨旧日言日本事者，不详其次第变革之理，无以窥其先后更化之宜。乙未和议成，大搜日本群书，臣女同薇，粗通东文，译而集成。阅之三年，乃得见日本变法曲折次第"。[10]这当是较为可信的。从目前所能掌握的康氏著作来看，康有为最早摘录日本文献并接触和使用日本汉字新名词，大约是他在为编辑日本西书目录所作"笔记"之时。这些笔记一共46篇，涉及到"改良"、"影画"、"教育学"、"统计表"、"磷酸"、"农业化学"、"农业保险"、"农业肥料"、"初等农学"、"高等学校"等许多日本新名词。《万木草堂遗稿》油印本卷六曾加以收录，编署"皆戊戌前作"。《康有为全集》的编者根据康氏《日本书目志自序》和《进呈<日本变政考>序》中关于欲结会开局"以译日书"等语，将其"姑系于"1888年前后[11]，似仍根据不足，恐估时过早。从其较为丰富的内容、所使用的名词并与《日本书目志》中相应部分对照来看，这些"笔记"似专为书目志中的"按语"所写，不过"另有所用"而已，故与"按语"有所出入。窃以为这些笔记的完成时间当系于1895年前后为宜。戊戌时期，康有为使用和传播日本新名词，主要采用三种方式：一是通过上奏折和著文使用传播；二是通过编译新学目录工具书加以传播，三是通过进呈专书供皇帝御览。其中又以头两种方式为主，特别是他的一些奏折和文章影响较大，其中所使用的数十个新名词，像"宪法"、"进步"、"改良"、"预算"、"方针"、"市场"、"巡捕"、"议员"、"民主"、"文明"、"殖民"、"抵制"、"帝国"、"取决"、"常备兵"、"地质学"、"调查表"等，在当时的社会上曾得到较为广泛的流传和认同；代表后两种方式的康氏作品，分别为1897年编峻、1898年初正式出版并多次重印的《日本书目志》和1898年夏秋进呈的《日本变政考》与《波兰分灭记》等，它们之中所包含的日本新名词数量很大，而绝大部分却流播有限。戊戌时期，康有为传播和使用日本新名词的第一种方式，与梁启超等同时代的维新人士相比，特色并不明显；而后两种方式反而更能体现他的独特之处，也更能反映当时中国人懵懂应急地接受或挪用日本新名词的时代文化特征。《日本书目志》全书共15卷，共收图书7725种，康有为加按语109条[12]。作为有史以来中国人所编的第一部日本书籍目录（其中又以近代书目为主），它是戊戌时期传播日本西学新知和汉字新名词的一大特别媒介。该书传播日本汉字新名词有以下特点：其一是数量大，据笔者初步统计，大约有300多个（在日本不尽为新名词）；其二是分布范围广，涉及内容杂；其三是学科名词多，并且按学科分类集中汇聚，往往反复出现；其四是编者康有为真正准确和完全理解该书中新名词内涵的恐怕有限，这些新名词十分之九都是以书名组成部分的形式存在，"按语"部分有过使用的只有十分之一，如"哲学"、"心理学"、"物理学"、"卫生学"、&nbsp;"小说学"、"方技学"、"民权"、"商法"、"民法"、"演说"、"体操"、"改良"、"进化"、"美术"、"普通"、"问题"、"革命"、"初等（中等、高等）学校"、"单级"、"师范教育"、"教室"、"教员"、"实验"等，而且"按语"使用过的这些词康氏本人也未必都弄懂了其含义，往往只是部分反映或传达了其意义，许多时候是照搬，并经常望文生义、甚至主观强解。有学者强调，《日本书目志》中不少汉字新名词如"科学"、"美学"等对康有为来说"充其量只是一种符号，而不是'词'"[13]。这种提醒无疑有其必要。笔者理解这种强调的意义。不过在我看来，如果夸大范围，断然认为凡是只出现在书名中的名词对康有为来说都不是"词"，却难免走向绝对。不了解某词的含义也并不等于就一定不能将它们视为词或新名词。"词"也不过是一种符号而已。作为一种符号的词对康有为来说只有了解、不了解或部分了解其内涵的区别。即便不能说康有为是有意"使用"了这些词，但也无法否认他是不自觉地、无意识地对它们加以了传播。在评价《日本书目志》对传播日本新名词的贡献的时候，我们不能孤立地看待：一则须将其与同时期康有为自己通过别的途径对日本新名词的使用联系起来，一则须将其与《时务报》等同时代其他媒体已经传播和流通的那些日本新名词联系起来。此外，还需重视其目录书自身的特点，如新名词概念在这里类聚、反复出现、强化刺激读者的感官与认知等。只有通过这种联系互动的综合把握，才能较为准确地了解《日本书目志》在传播日本汉字新名词方面的思想文化意义。以学科名词中的"哲学"一词为例。戊戌以前，这个日本学者西周创制的汉字新名词已经零星地传到中国，但一般只是在介绍有关日本教育制度和课程体系时才被提到，而且往往并不同时连带出现超出"哲学"两字以外的内容信息。康有为无疑是戊戌时期自觉传播"哲学"词汇和概念的先驱者之一。沈国威曾根据《日本书目志》中有关哲学书目的康氏按语，指出"康有为似乎把西方的哲学理解成了'贤哲之学'，按语与哲学的学科内容毫无关系"[14]。但如果联系康有为在其他地方的有关述说，我们看到的情况可能就会有所不同。的确，在有关哲学书目的"按语"里，康有为并未直接使用"哲学"一词，但他在此书其它按语部分却有使用，《日本变政考》一书中也使用过该词。在这些使用中，我们发现他对哲学的学科特点其实并非一无所知，而是有所揭示。比如，在《日本书目志》的"自序"里，康有为就表明哲学是与生物、心理、伦理、化学、光学、农学、商学等学术并立的"专学"即专门之学，而不是一般泛泛而言的"贤哲之学"；在该书的第一个按语即关于普通生理学的按语中，他又写道："生理之学------由受形之器推其天命之精，盖为物理学之源，心灵学之本，由此以入于哲学，则四通六辟，小大精粗，其运无乎不在矣"[15]。可见哲学在他那里，乃是建立于其他专门之学基础上的一门比较高深的学问。《日本书目志》的"理学门"收录哲学书22种，书名中带"哲学"一词者就有16种。另外，"小说门"另收有《色情哲学》，"政治门"里的"经济学类"收有《麻氏经济哲学》，"图史门"收有《历史哲学》，"文字语言门"收有《言语哲学》；"教育门"收有《教育哲学史》，"宗教门"则有《宗教哲学》和《基督教及哲学》等。如果我们将作为专门之学的"哲学"与作为更高层次的各门学科"哲学"的观念结合起来，再去反观康有为关于哲学部分的"按语"，便会感到他实际上已初步表明了哲学是一种哲人擅长的玄妙、高深且博大之学的意思，虽仍然很懵懂，但却无疑能给读者留下关于"哲学"初步模糊的印象。这在当时的中国，已确属难得可贵了。"美术"一词也是一个典型的例子。康有为之前，李筱圃在1880年所写的《日本游记》里，黄遵宪在《日本国志》中均偶尔使用过"美术会"一词。傅云龙在《游历日本图经》中使用过"美术"和"美术品"两词；日人古城贞吉在1897年也几次使用过"美术"一词[16]。但总的说来还是并不多见。康有为属于最早真正自觉且较多使用日制"美术"一词的中国人。他的《日本书目志》卷十三里，曾专列"美术"一门，收录各种艺术类书籍633种，其中带有"美术"一词的书就有《美术应用》等12种。在有关"按语"里，他又正式地使用了"美术"一词，强调在日本，"其士女裙屐翩翩，歌舞谣咏，冶游美术，皆过南洋诸岛，有由也"；还认定："美术关于文学，盖水地致然也"。[17]即认为美术的发达往往与该地区山水优美有关。在《日本变政考》中，他也多次使用过"美术"一词，并提到日本"美术改良"之事。实际上，就笔者所知，戊戌时期的舆论骄子梁启超对"哲学"和"美术"两词的最早正式使用，就出现在《读<日本书目志>书后》一文[18]之中。由此也可见《日本书目志》在传播日本新名词方面的影响之一斑。与《日本书目志》里绝大多数日本新名词都出现在书名中不同，在《日本变政考》一书里，康有为对日本新名词的使用基本上都是出现在行文之中的。可以说，这部《日本变政考》同黄遵宪的《日本国志》一起，堪称戊戌时期使用日本汉字新名词数量最多也最为集中的两部大著。就开风气和实际影响而言，《日本国志》的贡献当然为《日本变政考》所无法比拟。后者对许多日本新名词的使用，实际上还直接受到《日本国志》的影响。但在使用的新名词数量和密度上，《日本变政考》却要大大超过《日本国志》，前者使用日本汉字新名词约300多个，而《日本国志》则只有200余个。《日本变政考》的资料来源除了《日本国志》外，还有日本人的著作《明治政史》等[19]，在部头上也要大大小于《日本国志》，因而使用日本新名词的密集度自然也就高得多。《日本变政考》一书主要是康有为在女儿康同薇等的帮助下完成。他自己曾在呈本中特意注明："原本所译日文太奥，顷加润色，令文从字顺，并附表注，以便阅看"，[20]可见他为了方便皇上理解，肯定还删改过不少新名词。不过尽管如此，该书所使用的日本汉字新名词数量仍很大、范围也广，涉及到政治、经济、军事、法律、学术、教育和社会生活等各个方面。其中政治法律方面的新名词最多，鲜明地体现了其为变法维新直接服务的政治文化意图与功能。这些政法名词包括立法院、检察院、行政权、司法权、监督权、弹劾权、三权鼎立、中央集权、地方分权、立宪（政体），代议制、投票选举、匿名投票、（半）改选、公选、（被）选举人、当选（人）、（被）选举权、人权、（自由）民权、国权、法权、公权、债权、物权、所有权、使用权、版权、治外法权、权限、议案、法案、草案、修正案、议事日程、议席、列席、缺席、首席、（预）表决、决议、处分、（行政）机关、裁判所、取缔（所）、民政（局）、缔约国、国际、殖（植）民（地）、帝国、议员、（副）议长、（副）总长、（副）总裁、（副）总监、检查长、院长、部长、局长、馆长、课长、书记（官）、长官、次官、常务、委任状、任期、法官、警官、警察（署）、警视厅、警备、政党、党员、代言人、公证人、机务、宪法、民法、刑法、商法、（刑事、民事）诉讼法、动产、不动产、高等法院、预审、公诉、公判、陪审员、引退、解放、运动、冲突、顾问（官）等。经济方面的新名词包括：公债、民债、国债、预算（表）、决算（表）、营业税、地方税、所得税、准备金、市场、会社、证券、商品、商标、制造品、人力车等。军事方面的新名词包括：大将、中将、少将、大佐、少尉、军人、军属（不同于现代汉语义）、军医、教导团、师团、旅团、联队、士官学校、军法、炮兵、工兵、步兵、宪兵、辎重兵、国民兵、常备兵、后备兵、通牒、现役，等。学术、教育和社会文化等其他方面的新名词包括：物理学、生物学、地质学、哲学、政治学、大（中、小）学区，中等（高等）学校、师范、学位、证书、（法学、理学、工学、医学、文学）博士，（法、理、文、医）学士、国立、官立、公立、私立、留学（生）、体操（场），教员、职员、社员、通信员、社会、联合体、俱乐部、改良、目的、扩张、普通、取消、命令、文学艺术、美术，宗教、文明、民族、（自由）主义、理论、问题、发言、义务、进步、程度、报告、特别、特权、困难、团结、演说、邮便（局）、卫生（局）、退场、番号、流行病、取决、表决、国道、检视、公园、出版、发行、运动会、会场、发起人、代理人、首创人、依赖、附属、直接、间接、恳亲会、政治家、政治界、流行病等。限于篇幅，这里只是列举了该书使用过的一些较为重要的日本新名词。需要说明的是，当时从日本引入的新名词的情况相当复杂，除了日本人自己独立创制的那些新名词外，有的是中国古代本有，但意义发生了较大变化或一定变化的；有的是传教士或来华西人曾经翻译使用，但当时没有流传开来，传到日本后再回归中国才终于固定和流行起来的；还有的是在新旧、中日名词基础上重新组合、很难简单归类的复合名词等等[21]。目前学界的相关研究还很是不足，存在不少争议（笔者前文所列日本新名词，有的也未必能得同行完全认可），这也是笔者尚难以较为精确统计这一时期引入和传播日本汉字新名词之数量的原因。如果将《日本书目志》中出现的众多学科名词以及其他名词也一并纳入视野，剔除两者的重复部分，再结合其在奏折等其他文字中所使用的，那么戊戌时期康有为有意或无意传播的日本汉字新名词，总数已接近400个[22]。这在当时的中国，无疑首屈一指。即便不算《日本书目志》中那些书名里出现的词汇，康有为也仍然算得上是当时使用日本汉字新名词最多的人物。&nbsp;三、"改良"与"社会"：康氏新名词实践的意义和特点戊戌时期，康有为等维新人士通过较多使用和传播新名词，特别是近代化的政治思想、法律制度以及社会哲学等方面的新名词和新概念，倡导了新的政治文化观念，对当时中国人的思想启蒙发挥了不容忽视的积极作用。比如，他热情而正面地运用和传播"改良"、"进步"、"进化"等新名词与新概念，就从自然和社会的各个方面多角度突出地彰显和宣传了改革、变法的合理性与合法性，有力传播了进化论取向的价值观。维新变法前夕，康有为对日本传来的"改良"一词已情有独衷，这颇能反映他作为维新派首领的政治性格，体现他引领和代表着戊戌时代的思想文化特色。在康有为之前，笔者只发现古城贞吉等日人在1897年的《时务报》和《农学报》中曾对该词有过个别使用。与他同道的其他维新派人士在戊戌变法失败之前，则罕见使用。康有为无疑是当时最先、最多和最爱使用"改良"一词的中国人，他对该词的热情"拥抱"，是在编辑《日本书目志》过程中发生的。《日本书目志》里曾录列带有"改良"一词的书名十余种，如《马匹改良说》、《实地改良蚕事新说》、《新撰米作改良法》、《地租改良策》、《演剧改良论私考》、《社会改良及耶稣教之关系》等等。在"稻作书"部分的按语中康有为强调："日本稻作皆改良之书，尤精也"。[23]在农业门"土壤类"的按语中，他写道："吾读日本所译《土壤篇》，何其暗与《管子》合也。泰西合数十国探求之，益精详矣。又加以改良之书，则吾《周礼》骍刚用牛、赤绨用羊之法也。因天之功，补以人力，夫愚者全乎天，智者全乎人，圣者兼天人而用之，以裁成辅相焉，改良是也"。[24]他感慨中国这个蚕桑业的发祥地，由于"四千年学不加进"，当时养蚕业已大大落后于日本和法国。原因是后者"有改良之论，有进化之方，有验瘟之器，有贮粒之法，有微粒子病鉴定之法，有微粒子病识验之报，其术极细以精矣"[25]等，可见在他那里，"改良"的努力实与"进化"是紧密联系的。他甚至意味深长地宣称："凡人治之道，靡有舍改良者也"。[26]这就将"改良"上升到社会哲学和政治文化的高度，来加以强调。由此出发，康有为还最早提到了"通史改良"的问题。这一问题以往学界通常都是在章太炎和梁启超20世纪初年的有关论说中加以讨论的，其实康有为早在戊戌时期已经发出先声，他从注重演剧与移风易俗之关系，乐亡与礼坏历史关联的角度提醒国人："日人尚未能及此意也，然能为通史改良考之矣。"[27]这样，康有为就从将生物进化和社会进化相联系的角度，彰显了"改良"的意义以及作为世界主体的人在其中的重要作用。它与严复在《天演论》中强调"与天争胜"的进化观是基本一致的。中国古文中并无"改良"一词[28]，缺乏那种表现改为"良"即朝好的方面或方向变革的双音节词汇，甚至"改"与"良"的二字组合，也不符合"改"字的传统构词习惯。所以1903年湖北巡抚端方戒谕科举士子不准入卷之词中，即以"改良"一词居其首[29]；五四前期，以保守著称的文化怪杰辜鸿铭，仍在讥嘲"改良"二字之不通[30]。实际上，康有为对日本"改良"一词热心引进、情有独衷和频繁使用绝非偶然，该词恰好便利地满足了其渴望和呼吁变法的"关键词"之简约要求，因而也就径直成为他心目中连接传统变易观与进化论、沟通进化论与变法运动的语词阶梯和观念桥梁。毫无疑问，"改良"一词乃是戊戌维新时期最重要的政治文化关键词。1898年1月，康有为在著名的《上清帝第五书》中，已开始使用"改良"一词来呼吁光绪帝变法，所谓"察阅万国得失，以求进步改良"是也；在进呈《日本变政考》的奏折中，他又强调泰西治国"刮垢除弊，更新改良，历千万变化而成今法"的历程，同时赞美日本变法"日异月殊，经百十之阻挠，过千万之丛弊，刮垢除旧，改良进步"[31]的精神。在《日本变政考》一书中，他更是异乎寻常地连续使用"改良"一词来揄扬日本维新效法西方、不断扩展的改革追求，抒发自己渴望全面变法的强烈愿望："当是时，不独君之以治国改良为主，乃至人民官庶，爱西国之风，上下一心。至于------演剧改良会，讲谈歌舞之矫风，下迄书画改良、言文改良、小说改良，音乐改良、唱歌改良、美术改良、衣食宫室改良------甚至有民种改良论，换大和民族为高加索民族者。"[32]像这样一段文字中连续反复使用"改良"一词的现象，不仅在戊戌时期难得一睹，即使在20世纪最初几年的中国也是不多见的。笔者因此认为，如果不在后来与"革命派"相对的"改良主义"意义上来使用"改良"一词，而是在其原初意义上来使用，那么称戊戌时期的康有为等为"改良派"，实在是再恰当不过。与此同时，康有为对"进步"、"进化"等名词概念的使用和传播[33]，也有类似的政治和社会文化效应。这里就不再赘述了。值得一提的还有"版权"一词的戊戌运用史，它同样可以反映康有为作为维新思想家积极传播近代化理念的启蒙先驱形象。《日本变政考》一书中传播现代"版权"一词及其概念，主要集中在介绍日本《出版条例》部分，其中一共使用了25个"版权"（或"板权"）名词，内容丰富，对版权的内涵与意义讲得清楚明白[34]。稍前，黄遵宪的《日本国志》也谈到这一问题，并率先使用了"版权"一词和概念，不过只是一带而过而已。遗憾的是，新近研究中国近代版权思想和实践的历史著作，在谈到"版权"一词时，或认定蔡元培1902年率先使用于《日人盟我版权》一文，或认定1899年12月《清议报》上刊载的日文译编《论布版权制度于支那》一文最早使用[35]，而对于此前康有为、黄遵宪的有关思想言论均未予注意，这是应该加以补充和纠正的。戊戌时期，康有为对许多日本汉字新名词的含义懵懵懂懂，其所"运用"也往往跌跌撞撞，难以摆脱汉语传统用法和习惯理解的制约，因此矛盾之处所在多有。这与他当时完全不懂日语有着直接关系。在这方面，他对"社会"和"经济"等词的使用颇有代表性。下面仅以"社会"一词为例加以说明。总体说来，康有为戊戌时期主要在结社组会的社团意义上使用"社会"一词。这种用法的"社会"一词在传统中国虽也存在却并不常用，常用的是"会"与"社"这种单音节词汇。那种指称人类共同生活的组织形式和彼此关系之总体的现代"社会"概念和新名词，在1897年以前的《时务报》中已经得到过准确传播[36]。应当说康有为对"社会"一词的热心取用，如同黄遵宪在《日本国志》所用的"社会"一词一样，正是受到来自日本的现代"社会"概念直接碰撞和影响的结果，或者更准确地说，是他们从自己的理解出发，去"运用"日本汉字新名词"社会"的结果，故其彼此含义仍存在着明显差别。在《日本书目志》"社会学"书目下，康有为写道："大地上，一大会而已。会大群，谓之国；会小群，谓之公司，谓之社会。社会之学，统合大小群而发其耏合之条理，故无大群小群，善合其会则强，不善合其会则弱。泰西之自强，非其国能为之也，皆其社会为之也"。[37]这里，康氏强调小群与大群之间的联系合构意义与功能，其阐释和运用毋宁说已经具备了一点超越一般传统结社意义的新内涵。这也是当时强调"合群益智救国"功能之"群学"流行的一个可资的思想来源和"学会"风气蔚然兴起的直接根据。&nbsp;戊戌维新时期体现这种新合群意义的"社会"一词最为引人注目的使用，正是康有为在1898年1月那份著名的"上清帝第六书"中完成的。这份统筹变法全局的奏折提出了设立十二专局的主张，其中的第十一局就名为"社会局"[38]。"社会局"一词的空前亮相，究竟曾给当时举国士子带来何种印象、观感与想象，如今已不得而知，但我们知道的是，后来当完全现代意义的"社会"一词广泛流行开来之后，康有为本人却因讨厌该词而在《戊戌奏稿》中特将"社会局"改成了"游会局"。顺便提醒一句，研究戊戌时期康有为对日本汉字新名词的使用，千万不能随意引用《戊戌奏稿》中的文字，该"奏稿"大半属十年后康氏本人改窜过的奏折，其中更多地采用了20世纪初广泛流行开来的不少新名词。不少学者引用《请废八股试帖楷法试士改用策论折》和《请开学校折》中的"科学"用例，来作康有为率先创用"科学"一词的证据，便属以讹传讹，恰是上了他改窜"奏稿"之当。要想知道康有为当年因不懂"社会"一词在日语中作为人类生活共同体的宏观之义，是如何懵懵懂懂、不懂装懂地编译日文，以进呈光绪皇帝、"启沃圣听"的，我们不妨看一看下面这段文字中他对"社会"一词的使用："举国社会，变习靡然，千载旧风，一时尽革------宫廷内服西欧衣服，行西欧礼式，国家以之为基础，社会以之为仰望也如此。-----当此时，政治社会之风愈益激动。少年热血之士，老成智识之辈，及四方有志者，皆感奋兴起。-----有志诸士于天主寺开壮士恳亲会，至者九千人。井上敬次郎述开会之意曰：'凡事物之改良，唯视乎社会之进步。吾等士人，从古皆为天下之事，建国家之业，各国皆以社会建立。----行政之事，与社会之进步相并而行，维新之后，封建之制度一变。凡人民生活之状态，诸般之作业，皆就更新之途辙，駸駸于进路之中'。"（《日本变政考》）[39]如果说在上述这段文字中，康有为使用"社会"一词尽管强其就我和令人费解、但还可以勉强在"结社"或"社团"的意义上跌跌撞撞地通过的话（其翻译内容不准乃至荒谬姑且不论），那么下面的一段文字则不能："（波兰）国分二族：一曰豪族，一曰民族。是等豪族，位于社会之上，自以其祖宗有功于国，以仕宦世家，而不知学，掌握生杀予夺之权，视民族不啻犬马"。（《波兰分灭记》）[40]这里康有为从日语照搬来的"社会"一词，显然只能在完全现代的意义上理解时，语句才能通顺。因此，我们恐怕已不能绝对说，现代意义的"社会"一词根本没有在戊戌时期康有为的行文中出现过，尽管他当时并未太弄懂其真实含义[41]。这种情况，也只有在那一特定时期日文译编成汉文的过程中才有可能发生。近现代意义的"社会"一词和概念之出现与实践，是清末民初政治文化领域里值得重视的"事件"，而康有为与该"事件"的源头有关。他对"社会"一词的早期使用蕴涵着部分超越传统的意义，其影响可能更是出乎其意料之外，而后来特别是民初时，他却顽固拒绝在完整的现代意义上使用"社会"一词（下文还要谈到）。这一前后变化，不仅生动地反映了他个人与日本新名词关系的典型面相，也有助于激发今人从一个特定角度，对那个时代日本新名词流播中国的复杂蕴涵进行深入反思。&nbsp;四、&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;新名词传播之反响与1904年康氏的反戈一击在近代中国，各类新名词早有传播，但真正引起社会关注，并开始被视为问题，整体上说实起于戊戌时期。这是因为此期报刊上开始广泛登载慷慨激昂、议论风发的新式政论文字，初步显示出新名词对中国人写文章的影响。这些新式文字有两个突出特点，一是较多人文社会科学新名词特别是政法新名词开始运用于其中；二是不少自然科学新名词被用来说明社会现象和社会问题。前者自然以日本汉字新名词开始传播为明显特征，后者虽包涵日本新名词在内，但却以鸦片战争以来传教士和中国人合作翻译、尤其是以同文馆和江南制造局翻译的西方自然科学书籍中的新名词为主要表象。不过，从现存常见的一些材料来看，戊戌时期，那些对新名词入文现象持批评和厌恶态度的人士，似乎并未特别在意那些从日本引入的人文社会科学及政法名词，或至少没有太在意这些词的"东瀛"身份。他们倒是对一些自然科学术语的所谓"滥用"之风更为敏感。这从王先谦和叶德辉等保守人士的有关言论中，可以概知。如王先谦就批评指出："自时务馆开，遂至文不成体，如脑筋、起点、压、爱、热、涨、抵、阻诸力，及支那、黄种、四万万人等字，纷纶满纸，尘起污人"。[42]叶德辉则将这些"触目鳞比"的新名词归为"异学之皮词，西文之俚语"，强调由于它们的泛滥，"而东南数省之文风日趋于诡僻，不得谓之词章"[43]。王、叶等人共同拟定的《湘省学约》除抨击上述新名词之外，还提到了"摄力"、"吸力"、"震旦"、"成线"、"血轮"、"以太"、"白种"等其他名词，谴责《湘报》的作者对这些新名词"摇笔即来"、"或者好为一切幽渺怪僻之言，阅不终篇，令人气逆"，&nbsp;断定这类人"言既不轨，心必不正"，必须严防惩处[44]。由此也可见，其政治态度与语言文化取向之间有着密切的关联。类似的批判论调不仅出现在湖南一省，上海最著名的大报《申报》也有同样的批评。如1898年该报上曾登载一篇《变法当先防流弊论》的文章，就指责学无根柢的新进少年"著书立说，动称起点与某处，或称设法保全黄种。夫起点系泰西化学家言，犹发源也。发源二字，沿用已久，人所共知，何必以起点譬之。黄种指亚细亚洲，我以亚细亚书之，安患人之迟疑不解，而必于白种黑种紫铜色种之外，以黄种自居？！"该文还分析指出："此种语言，只见于近三五年著述内，从前固无是也"。[45]应当承认，仅就现象而论，当时政治思想保守的人士对维新派好用上述名词的揭示还是相当准确的。不惟梁启超、严复、谭嗣同和唐才常等人如此[46]，康有为的表现也相当突出。比如，在1895年的《公车上书》中，"四万万人"的说法就屡见不鲜（实际上，1891年他的《答朱蓉生书》里就有使用）；在《京师保国会第一次集会演说》中，不仅"四万万人"一词随处可见，"热力"、"涨力"、"吸力"等词也是联翩出现、彰人耳目。不过，在这些被指斥的"新名词"中，"起点"、"压力"、"阻力"、"热力"等词在日制汉字新名词中虽也存在，但康有为等人的使用却并非直接来自日本的影响，而是他们大量阅读江南制造局所译科技西书的结果。这一点，只要翻阅一下19世纪80年代后期和90年代初期康有为和其他人的著述，便不难得知[47]。可以说，对传教士翻译西书中的新名词之较多使用，从一个方面实反映了戊戌以前康有为对新名词入文的积极态度。相对于诸多由"力"组成的新名词来说，"支那"、"黄种"、"白种"等涉及到近代民族或种族意识的名词，乃至"起点"一词的活跃倒的确与日本用法有关，特别是以"支那"自称国名现象的流行，诚属日本直接影响的结果，尽管当时对于一般中国士人来说，懂得该词为印度人称呼中国已经算不上什么高深知识[48]。叶德辉就曾讥嘲那些"笔舌掉罄，自称支那"者为"东施效颦"，结果是"非文非质、不中不西"，必遭"邻女窃笑"。[49]王先谦和叶德辉等当时的政治文化保守派人士之批评内涵表明，戊戌时期日本新名词传播的影响是不能夸大的。当时，日本新名词尚较多地出现在那些译文和编译文之中，一般士子们精心结构文章时，对于日本新名词的使用其实仍然很有限。这或许可以作为上述批评不明确提及日本新名词的原因之一种解释。实际上，日本新名词在中国广泛流播，被普遍应用于著书作文，致使中国文体文风发生重要变化，还是戊戌以后特别是1902年之后的事情。1904年，痛恨士子滥用日本新名词的陕西布政使樊增祥，在追溯这一现象的发端时，曾痛切指出："中国文字自有申报馆而俗不可医，然犹不至于鹦鹉改言从靺鞨，猕猴换舞学高骊也。迨戊戌以后，此等丑怪字眼始络绎堆积于报章之上，无知之物承窍乞余，相沿相袭。"[50]此当为亲历者之可靠证言。在戊戌以后日本新名词传播方面，旅日学者和留日学生发挥了重要作用，其中影响最大者莫若梁启超，尤其是他所创办的《清议报》和《新民丛报》。当时受日本名词影响的文体被称之为"新民体"，可以反映后者作用之一斑。不过虽然如此，今人对戊戌时期日本新名词在华传播的那段特殊历史却也不该忽略。如果没有那段早期语言实践的综合积累，梁启超1898年底到日本创办《清议报》之后，便立马能在上面大批使用、逐渐自由挥洒日本新名词，实在是很难想象的。从某种程度上说，人们将"戊戌"作为转折年代本身，已经暗涵了这一时期对后来变化因素的积聚酝酿意义[51]。正因为日本汉字新名词流行于戊戌以后，特别是1902年之后，今天我们所能见到的直接抨击这一语言文化现象、或禁止使用某些日本名词的早期史料多发生在1903-1905年之间，也就毫不足怪：比如1903年，端方下令湖北科考试卷不准用"改良"、"起点"、"反影"、"特色"之类新名词[52]；比如1903年底和1904年初，张之洞主持制订《学务纲要》，对"社会"、"团体"、"机关"、"组织"、"影响"、"代表"、"困难"、"冲突"和"观念"等16个日本名词加以批判，明定"戒袭外国无谓名词，以存国文，端士风"；再比如1905年国粹派人士主办的《国粹杂志》创刊，其"略例"公开声明：撰述文体"纯用国文风格，务求渊懿精实，一洗今日东瀛文体粗浅之恶习"，等等，不一而足。有学者因此认为，这一时期，朝野上下已一致形成了一种贬斥和抵制"东瀛文体"的风气[53]，笔者深以为然。不过，若仅就"在野"一方对"东瀛文体"的贬斥和抵制而言，目前的有关研究还主要只谈到了革命派的一翼国粹派之言行，对于当时正流亡海外的保皇派的相关思想活动却较为忽视。实则保皇派首领康有为，此时也发表了值得注意的意见，并且采取了与其戊戌时对待日本新名词截然不同的否定取向与保守姿态。康有为正式批评国人滥用日本新名词的现象，始于1904年他在英国参观游览期间，更准确地说，可能肇因于他与剑桥大学大汉学家翟理思关于宗教问题的谈话。康氏最初对日本新名词的贬责，主要也是从"宗教"一词和概念发难，针对的乃是孔子不被承认为"教主"、儒教不被认可为"宗教"的观点。也就是说，其首要出发点仍然是政治文化观念的考虑。不认为孔教为宗教的观点不仅西人有言，康有为的弟子梁启超在1902年的《保教非所以尊孔论》中，也有明确阐发。但在康看来，"夫今之敢倡是说者，不过以日本书盛行，日读而迷之。日人以神道为宗教，乃日人之妄定名词耳"。其实"今日人宗教之名，本由译欧美之书而出"，它在西方的原型为Religion（音译为"厘利尽"），"厘利尽者，谓凡能树立一义，能倡徒众者之意------与中国所谓教，别无殊异，所含广大"，绝不限于仅指"神道教"。如果仅限于指神道教，为何不直接译成"神道"或"神教"，而非要译成"宗教"不可呢？故他认为日人以"宗教"对译Religion，"所译欧义不完不备"，由此导致外人肆意攻击我中国为"无教"之国而无言以对，就更属"无耻无愤、不知不觉"之蠢货行为了[54]。不仅如此，康有为还认为，日人所造的"宗教"一词，也不符合原有汉字的构词习惯，而是落入了不必要的"双字"或"复文"之六朝佛教构词的窠臼，既累赘不堪，且"不妥不通"，这也是造成人们误认为孔教非"宗教"性质的一种语言构词因素。他写道："日人之于华文训诂，多所未惬。如自由、经济等词句，皆与中国本义相反。即体操二字，在中国文法，只可曰操体乃通。而其行文又习于佛典之重文，若慈悲、勇猛、坚固等字，必用双名。由是主名百物，多用双字。如教主立教之教，而必曰宗教；教学之教，而必曰教育。此今人译述日文而视为确然不刊者，实考之而皆极不通者也。夫宗之与教，二文本不相关。中国自古名词，有言祖宗者，有言宗庙者，未有言宗教者。日人之为此名词也，始出于佛学者也。自唐是世佛学分离，于是《传灯录》分五宗------所谓宗者，犹战国诸子之分曰某子------撰录之僧，偶作名词，本无意义------日人以其复文之俗习读传灯之书，乃取宗字加于教上。盖当时教者，系专指佛教言之；宗者，专指佛教下诸宗派验之也。教大宗小，以宗加诸教上，已大不适矣。"基于此种辨析，康有为慷慨激昂地表示："今以日人所学我数千年文明之汉文，我乃舍而从日人不妥可笑之名词，愚陋甚矣！是故宗教二字之不典不妥，在日人已属不可，况吾国人？故必不可引之于笔端。吾国数千年文词，只有教字之一字一义。吾国人行文，只可曰教，安有宗教之不妥贴而令人迷惑者乎"。[55]在清末，康有为不仅是最早自觉模仿西方宗教以从事"孔教"运动的实践者，也是在接触西方"宗教"（Religion）概念之后，从理论上正式论证儒教是"宗教"的思想家。他与其弟子共同开启了近代中国"儒教是否为'宗教'"讨论的先河。民国初年孔教会运动期间，这一讨论达到高潮[56]。应当说，康有为这种从一个重要的名词概念出发，同时致力于维护民族语文"纯洁性"和中国儒教传统文化"主导性"的双重出击，一出场便显示出不同于当时一般"日本新名词"批评者的政治文化眼界和思想高度。不过，从康有为的论证方式来看，他却存在着以传统汉语中的"教"字内涵，一相情愿地强行解读"Religion"的问题。这与今天汉语中翻译Religion&nbsp;的"宗教"一词流行以后，反过来影响对传统带"教"字词汇含义的理解，造成"儒教"、"道教"等概念内涵狭隘化认同的问题，有着相通之处，但方向却恰好相反。而当"信教自由"被悬为不易的政治原则之后，更必然要对现实社会中的各种"教"争取合法的"宗教"身份与地位，产生直接作用，民初"孔教是否为宗教"之争，只不过是类似争论的一个缩影而已。语言概念互动的复杂性，有时能使今人感到既有趣又无奈。在佛教传入以前，诚如康有为所言，中文里并无"宗教"两字连用的现象，佛教传入之后，在一些佛教典籍中，这两字连用的情形开始出现。除了"宗"字当作"宗奉"的动词使用时可以不计外，名词的"宗教"大约有两种用法：或泛称某宗奉行之教、某人某派所宗奉之教；或特指某学门教派的宗旨或教义，但它们都局限于该教门或学派内部而论，不像现代"宗教"一词具有作为抽象含义的范畴（category）性质[57]。这或许也是康有为称传统中国的"宗教"一词"偶作名词，本无意义"的原因所在（而"教"字则具有抽象义）。用传统中文里的"宗教"二字来对译"Religion"，始于日本明治初年。1880年代以后，此种用法的"宗教"逐渐传到中国。戊戌时期，一些中国人开始在现代意义上自觉加以使用。康有为在《波兰分灭记》中对日本"宗教"一词也有懵懂挪用[58]，不过他当时，似乎尚不十分明白其在西方和日本的原义。真正懂得其确切含义的是严复，但他最初也同样不愿使用"宗教"一词，而宁愿将其改写为"教宗"。梁启超、唐才常和章太炎等人，也一度追随严复采用"教宗"。可见作为范畴的"宗教"一词，对于中国人来说，最初使用起来确有某种别扭之感。但问题究竟是否像康有为所说的那样，出在"教大宗小"、把"宗加在教上"明显不合适这一点上面，目前尚难以判定。即便对于康有为来说，结构相似但影响更大的"科学"一词，却并没有因类似情形而受到他同样的责难。这反过来也能够证明，政治文化理念在康有为反对"宗教"一词的过程中实居于相当重要的地位。后来，"宗教"一词在中国的命运众所周知，而"教宗"的相关使用却很快即遭淘汰。个中原因，至少与"教宗"字面上重在"教派"而不是"教"之本身不无关系。同时，明清以降，中文里的"教宗"还有一个表示罗马"教皇"或"教化王"之义的用法在竞争，这一点，恐怕多少也发挥了一些消极作用。1904年，康有为所批评的日本新名词除了"宗教"之外，还涉及"自由"、"经济"、"世纪"、"体操"，乃至"高等"和"中学"、"小学"等词[59]。他后来的批评中，更包括了"目的"、"命令"、"社会"、"运动"、"取消"、"手续"和"人格"等十余词。在这些词中，有不少他戊戌时期多曾懵懂使用过。"体操"一词不用说，他曾反复使用；"取消"一词也是用过的；即便是后来康有为极为讨厌的"目的"和"命令"两词，戊戌时期他又何尝没有使用？比如《波兰分灭记》里就有所谓"不问何人命令，不必遵奉云"的句子[60]，《日本变政考》中也多有"法律命令"等类似用法[61]。至于"目的"一词，他甚至还在"案语"中主动加以应用："唯日本之变政也，勇于去弊，毅于兴新------而先其变法者，尚依然故我，皆目的未定，人心不一之故也"。[62]因此，若以20世纪初康有为自定的批评对象和内涵来看，戊戌时期他自己当属于"滥用"日本新名词的始作俑者之一而无疑，尽管他本人对此似乎尚缺乏自知之明。关于康有为对日本新名词前后态度的矛盾变化，他自己曾从"变革"与"保守"关系的角度作出过解释，大意是说，中国向来只知保守，当万国交通竞争之际，若不能变数千年朽弊之旧法，必不能竞存于新世，所以戊戌时候，他"甘冒犯一国之怒而毅然思变之"，但现在情况有所不同了："今之时，人人亦既知变，则应就轨道之可循者寻求之，亦有宜温故存旧者"。此种解释，显然还有些笼统，也不完全符合他当时采用日本新名词的行为逻辑，相比之下，1904年他所作的另外一段夫子自道，倒可能与事实要更为接近："近人名词必用日本书句，称年必用西历世纪，虽属不知自立，然无论誉之攻之，要其不为顽固保守，则显而易见也。初尚以为仅一二少数人，今则駸駸乎几遍于全国矣。我自戊戌维新，忧心忡忡，日惧国土之覆亡而人士之不我从也。曾几何时，相将突变，甚且攻我为守旧矣。"[63]康有为的这一自述很可玩味，他于自我解嘲中，实暗藏着一种对自己前后态度变化的巧妙辩解：戊戌时期，他因对"国土之覆亡"忧心忡忡，而提倡国人师法日本，虽不懂日文，也仍肯热心去删改和润色译自日本的文字，以唤醒国人。他之采纳、挪用和传播日制汉字新名词，正是在这一过程中有意无意得以实现的。那时侯，康有为真正关心的乃是政治上的变法，包括政治文化理念的改变，他并不在意于语文变革本身，更无意于以日本名词去丰富发展中国语文，在这一点上，他与稍后提倡"诗界革命"和"文界革命"的梁启超、黄遵宪等人，实迥然不同。&nbsp;五、教训梁启超与坚执国粹论：议论及反思清末民初，在日本新名词的传播史上，康有为与梁启超这对师徒的关系值得特别关注。梁启超在流亡日本创办《清议报》之前，大约使用了三十几个日本新名词，并明显受到其师康有为的启发和影响。而到日本后不久，随即进入了他率性传播日本名词、以"舆论娇子"独领文坛风骚的时代。20世纪初年，当梁在这方面走得更激更远时，作为老师的康有为因无法容忍，不得不处心积虑地对其加以规劝。在1910年8月5日给梁启超的一封信中，他语重心长地劝诫梁说："汝文才气绝佳，惟久于东中，又声名已成，有意开新，乃遮拾东文入文，凡至恶俗之字，如手段、手腕（其他组织、目的、舞台、二十（世）纪，为字满目）等亦日日入文，以至波荡成风。文笔则芜漫，文调则不成，千古文章之入于地狱恶道矣，莫今日若。中国已百物所有，一切须变，独此道德、文章、衣服、饮食四者可存耳。若文章亦皆芜秽之，古复何有？此诚汝之罪也。计十年后（中国不亡，文学复兴），必有英才领袖文学者，以汝为的而攻射之。吾欲规汝久矣。今汝自悔其非，不如汝自忏之（何不即作一文自忏而攻用东文者），如辟革命然，免援后生以口实，岂不美欤？（且免后日须将各书重译一次，功德亦大）。汝观吾文，曾肯用一日本字否？日本变新制可采，若以中文造恶俗字则不可从也。汝今心术醇正，虚骄皆去，此非论文，实学道之进境也。至学韩非于报体，颇宜。以汝之学，无所不可。为今之计，不必求增美，先求释回，但扫尽埃秽，清光大来，然后渔猎酣醉于古人，无所不可耳。"[64]在清末输入和传播日本新名词研究方面，这封信无疑具有着不容忽视的资料价值，笔者孤陋，目前尚未见他人对此信予以引述和讨论。在该信中，康有为对这位已经名满天下的弟子的有关行为痛加批评，讲明利害、指明出路，毫不含糊，然又注意照顾到梁启超的自尊心，并不忘对其才气和能力有所夸奖，真真是煞费苦心。不过，当我们看到信中"汝观吾文，曾肯用一日本字否？"时，仍不免要对康有为的性格和时人对日本名词的了解程度，产生一定的消极联想。如今，梁启超此前对康有为表示"后悔"的文字我们已经难以见到，无法确知他的态度是否真诚。但此后他显然并没有听从老师的告诫，去做一篇公开表示忏悔并"攻东文"的文章，当然也没有公开去揭康有为早年在使用日本新名词方面所做的"示范"之短，以为自己辩护，这一点基本上可以确定无疑。进入民国之初，康有为对日本新名词广泛流播的那种反感情绪仍然没有消减，甚而有所增强。1913年7月，他在《中国颠危在全法欧美而尽弃国粹说》一文中，再次痛斥所谓"文字名词，且媚及日本"的"无耻可悲"现象，认为汉语里滥用日本新名词，是抛弃传统雅言，丢失国粹；学日本俚语，乃是语言上的退化。就康有为个人而言，这种语言态度与他政治文化理念上趋于保守是大体一致的。他情绪激动地写道："或谓新法语文宜于一致，岂知进化之理，一致者，当使升鄙言以归于雅音，岂可去雅音而从于俚语？-----若易好音为鴞鸣，是谓退化，岂可一致？推其所原，盖日本文法长累过甚，彼以旧俗，既牵汉文，又加英文法，不得不然。我国数千年之文章，单字成文，比音成乐，杂色成章，万国罕比其美，岂可自舍之？且以读东书、学东文之故，乃并其不雅之名词而皆师学之，于是手段、手续、取消、取缔、打消、打击之名，在日人以为俗语者，在吾国则为雅文，至命令皆用之矣。其他若崇拜、社会、价值、绝对、唯一、要素、经济、人格、谈判、运动，双方之字，连章满目，皆与吾中国训诂不相通晓。英之华文博士为恶士佛大学教授褒洛者，读中国书数十年，近读报章，至'社会'二字，不得其解，谓吾读中国书久，何无之也，故谓与中国训诂不通也。天下之褒洛多矣，其日见'取缔'、'手续'而不得其解者，十居其九。则何为乎？若以难中国之旧人乎，抑以夸异闻之新博乎？接前之文史，则不相通；垂后之文史，则不为尔雅。今之时流，岂不知日本文学皆出自中国，乃俯而师日本之俚词，何无耻也。始于清末之世，滥于共和之初，十年以来，真吾国文学之大厄也。"康有为甚至还大言以告国人："吾中国若自立不亡，则十年后必耻用日本文矣；若犹用之而不耻，则十年后中国亦必亡矣"。[65]这些议论，与清末张之洞和刘师培的有些说法，几乎是一脉相承，而且其抨击的具体词汇还要多些。尤其是其中充溢的那种民族主义情绪，民国初年时实在显得格外突出。在这方面，就公开发表物而言，可以与康文匹敌的，大约只有两年后即1915年，贵州留日学生彭文祖所著的《盲人瞎马之新名词》一书了。该书大骂来自日本的所谓"杂种名词"，"杂种话"和"杂种文法"，痛斥中国人由此所表现出来的"盲从性"，认为"新名词之为鬼为祟，害国殃民以启亡国亡种之兆，至于不可纪极也"。[66]其所抨击的新名词之数量，也要远过康有为，它还包括了康氏所没有提到的"引渡"、"让渡"、"抽象（的）"、"具体（的）"、"积极（的）"、"消极（的）"、"动员（令）"、"场合"、"必要"等日本名词[67]。不过，就其对日本汉字新名词"不妥"性的批评内涵而言，彭文祖却未见得比康有为更为高明。沈国威曾将清末民初"守旧人士"反对日本语词的理由概括为四点，一是日本词不雅驯，所谓"文字怪异"、"鄙俚粗率"（张之洞语），所谓"东籍之文，冗芜空衍，无文法可言"（刘师培语），所谓"生造字眼，取古今从不连属之字，阄合为文"（樊增祥语）等，都属此类；二是新旧、中外搀杂破坏了文体的统一性；三是译词界说混乱，不能使人正确理解。这又分为两种情况：其一为新名词字面义与原词概念义之间冲突，其二为某些译者和使用者别有用心，故意曲解；四是民族主义的情理之要求[68]。其中，第一点和第二点理由基本上无法分割。如果以上述理由来衡量当时康有为的有关言论，其否定性批评可以说较为全面，因而也具有着某种典型性和代表性。仅就其中第一、二点理由来说，他的观点阐发之鲜明与透彻，在清末时起码是相当出众的。在康氏看来，汉字单音节构词作文（称为"单字成文"）其实很美妙，它不仅是汉文雅洁的基础，甚至也是其韵律节奏（称为"文调"）之完美得以保证的前提，而日本双音节词（称为"双字"）的大量引入，既"俚俗"不堪，还致使传统汉文变得冗蔓。笔者以为，若就汉语文言文的特点而言，康的这一强调并非完全无的放失，他同时提请国人进行词汇变革时，不能使其"接前之文史，则不相通；垂后之文史，则不为尔雅"，即便是对现代语体文来说，也不能以其姿态保守而将其思想文化意义一笔抹杀。毕竟，任何一种主体性的新选择都是以自我有所保守为前提的，而当人们都热衷于盲目趋新时，固执地公然表达这种保守性的选择智慧，同样需要一种文化责任感和勇气。只不过，这种有意义的"保守"标准或"度"实在是太难以把握了。实际上，当中国这样一个古老文明面临全新的近代文明整体冲击的时候，语言文字究竟如何迎接挑战，其复杂性和艰难程度远非今人所能简单想象。在这一过程中，到底如何才能抛开狭隘民族主义的立场，去正确认识和评价来自比中国先行一步的"和制"汉字新名词的流播，更是至今国人也仍没能很好解决的问题。何况那个选择时代早已匆匆过去，而国人浸泡在众多"和制"名词的语言文化环境中，也已经整整有了一个世纪？！不过也有一些现象，时间是可能帮助人们深化认识的。比如今天，我们就能较为深刻地意识到，双音节词和多音节词的剧增对于保证新增词汇含义确定性的必要和汉语现代化的重要意义[69]，也更容易认识到，在日本汉字新名词汹涌而至的时候，仅仅是出于带有政治色彩的文化民族主义情绪去消极的抵制，而不是积极去创造更为优秀的双音节和多音节词，特别是政府若不及时有效去组织和介入相关工作，结果必定无济于事。而这反过来，也有助于我们了解康有为当年以双音节字组词的缘故去抵制日本名词的做法之偏颇。实际上，还在当时，就有一些政治文化立场有别的人士提出过，日本所造的那些汉字双音节以上新名词、在对应西方名词的过程中，往往要比单音节词含义更为确定化的问题。如王国维1905年就曾指出："日本人多用双字，其不能通者则更用四字以表之，中国则习用单字，精密不精密之分全在于此"。[70]甚至连对日文并不满意、主张欧化的无政府革命党人吴稚晖也曾为日本大造"双叠之词"进行辩护，强调中国人对这些词"习焉不察，仅目为掉文而已，其实有时非双用不能达意"。[71]凡此都可资今人去作进一步的反思。同样可资人们反思的，还有当时人对所谓日本名词"雅驯"问题的反向辩论。就在清廷颁布"学务纲要"，张之洞和康有为等朝野人士对日本名词大加非议的时候，当时出任京师大学堂心理学教习的日本学者、精通汉语的服部宇之吉却敢于站出来，公然表示不同意见。他在1904年底完成的《心理学讲义》中写道："奏定学堂章程纲要有不许用新语之不雅驯一条，然学术欲随时而进步，学者随事而创作新语，亦势所不得免也。创作新语，中国不乏其例。春秋战国诸子暂舍而不论，即唐代玄奘等译佛典，亦多此法。盖传外国之学术宗教者，自己国语苟无适当之语，则不得已而为此也。玄奘等所造之语，在当时未必皆雅驯，而今人则不复问其雅驯与否。由是观之，语之雅驯与否，毕竟不过惯与不惯而已。今中国正当广求知识于外国之时，而敢问语之雅驯或因此致阻碍学术之发达，则岂能免颠倒本末轻重之讥乎？本书所用学语，专据日本学界常用之语，其中或有所谓不雅驯者，然在日本则既已通行，而在中国又无可代用，毋宁仍用之，非敢蔑明章也"。[72]事实上，服部宇之吉上述这"理直气壮"的争辩，值得今人反思的已经远不止"雅驯"一端而已。当然，若单从中国语文传统合理性现代转换的整体情形来说，是否当时日本所造的那些新名词都较为理想、无法替代，则仍然是别一问题。甚至"后来是否流行开来"，也未必能作为合理评判的真正标准。在此，关涉政治和社会其他因素的成败论并不能取代优劣论，而优劣与否，也并非今天都已完全没有讨论的余地和语言文化意义。不过要想对此问题有更为深入的认识，即便从历史研究的角度来说，也至少有两项资料工作需要先行积累，一是当时都有哪些传入的日本名词没有流行开？二是后来那些流行开来的日本汉字名词，在清末民初时都曾有过哪些替代方案？而这，显然都已不是本文所能完成的任务，故只好留待将来再去探讨。最后需要交代的是，民国初年，康有为基于政治思想立场、文化态度和语言认知所明确反对的"宗教"、"社会"、"目的"、"世纪"等词，他个人在写作时也的确是有意坚持不去使用的，如将"宗教"经常改称"教"，"世纪"往往改为"纪"等。但偶尔也有使用的时候，如1912年在《中华民国国会元老院选举法案》中，他就两次使用了"目的"一词；而对"宗教"一词的使用，相对说来还要多些。语词的使用一旦成为社会习惯，任何个人的政治和文化意志，多无法轻易加以改变，反而最终不得不被迫地去适应它。康有为也并不例外。&nbsp;（本文原载黄兴涛主编：《新史学》第3卷，中华书局2009年12月版）&nbsp;[1]&nbsp;据沈国威估计，"东文报译"栏大约翻译日文字数约达40万字。有关古城贞吉在时务报馆的工作和上海的情形，可参见沈国威：《关于古城贞吉的<沪上销夏录>》，载《或问》（日本"近代东西言语文化接触研究会"编）2004年10月第8号。[2]&nbsp;关于戊戌时期及以前日本人与日本汉字新词在华传播的有关问题，可参见黄兴涛《日本人与"和制"汉字新词在晚清中国的传播》，载《寻根》2006年第4期。[3]戊戌前康有为就看过这些著作，如1894年的《桂学答问》和两年后的《南海师承记》里，就都提到"《日本图经》、《日本新政考》，日事也略见矣"。同时还认为何如璋的《使东述略》"可观"，见《康有为全集》第二集第23页，217页。[4]&nbsp;参见郑海麟：《黄遵宪传》，中华书局2006年版，第168-169页。[5]&nbsp;有关戊戌以前中国人传播日本汉字新名词的情况，可参见马西尼著，黄河清译《现代汉语词汇的形成》，汉语大词典出版社1997年版，第106-124页；沈国威：《近代日中語彙交流史--新漢語の生成と受容》，笠间书院，1994，第80-122页。[6]&nbsp;同前引马西尼《现代汉语词汇的形成》，作者表示："在19世纪的文献中，我还没有发现'电话'这词"。见该书，第200页。但《东亚报》1898年9月26日第10册就有一文题为《地球电话统计》。[7]&nbsp;在1888年"上清帝第一书"中，康有为写道："日本崎岖小岛，近者君臣变法兴治，十余年间，百废俱举，南灭琉球，北辟虾夷，欧洲大国，睨而不敢伺。"这可以为本立论之证据。[8]&nbsp;在收入《戊戌奏稿》中的《进呈<日本变政考>序》中，康有为更是声称"琉球被灭之际，臣有乡人商于日本，携示书目，臣托购求，且读且骇，知其变政之勇猛，而成效之已著也"。将他正式关注日本的时间提前到1875年前后，恐系自吹。[9]&nbsp;可见其《日本书目志》自序和1898年《广译日本书设立京师译书局折》（后折虽出自《戊戌奏稿》，其中新名词不可靠，但折子大意有时仍有可信之处）[10]&nbsp;见姜义华、张荣华编校：《康有为全集》第四集，中国人民大学出版社2007年版，第103-104页。[11]&nbsp;同上，《康有为全集》第一集，第193页编者注释。[12]&nbsp;这里的数字系采用沈国威的统计，见氏著《康有为及其<日本书目志>》一文，载《或问》2003年1月第5号。[13]&nbsp;同前引沈国威《康有为及其<日本书目志>》。不过国威强调这一点时有具体针对词，并非泛泛之论。[14]&nbsp;同上。[15]&nbsp;姜义华、张荣华编校《康有为全集》第三集，中国人民大学出版社2007年版，第263页；267页。[16]&nbsp;如在古城贞吉译的《地球二大患》一文中，他就专门说明"西人以绘画、雕刻、音乐、诗歌为美术"。见《时务报》第39册。光绪二十三年（1897）八月二十一日。[17]&nbsp;见《康有为全集》第三集，第325页，489页。[18]&nbsp;梁启超此文载《时务报》第45册（光绪二十三年十月二十一日）。[19]&nbsp;见村田雄二郎：《康有为的日本研究及其特点--<日本变政考><日本书目志>管见》，《近代史研究》1993年第1期。[20]&nbsp;《康有为全集》第四卷，第103页。黄彰健《康有为戊戌真奏议》中所收《日本变政考》（见（台）中研院历史语言研究所史料丛编民国六十三年版）与《康有为全集》所收版本有别，但经对照，在所用日本新名词方面却基本没有差异。[21]&nbsp;前两种情况，学术界也有较多说明，最后一种情况乃笔者想提请学界注意者。比如"国立银行"，其中"国立"为日本制新名词，"银行"则为来华西人与中国人共同创制，两者复合后其属性究竟如何判断便出现问题。[22]&nbsp;《日本书目志》所收录的书名中除了&nbsp;"经济学"、"伦理学"、"论理学"、"人类学"、"体育学"、"美学"、"行政学"等大量现代学科新名词外，还出现过"生殖器"、"百科全书"、"神经"、"胎教"、"绷带"、"组织"、"饮料（水）"、"染料"、"视力表"、"精神病"、"方针"、"手续"、"辩护士"、"挂图"、"女权"、"幼稚园"、"有机"、"无机"、"定量分析"、"定性分析"、"进化论"、"归纳法"、"传统"、"科学"、"料理"、"现象"、"家族主义"、"文库"、"发明家"、"国语"、"国文"、"国学"等许多日后流行的重要新名词。[23]&nbsp;《康有为全集》第三集，第366页。[24]&nbsp;同上，第365页。[25]&nbsp;同上，第376页。[26]&nbsp;同上，第365页。[27]&nbsp;同上，第484页。[28]&nbsp;一些清末民初出版的旧著古籍，有的在重版时被出版者特意加上"改良"二字，如《图说改良女儿经》。读者应予注意。[29]&nbsp;见《樊山政书》卷六，中华书局2007年版，第161页。[30]&nbsp;参见黄兴涛：《清末民初新名词新概念与"现代性"问题》，《天津社会科学》2005年第4期。[31]&nbsp;见《康有为全集》第四集，第5页，第48页。[32]&nbsp;同上，第239页。[33]&nbsp;"进步"一词在《日本变政考》一书里和其他奏折中使用很多。如"万国竞立之世，最讲进取-----故改革者所以谋自强，必自强乃可以言进取。泰西各国皆有进步党。进步者，天下之公理也。小之则一身一家，推而极之，全球万国，无强则无弱，有愈强者则先之强者已弱矣-----故进步者，将尺寸比较，并驱争先"。见《康有为全集》第四集,第177页。[34]&nbsp;同上，第184至186页。[35]&nbsp;见仲崇山：《我国版权制度发展述略》，《编辑学刊》1997年第5期；李明山：《中国"版权"考》，《编辑学刊》1998年第5期。也可见李明山主编《中国近代版权史》，河南大学出版社2003年版，第4-至5页。[36]&nbsp;如光绪二十二年十二月十一日和二十三年正月二十一日，古城贞吉就译有《论社会》一文，登载在《时务报》第17册和18册上。这是较系统传播现代"社会"观念最早的代表作，可惜至今无人重视。[37]&nbsp;《康有为全集》第三集，第335页。[38]&nbsp;该折曾收入《杰士上书汇录》，见《康有为全集》第四集，第15页。[39]&nbsp;同上，第239-241页。[40]&nbsp;《康有为全集》第四集，第399页。[41]&nbsp;康有为在使用"经济"等词时也存在类似情形。比如，《波兰分灭记》讲到国会提出的改革措施的时候，其有关财政改革和预算问题的一项做法就是"设经济所以理财"（见《康有为全集》第四集，第416页），此处"经济"在日文原文里肯定是现代意义，而对此难以理解的康有为却不得不对其加以含混其辞的处理，以至给今人留下怪异不通之感。又如《日本变政考》中讲到"国权党"政纲中时，其中有一条："贸易宜斥为一己经济之主义，执利国之义"，此中的"经济"一词当亦属此种情形。当时，康氏甚至还愿意将"政治经济"两词连在一起使用，如在代杨深秀起草的《请译日本书片》中，他批评江南制造局时就有所谓"徒译兵学医学之书，而政治经济之本乃不得一二"之句（见黄彰健《康有为戊戌真奏议》，第22页）。或许，康有为当时对日本"经济"一词的现代用法也并非毫无觉察，只是太喜欢强其就我，硬要将其纳入到包括"政治"的中国传统经世济国的广义之内罢了。如他在《日本书目志》经济学书目的"按语"中就强调，经济之学"泰西列为专门。其说原本天人，闳深著明，若《麻氏经济哲学》，茂矣，美矣。泰西从政者，非从经济学出不得任官。理财富国，尤为经济之要"（见《康有为全集》第三集第340页）。不过，即便将"理财富国"视为最主要内容的"经济"概念，也至少与传统"经济"概念之当然内涵有所不同。[42]&nbsp;见王先谦《虚受堂书札·与陈宝箴书》，可见《葵园四种》，岳麓书社1986年版。[43]&nbsp;叶德辉《长兴学记驳议》，《翼教丛编》（苏舆辑），台联国风出版社1970年版，第255页。[44]&nbsp;《湘省学约》，《翼教丛编》第373-374页。[45]&nbsp;中国史学会主编：《戊戌变法》（三），神州国光社1953年版，第334-335页。[46]&nbsp;在这方面，严复1898年发表的《论中国之阻力与离心力》，唐才常的《论热力》等文较具代表性。[47]像"起点"、"压力"和"热力"等词，康有为在《实理公法全书》、《钱币疏》和《答朱蓉生书》等文中，就有使用。见《康有为全集》第155页、174页、325页。[48]如康有为在注解日本史地书目时就表明："支那诸史皆吾事，谓吾支那者，佛语也。"见《康有为全集》第三集，第312页。[49]叶德辉：《郋园书札·答人书》，第23页。见长沙中国古书刊印社1935年《郋园全书》汇印本。[50]&nbsp;见《樊山政书》，中华书局2007年版，第161页。此段文字原标点者在"申报馆"三字前断开，有误。樊增祥曾做张之洞幕僚，对张之洞禁士子为文用新名词深表赞同，特做诗曰："如有佳语，不含鸡舌而亦香；尽去新词，不食马肝为知味。"巧譬生新，为张之洞所激赏（见钱基博：《现代中国文学史》，岳麓书社1986年版，第208页）。此外，1903年冬和1904年，樊氏在陕还痛批大学堂课卷和公牍文字中使用"文明"、"野蛮"和"起点"等词，并将使用了"起点"一词原被幕僚置为第一的试卷，改为榜末以示儆，"盖矫枉不嫌过直也"。他还表示："以后凡有沿用此等不根字眼者，本司必奋笔详参，决无宽贷"，"誓以天帚扫此垢污"。见《樊山政书》，第161页。[51]&nbsp;1915年，《盲人瞎马之新名词》的作者彭文祖已注意到戊戌时期日本新名词被使用的这一积聚酝酿意义，他指出："溯我国新名词之起源，于甲午大创以后，方渐涌于耳鼓，此留学生与新人物（如现之大文豪梁启超等）者，共建之一大纪念物也"。见东京秀光舍1915年所版该书第4页。[52]&nbsp;见樊增祥："批学吕馆游令拯课卷"，《樊山政书》，第161页。[53]&nbsp;参见罗志田《国家与学术：清季民初关于"国学"的思想论争》，三联书店2003年版，第143-157页。[54]&nbsp;见《康有为全集》第四集，第36页。[55]&nbsp;《英国监布烈住大学华文总教习斋路士会见记》，《康有为全集》第八集，第33-35页。[56]&nbsp;可参见韩华：《民初孔教会与国教运动研究》，北京图书馆出版社2007年版，第222-232页。[57]&nbsp;参见陈熙远：《"宗教--一个中国近代文化史上的关键词"》，（台）《新史学》2002年12月第13卷第4期。笔者这里的参用有所调整。[58]&nbsp;如所谓"宗教角争"，"宗教者，国之命脉也，我为保护宗教以从庶民意，岂肯使他教煽惑流俗？"等，见《康有为全集》第四集，第401-402页。此外，《日本书目志》也列有带有"宗教"名词的书名《宗教哲学》、《宗教革命论》、《宗教进化论》、《宗教新论》等七种，并专门设有"宗教"一门，共分五类。介绍文字中称"凡宗教五类一百八种"。[59]&nbsp;康有为认为采用日本"高等"、"中学"和"小学"等名目，"尚不如旧名府学、县学之妥适"。见《康有为全集》第八集，第48页。[60]&nbsp;见《康有为全集》第四集，第421页。[61]&nbsp;同上，第227-229页，第219页。[62]&nbsp;同上，第137页。[63]&nbsp;《英国监布烈住大学华文总教习斋路士会见记》，《康有为全集》第八集，第37页。[64]&nbsp;见《康有为全集》第九集，第151页。[65]&nbsp;见《康有为全集》第十卷，第140-141页。[66]&nbsp;彭文祖：《盲人瞎马之新名词》，第5页。作者自称其著此书"以痛恨与报效四字为主眼"（67页），"欲以区区之意报效国家社会于万一"（6页）。[67]&nbsp;《盲人瞎马之新名词》一书中所批评的日本新名词，不能直接以该书目录上所列的名词为凭。有些学者未认真读原文内容，不免犯此错误。实则目录中所提到的名词，有的如"法人"、"债权人"等，作者是认可的，只是批评国人未弄懂其真实含义而乱用；有的如"目的"、"义务"等词，书中认为系汉字词的"私生子"，本通顺可用。不过"目的"一词，与"家生子"之"主眼"、"标的"等相比，毕竟不如后者"光明磊落"、"堂堂正正"；而"义务"由于中文里没有"家生子"，故"如何酷爱亦可也"（见该书第70-74页）。此外，还有一些被抨击的名词，出现在书的正文中。[68]&nbsp;见沈国威：《清末民初中国社会对'新名词'之反应》，《亚洲文化交流研究》（「アジア文化交流研究」）第2号，第109-112页。关西大学亚洲文化交流研究中心2007年3月出版。[69]&nbsp;参见黄兴涛《清末民初新名词新概念与"现代性"问题》，《天津社会科学》2005年第4期。[70]&nbsp;王国维：《论新学语之输入》，见干春松、孟彦弘编《王国维学术经典集》（上），江西人民出版社1997年版，第104页。[71]燃（吴稚晖）：《书<神州日报>"东学西渐"篇后》，《辛亥革命前十年间时论文选》卷三，第473页。三联书店1977年版。罗志田对吴稚晖的相关看法已有较详细讨论，参见其《国家与学术》一书，第173-179页。笔者对该文标题内的符号略作不同处理。[72]&nbsp;见服部宇之吉：《心理学讲义》"凡例"，日本东京东亚公司、新书局（上海英租界河南路）1905年发行。

研读《植物名词中英对照表》这部严复当年批改的原稿本，一方面可以部分地见证严复多方面的知识兴趣和学问水准，其敢于断制的性格和注重多采用中国固有古雅文词的偏向，还有他对待此事较为负责的态度；另一方面，也具体地看到了中西名词编订工作的难度、具体过程和审校特征，

谈论国学者，首先应该意识到，不仅“国学”是一个现代概念，以“国学”的名义从事教学、科研和文化宣教活动，也是到清末民国时期才有的历史现象。

早在乾隆时代，英语在华传播就已经有了值得关注的内容。比如，那时的清王朝就已编纂出了最早一部中英词汇对译文典--《(口英)咭唎国译语》（口英是一个字）

“支那”一词最早是古印度对中国的称呼，在唐宋时已被音译成中文，也作脂那、至那、震旦、振旦、真丹等。古印度两大史诗《摩诃婆罗多》和《罗摩衍那》都曾以“cina”来指称中国。后来，西方各国流行的对中国的称谓“China”，实由此演化而来。

据载，2000年1月，美国方言学会曾举行过一次有趣的"世纪之字"评选活动。获得提名的"世纪之字"有"自由"、"正义"、"科学"、"自然"、"OK"、"书"和"她"等，而进入决赛的只有"科学"和"她"字（science & she ）。最后，"她"竟然以35票对27票战胜了"科学"，夺取了桂冠，成为"21世纪最重要的一个字"。

"黄色"一词含义的畸变，与近代特别是五四后中国人民族自尊感尤其是文化自尊心、自信心的严重失落亦不无关联。

儒家经典的经世取向与经典诠释的实践性存在紧张，所以本文所探讨的这两种类型的「解释的张力」乃不可避免。

一、引言 孔子自述他的学问特质，两度以"一以贯之"形容他所抱持的"道"，《论语．里仁》："子曰：'参乎，吾道一以贯之。'曾子曰：'唯。'子出，门人问曰：'何谓也？'曾子曰：'夫子之道，忠恕而已矣。'"《论语．卫灵公》："子曰：'赐也，女以予为多学而识之者与？'对曰：'然，非与？'曰：'非也，予一以贯之。'"《论语》全书两见"一以贯之"一语，千百年来东亚儒者众说纷纭，索解无由，明代文学家贺复征说："吾道一以贯之，千百年间未有明摘其蕴者"，［1］（P1314）清儒刘宝楠（17911855）说此语"自汉以来不得其解"。［2］（P152）２０００年来，东亚儒者对孔子"一以贯之"一语之疏解文字，犹如夏夜繁星，难以计数。中日韩儒者说解纷纷，家自为说，人各为书，各是其所是而非其所非，各家诠释争衡消长，构成东亚思想史中值得注意的现象。本文的写作，将以德川时代（1600-1868）３００年间日本儒者对孔子所说"吾道一以贯之"一语的解释为中心，先分析各家诠释言论之内容，再从东亚比较思想史角度，探讨日本儒者对"吾道一以贯之"的解释之特点，以厘定日本儒学思想之特质。二、日本儒者对"吾道一以贯之"的解释 日本德川时代３００年间，各派儒者杂然纷起，各立门户，不同学派之间既交互影响，又互相攻击，其间之思想交涉极为复杂。就以最受日本儒者尊崇的《论语》为例，17世纪伊藤仁斋（16271705）推崇《论语》为"最上至极宇宙第一书"，［3］（P4）并撰《论语古义》、《语孟字义》特加阐发。但是古文辞学派大师荻生徂徕（16661728）却撰着《论语征》对仁斋大加批评。徂徕所着《论语征》，却又受到冈白驹（号龙洲，16921767）、片山兼山（17301782）、五井兰洲（16971762）等人的批判，［4］（P281289）其中18世纪大坂怀德堂儒者中井竹山（17301804）对徂徕的批驳尤为着名。［5］各家对孔子所说"吾道一以贯之"一语之解释论点各不相同，我们取其大同而略其小异，归纳日本儒者对这句话诠释的两个主要论点。 （一）"吾道者，先王之道也"［6］（P82） 德川儒者诠释孔子"吾道一以贯之"一语，首先值得注意的是：多数日本儒者都将孔子的"道"界定为社会政治意义的"道"，是经世济民之道。日本儒者从所谓"实学"立场重新解释孔子的"道"的思想倾向，早已出现于德川初期。16世纪促使朱子学成为官学的关键人物林罗山（15831657）说： 道者日用所共由当行、有条理之名也。天能运，地能载，人物能云为，各有其道，不可违；道有所行也，日用不可以由行则不道。圣人之道也，人道也；通古今，亘上下，可以由行也。若涉作为造作，我可行，彼不可行，古可行，今不可行，则非人之道，非率性之道。 道名从路上起也，人之行必有路。大路者，都城王畿之路，而车马可通，人物器用可交行，天下之人民各欲出其路。小径者，吾人所利之路而甚狭陋也，其险阻隘曲少可玩也。圣人之道大路也，异端之道小径也，小径少可玩而终不可安，大路无可玩，无可见，而万小径在目下，终不可离。［7］（P20） 林罗山将孔子的"道"解释为"日用所共由当行"的"人道"，已透露反宋学的宇宙论之思想倾向。17世纪古学派大儒伊藤仁斋对"道"的定义，取径也与林罗山相近，仁斋说： 圣人之道，不过彝伦纲常之间，而济人为大。故曾子以忠恕发挥夫子一以贯之之旨。呜呼！传圣人之道而告之后学，其旨明且尽矣。夫子尝答樊迟问仁曰："与人忠。"子贡问曰："有一言而可以终身行之者乎？"夫子唯曰："其恕乎。"孟子亦曰："强恕而行，求仁无近焉。"可见忠恕二者，乃求仁之至要，而圣学之所成始成终者也。盖忠恕所以一贯之道也，非以忠恕训一贯也。先儒以为："夫子之心一理浑然，而泛应曲当。惟曾子有见于此。而非学者之所能与知也。故借学者忠恕之目。以晓一贯之旨。"岂然乎哉？［3］（P230231） 仁斋在这一段解释中，以"彝伦纲常"解释孔子的"道"，并指出"济人"才是"道"的核心，而不是如"先儒"（指朱子）所说："夫子之心，一理浑然，而泛应曲当。"换言之，在仁斋的诠释中，"道"并不是如朱子所说是一种宇宙创生并运行的原理，而是社会政治运作的道德规范。 仁斋之后，荻生徂徕将孔子之"道"的社会政治性格发挥得淋漓尽致，徂徕说： 孔子之道，即先王之道也。......先王之道，先王为安民立之，故其道有仁焉者，有智焉者，有义焉者，有勇焉者，有俭焉者，有恭焉者，有神焉者，有人焉者，有似自然焉者，有似伪焉者，有本焉者，有末焉者，有近焉者，有远焉者，有礼焉，有乐焉，有兵焉，有刑焉，制度云为，不可以一尽焉，纷杂乎不可得而究焉，故命之曰"博文"。又曰："儒者之道，博而寡要。"然要其所统会，莫不归于安民焉者，故孔门教人，曰："依于仁"，曰："博文约礼"，为学先王之道以成德于己也。学先王之道，非博则不足尽之，故曰"博文"。欲归诸己，则莫如以礼，故曰"约礼"。然礼亦繁矣哉，故又教之以"仁"。仁，先王之一德也，故谓先王之道仁尽之，则不可矣。然先王之道，统会于安民，故仁，先王之大德也，依于仁，则先王之道，可以贯之矣。故不曰"一"，而曰"一以贯之"。［6］（P6） 徂徕解释下的孔子之"道"是"先王之道"，"然先王之道，统会于安民"。在"先王之道"中，完全没有宇宙论、本体论或形上学的内涵。这种"道"是在时间与空间交叉作用之下的"具体性"的"道"，其中有礼乐兵刑，有制度造作，有仁义礼智，充满了人民的苦难与先王的苦心孤诣。 除了仁斋与徂徕之外，日本儒者解释孔子"吾道一以贯之"的"道"，均从"道"的社会性与政治性入手，例如龟井南溟（17731836）就这样解释： 吾道者何？夫子身先王之道。故称曰："吾道"，门人称之，曰："夫子之道。"何谓"先王之道"？唐虞三代之盛，礼乐刑政，一日万机所施行，凡事之所征见于文献者，无不有道焉。能修其道，以训天下者，是先王也。是以曰："先王之道。"［8］（P63） 龟井也以"先王之道"释孔子的"道"，并以"礼乐刑政"为"道"的内容。日本儒者从具体性诠释孔子的"道"，充分显示德川时代儒者反宋学的思想氛围。这一点将在本文第三节加以说明。 （二）"一以贯之"解 其次，德川儒者所提出的第二项值得注意的论点集中在"一以贯之"这句话。日本儒者对"一以贯之"的解释言论要点如下： １"贯，统也"。早在17世纪，古学派大师伊藤仁斋就解释说： 贯，统也。言道虽至广，然一而不杂，则自能致天下之善，而无所不统，非多学而可能得也。......曾子以为，忠恕足以尽夫子之道也，因为门人述夫子一以贯之之旨如此。......夫道一而已矣。虽五常百行，至为多端，然同归而殊涂，一致而百虑。天下之至一，可以统天下之万善，故夫子不曰"心"，不曰"理"，唯曰："吾道一以贯之"也。［3］（P5354） 仁斋以"统"释"一以贯之"的"贯"，采用的是何晏与皇侃的解释。何晏注云："善有元，事有会，天下殊途而同归，百虑而一致，知其元则众善举矣。故不待多学，一以知之也。"［9］（P3）皇侃疏云："道者，孔子之道也。贯，犹统也，譬如以绳穿物，有贯统也。孔子语曾子曰：'吾教化之道，唯用一道以贯统天下万理也。'故王弼曰：'贯，犹统也。'夫事有归，理有会，故得其归，事虽殷大，可以一名举总其会，理虽博，可以至约穷也。譬犹以君御民，执一统众之道也。"［10］（P3132）伊藤仁斋的解释本于何晏与皇侃的注疏。 自仁斋以下，日本儒者多以"统"释"贯"，例如照井全都（18181881）解释"吾道一以贯之"一语时说："一者，不二之谓也，言不变。贯者，统也。之字设字。盖指交际之道也。一以贯之。犹《左传》壹以待之。言接人之道，不以彼与此贰其心也。"［11］（P96）即为一例。 ２以"仁"释"一"。日本儒者多认为"一"的涵义指"仁"而言，所谓"忠恕"就是求"仁"的根本途径。前引伊藤仁斋所说："忠恕二者，乃求仁之至要，而圣学之所成始成终者也。盖忠恕所以一以贯之也，非以忠恕训一贯也。"已持此说。仁斋之后折衷学者片山兼山撰有《论语一贯》一书，亦持以"仁"释"一"之立场，他说："曾子答门人以忠恕，亦仁之方，而夫子所云'一以贯之'之'一'，即为仁可知也。"［12］（P24）另外，反对宋学与仁斋学的荻生徂徕虽然立说与仁斋互异，但是，徂徕也以"仁"解释"一贯"的"一"。徂徕说： ^先王之道，统会于安民，故仁。先王之大德也，依于仁，则先王之道，可以贯之矣。故不曰一，而曰一以贯之。辟诸钱与襁。仁，襁也。先王之道，钱也。谓钱即襁可乎？是一贯之旨也。宋儒亦有钱襁之喻（钱襁之欲见大全朱说），以一理为襁，然一理贯万理，则万理一理之分，岂容言贯乎？一理贯万事，则歧精粗而二之，依然老佛之见已，可谓不成喻矣。忠恕者为仁之方也，故曾子云尔，然忠恕岂能尽先王之道乎？由此以往，庶几可以尽之，示之以其方也，故而已矣者。非竭尽而无余之辞，亦如尧舜之道，孝弟而已矣。（《孟子·告子》篇）孝弟岂尽于尧舜之道乎？亦言由此则可以尽之耳。此章之义，后儒（后儒诸说散见集注及大全）或以为一理，或以为一心，或以为诚，其谓之一理者，昧乎贯字也，其谓之一心者，不知先王之道也。其谓之诚者，仅谓动容周旋中礼耳，不知孔子之所为道也。忠者，为人谋而委曲周悉，莫不尽己之心也。恕者，己所不欲，勿施于人之谓也，皆以与人交者言之。仁之为道，亦在与人交之间，而长之养之，匡之成之，使各遂其生者也。［6］（P8485） 徂徕主张以"仁"贯通"先王之道"，所谓"一"是指"仁"而言。 徂徕以"仁"释"一以贯之"的"一"的立场，到了兵学者松宫观山（？1780）与折衷学者冢田虎（17451832）手中获得进一步的发挥。松宫观山说："天下事有大小，物有精粗，唯道无大小精粗，一以贯之，一者，仁也。夫子之道，即先王之道在安民，苟知道之一而无二，何必就一事一物，究其大小精粗哉!曾子学于夫子已久，苟就一事一物，究其大小精粗莫不详悉，而未知其要归一，故夫子以此告知也。仍就一事一物究其大小精粗，是宋儒穷理之学，即物而穷其理也，《大学》致知格物亦是也。"［13］（P25）足见松宫观山解释"一贯"，承续徂徕立场而批判朱子的穷理之学。时代稍后的冢田大峰说： 吾道者，先王之道也。夫子祖述尧舜宪章文武故亲之曰：吾道。所谓一者何也？曰仁也。仁者何也？传曰：蓄义丰功，谓之仁。是也，何以知所谓一者仁也。盖先王安天下之道，三纲五典，五伦九经如此之属，其目不寡，其教各殊。然其要皆蓄义，以丰功于人者。而孝弟亦依于仁，忠顺亦依于仁。凡修身、齐家、治国、平天下之道，尽莫不依于仁也。故曰：'志于道，据于德，依于仁。'凡人之不孝不友、不慈不忠、事皆不善，而邦家不宁者。人人唯为己谋。而不思义之由也。所谓仁也者，能为人谋，而不悖义之道也。则人人苟且之间。犹能志于仁，则行事皆无不善也。故知圣人之道仁以贯之也，然则曾子答门人何为不曰之仁而已，而曰夫子之道，忠恕而已乎？曰：因曾子之言忠恕而已，愈知一者仁也。所谓忠者，为人谋事，以身纳其事，而尽己中心也。恕者，施事于人，反推之己，而如己心之所好恶也。此是忠恕者，为仁之方也。何以知之？孔子曰：夫仁者，己欲达而达人，能近取譬，可谓仁之方也已。此取于己之所欲；以譬诸人，而立人达人者，即是忠恕也。故知忠恕者，仁之方也。［14］（P1617）^冢田大峰将作为"一"的"仁"的具体内容，进一步阐明为"蓄义丰功"，认为"凡修身齐家治国平天下之道，尽莫不依于仁"。冢田大峰的解释与荻生徂徕一脉相承，都将孔子的"道"解释为社会政治之道，但冢田更引《论语》论"仁"之经文加以贯串，更自成理路。三、日本儒者对宋儒的批判及其思想史的定位 （一）对宋学的批判 从伊藤仁斋开始，德川时代儒者对孔子所说"吾道一以贯之"的解释言论中，呈现极其强烈的反宋学思想倾向，尤其以朱子学为主要攻击目标。伊藤仁斋所撰《论语古义》随处批评的"先儒"就是指朱子而言。仁斋解释孔子的"一以贯之"时说："先儒以为：'夫子之心，一理浑然，而泛应曲当'"，［3］（P230231）就是指朱注而言。朱子在《论语集注》中说： 夫子之一理浑然而泛应曲当，譬则天地之至诚无息，而万物各得其所也。自此之外，固无余法，而亦无待于推矣。曾子有见于此而难言之，故借学者尽己、推己之目以着明之，欲人之易晓也。盖至诚无息者，道之体也，万殊之所以一本也；万物各得其所者，道之用也，一本之所以万殊也。以此观之，一以贯之之实可见矣。［15］（P72） 朱子将孔子的"一以贯之"解释为孔子"一理浑然而泛应曲当"，显然是将"理学"读入孔子思想，引起了１７世纪以降日本儒者一致的挞伐。 日本儒者之所以在重读《论语》时批判宋学，尤其是朱子学，主要原因在于他们认为宋学已经受到佛教尤其是禅学的污染，故宋儒言论常受佛教思想渗透而不自知，荻生徂徕解"吾道一以贯之"章时说： 大抵宋世禅学甚盛，其渠魁者，自圣自智。称尊王公前，横行一世，儒者莫之能抗。盖后世无爵而尊者，莫是过也。儒者心羡之，而风习所渐，其所见亦似之，故曰'性'曰'心'，皆彼法所尚。豁然贯通，即彼顿悟。孔、曾、思、孟，道统相承，即彼四七二三，遂以孔门一贯，大小之事，曾子之'唯'，即迦叶微笑矣。岂不儿戏乎？过此以往，天理人欲即真如无明。理气即空假二谛，天道人道即法身应身，圣贤即如来菩萨，十二元会即成住坏空，持敬即坐禅，知行即解行，扬排而阴学之。至于其流裔，操戈自攻，要之不能出彼范围中，悲哉！如此章一贯之旨。诚非不能大知之者所及。然游夏以上，岂不与闻？特门人所录，偶有参与赐耳。千载之后，据遗文仅存者，而谓二子独得闻之。又以其有详略而为二子优劣，可不谓凿乎？盖孔子之道，即先王之道也。先王之道，先王为安民立之。［6］（P83） 徂徕以后，１８、１９世纪之交的考证学派儒者猪饲敬所（17611845）有长文解此章，他也批评宋儒说： 宋儒以此章，为孔、曾传道之秘奥，是以有疑于忠恕不足以当一贯，故程子有天人体用等辨，朱子有借学者之自说，黄东发既病其非，平实矣。朱子又以为一是圣人具心之理，乃道之体也，是佛氏贵心性之说耳，失圣人之旨远矣，宜其弊至有谓道本自一，不必言贯者也。仁斋厌其虚高，以为纯一不二之谓，不知纯一不可言贯，且推之于告子、子贡之言，益见其说之不通也。徂徕以一为仁，似得之，然观其先王之道归于安民，则道非其道，仁非其仁，而不得其解也。且夫先王之道，安民为归，固是显然常理，易言易简，夫子何为艰涩其言，而特告曾子。愚窃谓先儒之说，皆似未得其旨，故今不自揣，敢演管见，以待后之君子。《卫灵公》篇，子曰：'赐也，汝以为予为多学而识之者与？'对曰：'然，非与？'曰：'非也，予一以贯之'，告曾子则以行言，而告子贡则以学言，故所谓一者，自是不同。夫子尝言'学而不厌'，'多见而识之'，岂非多学而识之者乎？而其言又如是者，何也？盖圣人之学，诗书六艺，制度文物，事理本末，互相统摄，是睿智贯之，不从事博文多识也。夫子又不以知自居，故亦唯曰一也。自他人目之，非睿智而何，亦所谓知者见之谓之知也。此亦圣人之一德也。诸家皆略其解，盖不察所谓一者，所指不同，而前解于此不通也。［16］（P34） 猪饲敬所和伊藤仁斋、荻生徂徕一样，都批判宋儒，猪饲反对朱子将孔子的"一以贯之"的"一"解释为"圣人其心之理"，他认为"一以贯之"是"以睿识贯之，不从事博文多识"。猪饲批判宋学以及其他日本儒者的个别论点还有可以商榷的余地，但是包括猪饲在内，许多日本儒者都反对朱子学将"一以贯之"的"一"解释为"理"，这是十分确定的。 （二）思想史的定位现在，我们可以进一步将日本儒者对"吾道一以贯之"的解释，放在中日比较思想史的脉络加以定位。就对"吾道一以贯之"一语的解释而言，日本儒者对宋儒的批判虽然激烈，但却不致命，因为日本儒者并未深入宋儒解释"吾道一以贯之"这句话时的两项哲学问题，换言之，他们并未进入宋儒的"诠释之环"，因此，他们的攻击就显得未能击中要害。我们依序讨论这两个问题。 1心与理之关系。朱子与宋儒解释"吾道一以贯之"这句话时，所涉及的第一个哲学问题就是"心"与"理"之关系。［17］（P25）我们再读朱子的集注： 参乎者，呼曾子之名而告之。贯，通也。唯者，应之速而无疑者也。圣人之心，浑然一理，而泛应曲当，用各不同。曾子于其用处，盖已随事精察而力行之，但未知其体之一尔。夫子知其真积力久，将有所得，是以呼而告之。曾子果能默契其指，即应之速而无疑也。［1５］（P72） 朱子在这段注文中说"圣人之心，浑然一理"，他认为孔子以"心"中之"一理"以"通"天下万物。朱子这段话是一种境界语，是指达到圣人境界以后"心"中"浑然一理"之精神状态。要达到这种精神境界，仍然必须循博学多闻的途径，才能有物可贯。《朱子语类》中的对话将这一点解释得更为清楚。朱子说： "一以贯之"，固是以心鉴照万物而不遗。然也须"多学而识之"始得，未有不学而自能一贯者也。［18］（P1149） 朱子强调人必须多学而识之，才能达到"圣人之心，浑然一理"的"一以贯之"的境界。朱子的解释中所触及的"心"与"理"之关系，正是朱子学的一大哲学课题。我们再以朱子对《孟子尽心上》的解释为例，进一步分疏这个问题。朱子《孟子集注》解释孟子所说的"尽心、知性、知天"说：心者，人之神明，所以具众理而应万事者也。性则心之所具之理，而天又理之所从以出者也。人有是心，莫非全体，然不穷理，则有所蔽而无以尽乎此心之量。故能极其心之全体而无不尽者，必其能穷夫理而无不知者也。既知其理，则其所从出，亦不外是矣。以《大学》之序言之，知性则物格之谓，尽心则知至之谓也。［19］（P349） 朱子认为只有"穷理"才能使"心""具众理而应万事"。我们再看朱子对孟子"尽心"说的解释： （1）尽心，谓事物之理皆知之而无不尽；知性，谓知君臣、父子、兄弟、夫妇、朋友各循其理；知天，则知此理之自然。 （2）尽心，如何尽得？不可尽者心之事，可尽者心之理。理既尽之后，谓如一物初不曾识，来到面前，便识得此物，尽吾心之理。尽心之理，便是"知性，知天"。［20］（P1426） 朱子在这两段话中，将孟子的"尽心"理解为认知意义的"尽"，即穷尽万事万物（包括"心"）之"理"，这种说法与孟子"尽心"之说颇有歧出，这一点早经牟宗三（19091995）先生指出。［21］（P444） 我要强调的是：朱子解释"吾道一以贯之"时，正如他在《四书章句集注》其他章篇一样，触及"心"与"理"之关系此一问题。朱子所提出"圣人之心浑然一理"的命题，主宰宋代儒者对孔子"吾道一以贯之"一语的解释思路。例如胡宏强调"会归于一心"以贯之，他说： 黄氏曰：夫子垂世立教，学者宗之，或得其一体，或闻其一言，有称其博学者，有誉其多能者，皆不能卞关而熟察之。乃若圣人之道，则闻而知之，传以心也，默而识之，悟以心也。况其泛应于域中，虽千变万化，未始有穷，而会归于一心，则天地之纯，全万人之大体，皆其分内耳，所谓一以贯之也。曾子早游圣门，省身于内，守之以约，故夫子告之，不待发问，而曾子受之，不复致疑，可谓相契以心，得于言意之外矣。及其答门人之问，语之以忠恕者，亦以其违道不远者告知，始知求诸心而切于践履者也。［22］（P2324） 再如蔡节强调"众理本一理"，他说： 夫子所云："吾道一以贯之"者，圣人之心浑然一理，无所不该，其于应事接物之际，虽曰理各有所止，然而众理本一理也。以曾子自得之深，故告之以此，曾子心领神会，而直应之曰："唯。"至答门人之问，则即忠恕以明之。盖自其近己知心而言之，则谓之忠；自其即己之心以及物而言之，则谓之恕。忠为体，恕为用，用之周乎物，即事体之流行者也，此所谓一以贯之有。其曰："夫子之道，忠恕而已矣"者，舍忠恕之外，他无足以发明一以贯之也［23］ 又说： 其所谓一者，则理而已。其所谓贯，则是理行乎事物之间，而无有不通者也。［24］（P2） 蔡节以"理"释"一"，仍不出朱子诠释的范围。 总而言之，朱子的诠释是宋儒解读《论语》"吾道一以贯之"一语所依据的解释典范，宋儒对孔子这句话的解释，都不出朱子所思考的"心"与"理"之关系的范围。胡寅（明仲，10981156）对"一以贯之"的解释具有代表性，他说： 赣川曾几书曰：穷理尽性，乃圣门事业。物物而察，知之始也；一以贯之，知之至也。无所不在者，理也；无所不有者，心也。物物致察，宛转归已，则心与理不昧，故知循理者，士也。物物皆备，反身而诚，则心与理不违，故乐循理者，君子也。天理合德，四时合序，则心与理一。无事乎循矣。故一以贯之，圣人也。子以四端五典，每事扩充，亦未免物物致察，犹非一以贯之之要，是欲不举足而登泰山，犹释氏所谓不假证修而语觉地也。四端固有，非外铄，五典天叙，不可违。在人则一心也，在物则一理也，充四端，可以成性，五典，可以尽伦，性成而伦尽，斯不二矣。［25］（P68-69） 从以上所说，我们可以看出朱子对"吾道一以贯之"一语的解释，在《论语》解释史上实居于分水岭之地位。自朱子之后，宋儒解释"一以贯之"的"一"，都从朱子的思考点--"心"与"理"的关系--出发，一直到１８世纪清儒焦循与阮元以"行"或"事"释"贯"字，才开启另一个诠释典范，［26］其间之变化转折具有思想史意义，我将另撰文探讨。 我们将日本儒者对"吾道一以贯之"的诠释与朱子及宋儒的解释加以比较，就可以发现：日本儒者对朱子与宋儒的批判，并未深入朱子与宋儒诠释中的哲学问题--"心"与"理"之关系。日本儒者将孔子"吾道一以贯之"的"道"界定为社会政治之"道"，抖落了"道"的超越性。荻生徂徕说："吾道者，先王之道也......先王之道，统会于安民"，［6］（P8384）伊藤仁斋说："圣人之道，不过人伦纲常之间，而济人为大"，［3］（P53）都是针对并企图颠覆朱子与宋儒所建构的"理"的形上思想世界，他们努力于将孔子的"道"还原为人伦日用之"道"，但是他们思想中的"道"是一种具体性的社会政治实践的策略或措施，并不是一种抽象性的规律或规范，因此，日本儒者的孔学诠释就未能触及朱子学这个"心"与"理"之关系的重大命题。因此之故，日本儒者对朱子与宋儒的批判也就未能入室操戈，一举摧毁朱子的思想世界。冢田虎认为孔子之所以能"一以贯之"的关键在于"仁"，冢田说："其所一以贯之者仁，而欲措之行事；乃以忠恕示其方，故孔子之教诲而尔，而后悔不晓焉，或以一理一心解之者，圣人之所未曾言，而未亦得忠恕之所以为仁之方也，则皆凿空而已。"［27］（P18）冢田虎认为"理"与"心"皆"圣人之所未曾言"，因此不应取"理"或"心"以解释孔子的"一以贯之"。即使这种说法可以成立，［28］（P2068）日本儒者对宋儒的攻击仍因未进入宋儒的"诠释之环"而失去焦点。 2方法论的个体论问题：朱子解释孔子"一以贯之"一语时，触及的第二个哲学问题是："一以贯之"如何可能？朱子所采取的是近于个体论的方法论立场。所谓方法论的"个体论"，是指朱子认为只有经由对万殊之理的切实掌握，才能达到"一以贯之"的境界。我们看看《朱子语类》中的这一段话： 所谓一贯者，会万殊于一贯。如曾子是于圣人一言一行上一一践履，都仔细理会过了，不是默然而得之。观《曾子问》中问丧礼之变，曲折无不详尽，便可见曾子当时功夫是一一理会过来。圣人知曾子许多道理都理会得，便以一贯语之，教它知许多道理却只是一个道理。曾子到此，亦是它践履处都理会过了，一旦豁然知此是一个道理，遂应曰："唯！"及至门人问之，便云："忠恕而已矣。"忠是大本，恕是达道。忠者，一理也；恕便是条贯，万殊皆自此出来。虽万殊，却只一理，所谓贯也。子贡平日是于前言往行上着工夫，于见识上做得亦到。夫子恐其亦以圣人为"多学而识之"，故问之。子贡方以为疑，夫子遂以一贯告之。子贡闻此别无语，亦未见得子贡理会得，理会不得。自今观之，夫子只以一贯语此二人，亦须是它承当得，想亦不肯说与领会不得底人。曾子是践履笃实上做到，子贡是博闻强识上做到。夫子舍二人之外，别不曾说，不似今人动便说一贯也。所谓一者，对万而言。今却不可去一上寻，须是去万上理会。若只见夫子语一贯，便将许多合做底事都不做，只理会一，不知却贯个甚底！［29］（P679680）朱子说得好："所谓一贯者，会万殊于一贯"，这明显地倾向于方法论的个体论的立场。朱子主张所谓"一"必须"去万上理会"。朱子曾进一步解释他的个体论立场，他说： "吾道一以贯之"，譬如聚得散钱已多，将一条索来一串穿了。所谓一贯，须是聚个散钱多，然后这索亦易得。若不积得许多钱，空有一条索，把甚么来穿！吾儒且要去积钱。若江西学者都无一钱，只有一条索，不知把甚么来穿。又曰："一，只是一个道理贯了。"或问："忠恕，曾子以前曾理会得否？"曰："曾子于忠恕自是理会得了，便将理会得底来解圣人之意，其实借来。"直卿问："'一以贯之'，是有至一以贯之。"曰：一，只是一个道理，不用说至一。［29］（P684） 朱子在这段话中用"钱襁之喻"说明如果没有许多个别的铜钱而空有一条襁，终不能"一以贯之"。朱子进一步批判陆九渊（象山，11391193）不从"万殊"入手说： 而今只管悬想说道"一贯"，却不知贯个甚么。圣人直是事事理会得，如云"好古敏以求之"，不是蓦直恁地去贯得它。如《曾子问》许多曲折，它思量一一问过，而夫子一一告之，末云："吾闻诸老聃云。"是圣人当初都曾事事理会过。如天下之圣说道事亲，事亲中间有多少事；说道事君，事君中间有多少事。而今正患不能一一见个恰好处，如何便说"一贯"﹖？近见永嘉有一两相识，只管去考制度，却都不曾理会个根本。一旦临利害，那个都未有用处，却都不将事。吕伯恭向来教人亦云："《论语》皆虚言，不如论实事。"便要去考史。如陆子静又只说个虚静，云："全无许多事。颜子不会学，'择乎中庸，得一善则拳拳勿失'。善则一矣，何用更择？'子路有闻，未之能行，唯恐有闻'。一闻之外，何用再闻？"便都与禅家说话一般了。圣人道理，都不恁地，直是周。［18］（P11481149） 朱子认为如永嘉学派只论"万殊"而不论"根本"固然不对，但如陆象山只论"一"而不论"多"也不免流于禅学。 总之，朱子对"吾道一以贯之"的解释，确实触及整体论或个体论的方法论问题。用宋儒的话来说，就是"涵养"与"察识"孰先，或"一贯"与"万殊"孰先的问题。这个哲学问题并不是朱子与宋儒"读入"于《论语》之中的问题，而是早已潜藏于孔子说"多学而识之"与"予一以贯之"之时，是先秦孔学原有的问题。但是，日本儒者解释"吾道一以贯之"这句话时，虽然猛烈挞伐朱子，但是却未触及朱子的孔学诠释中的这个方法论问题。因此，日本儒者与宋儒的对话可以说并无交集之处。四、日本儒者与朝鲜儒者的解释之比较 （一）朝鲜儒者的解释 儒学东传朝鲜始于高丽后期，１４世纪权溥（12621346）刊印朱子《四书集注》，［30］（P89）进入朝鲜时代（13921910）之后，儒学思潮杂然纷陈，有主治主义学派、性理学派、礼学派、阳明学派、经济学派以及实学派等，其中尤以研究朱子学为中心的性理学派最具影响力。韩国朱子学之流衍，首推李（15071570）、李珥（15361584），踵其后者则为宋时烈（16071689）及韩元震（16821751）。朝鲜性理派儒者研究心之哲学问题如理气、本然之性与气质之质、四端七情、已发未发、人心道心等均为朱子学之主要问题。［31］（1-69）就朝鲜时代韩儒对孔子"吾道一以贯之"这句话的解释言论观之，基本上都在朱子的解释典范的影响之下发展，因袭多于创新，（1）因袭者主要在于"心"与"理"之关系此一课题之发挥，（2）其创新者则为以"诚"释"一以贯之"的"一"。我们详细阐释这两点。 1韩儒对"心"与"理"关系的再阐释。 朝鲜儒者在朱子学的笼罩之下，解释《论语》时常从朱子的思路出发，但讲得更为细致。朱子注《论语．里仁》"吾道一以贯之"一语云："圣人之心，浑然一理，而泛应曲当，用各不同"，朝鲜儒者循朱注之轨辙，开发出两个新的命题： （a）以"吾心之理"贯"万物之理"。朱子集注中潜藏一个问题："圣人之心浑然一理，泛应曲当"如何可解？朝鲜儒者针对这个问题提出解释。金谨行说： 子曰："参乎！吾道一以贯之"者，一者，理也。贯者，心之事也。理在吾心，以吾心之理，贯乎万物之理也。［32］（P575） 金谨行这一段解释环绕着"心"与"理"之关系，循朱子之思路而进一步发挥，但是却也突破朱子旧轨。朱子曾与张讨论《论语》"一以贯之"，朱子说"圣人之心，于天下事物之理无所不该，虽有内外、本末、隐显之殊，而未尝不一以贯之也"，［33］（P1212）朱子认为"心"有时不能对天下之"理"加以"一以贯之"，乃是因为"梏于形器之私，是以有所蔽而不尽"，［33］（P1248）朱子认为只有经过"穷理"的工夫，才能使"心"对外在事物有所掌握，朱子说： 儒者之学，大要以穷理为先，盖凡一物有一理，须先明此，然后心之所发，轻重长短，各有准则。《书》所谓"天叙天秩，天命天讨"，孟子所谓"物皆然，心为甚"者，皆谓此也。若不于此先致其知，但见其所以为心者如此，识其所以为心者如此，泛然而无所准则，则其所存所发，亦何自而中于理乎？［34］（P1156） 朱子在以上这段话中明白指出"穷理"是使"心之所发"、"各有准则"的先决条件。 正是在与朱子对比之下，我们看到了朝鲜儒者对朱子学的突破。朝鲜儒者金谨行将孔子的"一以贯之"解释为"理在吾心，以吾心之理贯乎万物之理"，所谓"理在吾心"一语显示相对于朱子的"穷理"之学而言的"内转"。 朝鲜儒者将朱子解释典范加以"内转"之后，提出一些新解，例如李秉休以"恕"字解"一贯"，他撰《论语一贯说》云： 余读《论语》，孔子谓曾子曰："参乎！吾道一以贯之。"门人未晓。曾子喻之曰："夫子之道，忠恕而已"，则一贯之旨不外于忠恕可知也。然忠恕二字，皆从接人上说。忠，故能恕，则忠在其中。或并称忠恕，或单称恕，其实一也。然则一贯，盖以恕言也。恕为一贯，其义何居？恕者，推己及物之谓也。夫以天下之理，万物之情，而以余一己之心推以及之，无不贯通。此非所谓一贯乎？［35］（P29） 李秉休以"恕"解"一贯"，并从"恕"字意为"推己及物"推衍为以自己之"心"推天下之理万物之情，此之谓"一贯"。 除了李秉休之外，丁若镛（17621836）也以"恕"释"一"，他说："一者，恕也。贯，穿也......吾道不外乎人伦，凡所以处人伦者，若五教九经，以至于经礼三百、曲礼三千，皆行之以一恕字。如以一缗贯千百之钱，此之谓一贯也。"［36］（P116117）丁茶山与李秉休都以"恕"释"一以贯之"的"一"，他们强调的是自我与"他者"之间的可类推性，而不是如朱子强调自我之"心"对"他者"之"理"的鉴知。 （b）"一本"与"万殊"皆归于"心"。本文第三节谈到朱子解释"一以贯之"时，显示他是一个方法论的个体论者，他主张"所谓一贯者，会万殊于一贯"，［28］（P2068）他强调"也须多学而识之始得，未有不学而自能一贯者也"，［15］（P72）他强而有力地批判陆象山说"而今只管悬想说道'一贯'，却不知贯个什么"。［29］（P684）朱子注《论语．里仁．15》曾子曰："夫子之道，忠恕而已矣"一语云： 夫子之一理浑然而泛应曲当，譬则天地之至诚无息，而万物各得其所也。自此以外，固无余法，而亦无待于推矣。曾子有见于此而难言之，故借学者尽己、推己之目以着明之，欲人之易晓也。盖至诚无息者，道之体也，万殊之所以一本也；万物各得其所者，道之用也，一本之所以万殊也。以此观之，一以贯之之实可见矣。［37］（72）但是，"万殊"与"一本"如何取得连系？朱子在集注中并未明言。正是在这个问题上，朝鲜儒者提出新见。他们指出"一本"与"万殊"正是在"心"上取得联系。朴知诫解释说： 孔子曰："吾道一以贯之"，朱子曰："人之为学，心与理而已"。"心"即"一本"也；"理"即"万殊"也。古圣人垂教之说，无非一与万而已。从事于小学而存此心于端庄静一之中者，从一上做工也；从事于格致，而穷众理之妙者，从万上做工也。自一而万，自万而一，复自一而为万，乃圣人之学也。一本万殊，两仪之象也。知上行上皆有此两端。知觉不之在心，曰："知上之一本"。明烛事物之理，曰："知上之万殊"，一心之浑然在中，曰："行上之一本"，躬行践履之在事物，曰："行上之万殊"，所谓忠恕是也。［38］（P232234） 朴知诫所说的一段解释之特殊之处，在于将朱子的"一本"与"万殊"，再细分为"知上之一本"与"知上之万殊"，以及"行上之一本"与"行上之万殊"，而归结在"心"的作用之上。 朝鲜儒者将"一本"与"万殊"汇归于"心"之上的解释立场，在金谨行的诠释中也有类似的表现，他说： 以道之总在一心者贯之于万事，则为散殊之道。以道之散在万事者本之于一心，则为总会之道。［32］（P576） 金谨行以"心"将"散殊之道"与"总会之道"加以统一，确较朱子之解释更进一层。 ２以"诚"释"一"。朝鲜儒者循朱子之轨辙，而有所创新的第二项就是以"诚"释"一以贯之"的"一"，杨应秀与尹衡老的解释可以作为代表。杨应秀撰《论语讲说》中有以下两条资料： （1）问：一贯者，以一理而通贯万事之理欤？愿闻其义。曰：圣人之一心，虚明洞彻，至诚无妄，故天下万事万物之理，自然无所不通，此之谓一以贯之也。然此等道理，不可以言传，亦不可闻而知之，惟在积学切至而自得也。［39］（P152） （2）问：一贯之理，或以行得之，或以知得之，其所以终能得之者何物欤？曰：诚也。［39］（P153） 杨应秀在以上两条问答中，强调"一以贯之"之所以可解，乃是因为"诚"的作用，因"圣人之一心，虚明洞澈至诚无妄，故天下万事万物之理，自然无所不通"。尹衡老也本《中庸》解《论语》的"一以贯之"，他说： 按圣人之无所不知，非多学而识也，即一理之贯通也。一贯而知之，即《中庸》所谓"自诚而明也"，诚之至者，清明在躬无一毫人欲之蔽，故志气如神......。相似事物之来，无不迎刃而解。［40］（P339）尹衡老在这一段中所说的"诚"字的用法，显然是指伦理学（而不是形上学）意义下的"诚"。［41］（P5455）^（二）日本儒者诠释的特色：与朝鲜儒者诠释的对比 我们如果将日朝儒者对"吾道一以贯之"一语的解释作一对比，就可以发现：日本儒者的解释与朝鲜儒者的解释大不相同，两者之对比在于：日本儒者倾向于将"个体性"（individuality）置于"社会性"（sociality）的脉络中思考，所以，日本儒者以"仁"释"一"，而朝鲜儒者以"诚"释"一"；［42］（P121136）日本儒者将"道"理解为先王所创设造作以安民的制度，而朝鲜儒者将"吾道一以贯之"的"道"，理解为统会于人之一"心"的抽象之"理"。 日朝儒者对孔子"吾道一以贯之"解释的差异，从表面上看，可以归因于１７世纪以后，朱子学在日本思想界的影响力逐渐式微，而朝鲜时代朝鲜思想界却笼罩在朱子学之下。但是，从更深一层来看，日本儒者之所以在解释"吾道一以贯之"一语时，将朱子解释中所见"心"与"理"之关系存而不论，并以"仁"而不以"诚"解释"一贯"的"一"，皆有其思想理路可寻。 宋儒与朝鲜儒者在朱子学典范之下，建立一个以"理"为基础的形上思想世界，并以"理学"为"实学"，朱子说： 子程子曰："不偏之谓中，不易之谓庸。中者，天下之正道，庸者，天下之定理。"此篇乃孔门传授心法，子思恐其久而差也，故笔之于书，以授孟子。其书始言一理，中散为万事，末复合为一理，"放之则弥六合，卷之则退藏于密"，其味无穷，皆实学也。善读者玩索而有得焉，则终身用之，有不能尽者矣。［43］（P17） 朱子明言"理学"即"实学"。但是，１７世纪以降德川时代日本儒者虽然学派取径各有不同，但却以人伦日用修己治人为"实学"。伊藤仁斋说： 圣人所谓知者，与后儒所谓知者，亦然不同。所谓知也者，自修己而乎治人，自齐家而及于平天下，皆有用之实学。［44］（P30） 仁斋主张所谓"知"不是知抽象之"理"，而是知具体的修己治人之方。荻生徂徕更明白宣示："大抵先王之道在外，其礼与义，皆多以施于人者言之"，［45］（P65）这种"施于人者"的"先王之道"，正是日本儒者理解的孔子"一以贯之"的"道"。徂徕又说："外礼而语治心之道，皆私智妄作也。"［45］（P86）徂徕及日本儒者在这种意义的"实学"思想之下，当然不会像朝鲜儒者一样地以"诚"这种"治心之道"解释"一以贯之"的"一"。五、结论：兼论日本儒者解经方法之特色 我们的分析显示：日本儒者将孔子"一以贯之"的"道"解释为"先王之道"，这是具体的制度施设与人为造作而不是抽象的形上之"理"。日本儒者以"统"释"贯"，而不是如朱子以"通"释"贯"。日本儒者也以"仁"释"一"，他们着重人与人之间的互动，反对形上之"理"对人间万事万物的宰制。 日本儒者在重新诠释孔学时，也对朱子及宋学展开激烈的批判，他们反对在人间的"先王之道"之上，另立一个形上的"理"的世界。但是，从中日比较思想史视野来看，日本儒者对宋学的批判并未切中要害，因为他们并未进入宋儒之孔学诠释中的两个哲学问题，这就是"心与理之关系"以及"个体论或整体论之方法论问题"。 相对于德川时代日本儒者对孔学的解释而言，朝鲜儒者可说基本上承继朱子学的旧轨。韩儒对朱子学中的"心与理之关系"以及"一本与万殊之关系"，皆有进一步的阐发。韩儒以"诚"释"一"，明确地显示朝鲜儒学思想之"内转"。日韩儒者对孔子"一以贯之"之"道"的解释之差异，正反映日本儒者的反朱与朝鲜儒者之翼朱思潮。 整体来看，德川时代日本儒者对孔子"吾道一以贯之"一语的解释，部分地体现日本儒者采取"即存在论本质"的解经方法。我最近曾说明：一些日本古学派儒者常常运用这种解经方法重读古典，他们主张将经典文本的概念或命题，置于具体实践的情境之中，才能掌握其真正的涵义。这种解经方法在日本德川思想史上反朱子学的儒者中，表现得最为明显。参考文献： ［1］贺复征文章辨体汇选：第590卷［M］台北：台湾商务印书馆，1983 ［2］刘宝楠论语正义：上册［M］北京：中华书局，1990 ［3］伊藤仁斋论语古义［A］关仪一郎日本名家四书注释全书:第3卷［M］东京：凤出版，1973 ［4］高田真治论语の文献注释书［M］东京：春阳堂书店，1937 ［5］中井积善非征［M］东京：吉川弘文馆，1988 ［6］荻生徂徕论语征：乙卷［Ａ］关仪一郎日本名家四书注释全书:第7卷［M］东京：凤出版，1973 ［7］林罗山圣教要录［M］井上哲次郎，蟹江义丸日本伦理汇编:第4册［M］东京：育成会，1903 ［8］龟井南溟论语语由［Ａ］关仪一郎日本名家四书注释全书:第3卷［M］东京：凤出版，1973 ［9］何晏集解、〔梁〕皇侃义疏、〔清〕鲍廷博校论语集解义疏:第8卷［M］台北：艺文印书馆，1966 ［10］何晏集解、〔梁〕皇侃义疏、〔清〕鲍廷博校论语集解义疏:第2卷［M］台北：艺文印书馆，1966 ［11］照井全都论语解［Ａ］关仪一郎日本名家四书注释全书:第12卷［M］东京：凤出版，1973 ［12］葛山寿述，片山兼山遗教论语一贯［M］京都：青萝馆，未载刊行年代，京都大学藏本 ［13］松宫观山学论［A］日本儒林丛书：第5册［M］东京：凤出版，1971 ［14］冢田虎圣道合语［Ａ］日本儒林丛书：第11册［M］东京：凤出版，1971 ［15］朱熹论语集注［Ａ］四书章句集注：第2卷［M］北京：中华书局，1983 ［16］猪饲敬所论语里仁篇一贯章讲义［A］日本儒林丛书：第14册［M］东京：凤出版，1971 ［17］钱穆（宾四）钱宾四先生全集：12册［M］台北：联经出版公司，1998 ［18］黎靖德朱子语类:第45卷［M］北京：中华书局，1986 ［19］朱熹孟子集注［Ａ］四书章句集注［M］北京：中华书局，1983 ［20］黎靖德朱子语类:第60卷［M］北京：中华书局，1986 ［21］牟宗三心体与性体：第3册［M］台北：正中书局，1968 ［22］胡宏五峰集：第5卷［M］台北：台湾商务印书馆，1969１９70 ［23］蔡节论语集说：第2卷［M］台北：台湾商务印书馆，1983 ［24］蔡节论语集说：第8卷［M］台北：台湾商务印书馆，1983 ［25］胡寅斐然集：第25卷［M］台北：台湾商务印书馆，1969１９70 ［26］焦循雕菰集：第9卷［M］ ［27］冢田虎圣道合语：上篇［Ａ］日本儒林丛书：第6册［M］东京：凤出版，1971 ［28］陈荣捷王阳明与禅［M］台北：无隐精舍，1973 ［29］黎靖德朱子语类：第27卷［M］北京：中华书局，1986 ［30］韩国哲学会韩国哲学史：中卷［M］北京：社会科学文献出版社，1996 ［31］钱穆朱子学流衍韩国考［Ｊ］新亚学报：第12卷1977 ［32］金谨行论语疑［A］韩国经学资料集成：第23卷［M］汉城：成均馆大学校大东文化研究院，1988^［33］朱熹朱子文集：第3卷［M］台北：财团法人德富文教基金会，2000 ［34］朱熹朱子文集：第30卷［M］台北：财团法人德富文教基金会，2000 ［35］李秉休论语一贯说［A］氏着论语禀目［A］韩国经学资料集成［M］汉城：成均馆大学校大东文化研究院，1988 ［36］丁若镛论语手［Ａ］氏着白水先生文集：第22卷［M］韩国经学资料集成：第27卷［M］汉城：成均馆大学校大东文化研究院，1988 ［37］朱熹论语集注：第2卷［M］台北：财团法人德富文教基金会，2000 ［38］朴知诫札录－论语［Ａ］氏着潜治集：第10卷［M］韩国经学资料集成［M］汉城：成均馆大学校大东文化研究院，1988 ［39］杨应秀论语讲说［Ａ］氏着白水先生文集：第21卷［M］韩国经学资料集成：第23卷［M］汉城：成均馆大学校大东文化研究院，1988 ［40］尹衡老札录－论语［A］氏着戒惧庵集：第7卷［M］韩国经学资料集成：第23卷［M］汉城：成均馆大学校大东文化研究院，1988 ［41］劳思光新编中国哲学史：第1卷［M］台北：三民书局，19811988 ［42］相良亨相良亨着作集：第2卷［M］。东京：ぺクかん社，1996 ［43］朱熹中庸章句［Ａ］四书章句集注［M］北京：中华书局，1983 ［44］伊藤仁斋语孟字义：上卷［M］ ［45］荻生徂徕辨名：上卷［Ａ］日本伦理汇编:第6册［M］东京：育成会，1903&nbsp;

本文以日本据台前后日本驻华外交官上野专一、启蒙思想家福泽谕吉与汉学家内藤湖南三位日本人，在十九世纪末期发表的论述台湾的文字为中心，分析当时日本人的台湾观，并探讨他们的台湾论述中所反映的日本知识界“脱亚入欧”的思想倾向及其问题之所在。

1927年国民党的"清党运动"和以后的残暴行动当然是革命过程中之悲剧。其引起很多家人父子兄弟投奔反蒋的阵营，不下于美国的南北战争。尤特里女士可谓对蒋极为同情的作家之一，可是她在所著之《中国最后的机会》一书中对清党一事也写出："在那暴怒、复仇、虐刑与死亡的日子，因之丧失生命，成为囚徒，变为玩世不恭，或从此不与闻政治的青年，都是全国的精英。"

1937 年抗战爆发后不久，沿海各处相继失陷，我即立意去从军。当时我未满20岁，符合传统所谓"弱冠"，只凭这一股稚气，满以为前方战事失利大抵都由于旧式将领以下军官畏死塞责。若有如我辈者一下决心，口至身随，有进无退，必能挽回颓势。与我一同应考的军校同学，很少例外，都有此愚志。

本文摘选自《从大历史角度读蒋介石日记》 黄仁宇/著 中国社会科学出版社

关于中国今后是否存在战略机遇期的问题在国内讨论过不止一次，而且是有争论的。很多学者认为，中国已经没有战略机遇期了，今后十年主要是战略危险期。他们这么认为不是没有道理，其理由和根据也很多。但是，我还是坚持中国未来十年存在战略机遇期的观点。

鲁迅在《写于深夜里》一文中说："这里面是穷困，疾病，饥饿，死亡......自然也有挣扎和争斗，但比较的少；这正如作者的自画像，脸上虽有憎恶和愤怒，而更多的是慈爱和悲悯的相同。这是一切'被侮辱和被损害的'的母亲的心的图像。"

他们要吸引的，不是民众的思想，而是诉诸他们的恐惧情绪和自卫本能。

在東亞思想史上，「中國」這個極具指標性的概念，雖然形成於古代中國，但其內涵在近世日本與現代台灣，卻經歷轉變。「

比利时艺术家: 法朗士·麦绥莱勒 (Franz Masereel, 1889-1972)

BARTLEBY, THE SCRIVENER.A STORY OF WALL-STREET.I am a rather elderly man. The nature of my avocations for the last thirty years has brought me into more than ordinary contact with what would seem an interesting and somewhat singular set of men, of whom as yet nothing that I know of has ever been written:—I mean the law-copyists or scriveners. I have known very many of them, professionally and privately, and if I pleased, could relate divers histories, at which good-natured gentlemen might smile, and sentimental souls might weep. But I waive the biographies of all other scriveners for a few passages in the life of Bartleby, who was a scrivener of the strangest I ever saw or heard of. While of other law-copyists I might write the complete life, of Bartleby nothing of that sort can be done. I believe that no materials exist for a full and satisfactory biography of this man. It is an irreparable loss to literature. Bartleby was one of those beings of whom nothing is ascertainable, except from the original sources, and in his case those are very small. What my own astonished eyes saw of Bartleby,&nbsp;that&nbsp;is all I know of him, except, indeed, one vague report which will appear in the sequel.Ere introducing the scrivener, as he first appeared to me, it is fit I make some mention of myself, my&nbsp;employees, my business, my chambers, and general surroundings; because some such description is indispensable to an adequate understanding of the chief character about to be presented.Imprimis: I am a man who, from his youth upwards, has been filled with a profound conviction that the easiest way of life is the best. Hence, though I belong to a profession proverbially energetic and nervous, even to turbulence, at times, yet nothing of that sort have I ever suffered to invade my peace. I am one of those unambitious lawyers who never addresses a jury, or in any way draws down public applause; but in the cool tranquility of a snug retreat, do a snug business among rich men's bonds and mortgages and title-deeds. All who know me, consider me an eminently&nbsp;safe&nbsp;man. The late John Jacob Astor, a personage little given to poetic enthusiasm, had no hesitation in pronouncing my first grand point to be prudence; my next, method. I do not speak it in vanity, but simply record the fact, that I was not unemployed in my profession by the late John Jacob Astor; a name which, I admit, I love to repeat, for it hath a rounded and orbicular sound to it, and rings like unto bullion. I will freely add, that I was not insensible to the late John Jacob Astor's good opinion.Some time prior to the period at which this little history begins, my avocations had been largely increased. The good old office, now extinct in the State of New York, of a Master in Chancery, had been conferred upon me. It was not a very arduous office, but very pleasantly remunerative. I seldom lose my temper; much more seldom indulge in dangerous indignation at wrongs and outrages; but I must be permitted to be rash here and declare, that I consider the sudden and violent abrogation of the office of Master in Chancery, by the new Constitution, as a—premature act; inasmuch as I had counted upon a life-lease of the profits, whereas I only received those of a few short years. But this is by the way.My chambers were up stairs at No.—Wall-street. At one end they looked upon the white wall of the interior of a spacious sky-light shaft, penetrating the building from top to bottom. This view might have been considered rather tame than otherwise, deficient in what landscape painters call "life." But if so, the view from the other end of my chambers offered, at least, a contrast, if nothing more. In that direction my windows commanded an unobstructed view of a lofty brick wall, black by age and everlasting shade; which wall required no spy-glass to bring out its lurking beauties, but for the benefit of all near-sighted spectators, was pushed up to within ten feet of my window panes. Owing to the great height of the surrounding buildings, and my chambers being on the second floor, the interval between this wall and mine not a little resembled a huge square cistern.At the period just preceding the advent of Bartleby, I had two persons as copyists in my employment, and a promising lad as an office-boy. First, Turkey; second, Nippers; third, Ginger Nut. These may seem names, the like of which are not usually found in the Directory. In truth they were nicknames, mutually conferred upon each other by my three clerks, and were deemed expressive of their respective persons or characters. Turkey was a short, pursy Englishman of about my own age, that is, somewhere not far from sixty. In the morning, one might say, his face was of a fine florid hue, but after twelve o'clock, meridian—his dinner hour—it blazed like a grate full of Christmas coals; and continued blazing—but, as it were, with a gradual wane—till 6 o'clock, P.M. or thereabouts, after which I saw no more of the proprietor of the face, which gaining its meridian with the sun, seemed to set with it, to rise, culminate, and decline the following day, with the like regularity and undiminished glory. There are many singular coincidences I have known in the course of my life, not the least among which was the fact, that exactly when Turkey displayed his fullest beams from his red and radiant countenance, just then, too, at that critical moment, began the daily period when I considered his business capacities as seriously disturbed for the remainder of the twenty-four hours. Not that he was absolutely idle, or averse to business then; far from it. The difficulty was, he was apt to be altogether too energetic. There was a strange, inflamed, flurried, flighty recklessness of activity about him. He would be incautious in dipping his pen into his inkstand. All his blots upon my documents, were dropped there after twelve o'clock, meridian. Indeed, not only would he be reckless and sadly given to making blots in the afternoon, but some days he went further, and was rather noisy. At such times, too, his face flamed with augmented blazonry, as if cannel coal had been heaped on anthracite. He made an unpleasant racket with his chair; spilled his sand-box; in mending his pens, impatiently split them all to pieces, and threw them on the floor in a sudden passion; stood up and leaned over his table, boxing his papers about in a most indecorous manner, very sad to behold in an elderly man like him. Nevertheless, as he was in many ways a most valuable person to me, and all the time before twelve o'clock, meridian, was the quickest, steadiest creature too, accomplishing a great deal of work in a style not easy to be matched—for these reasons, I was willing to overlook his eccentricities, though indeed, occasionally, I remonstrated with him. I did this very gently, however, because, though the civilest, nay, the blandest and most reverential of men in the morning, yet in the afternoon he was disposed, upon provocation, to be slightly rash with his tongue, in fact, insolent. Now, valuing his morning services as I did, and resolved not to lose them; yet, at the same time made uncomfortable by his inflamed ways after twelve o'clock; and being a man of peace, unwilling by my admonitions to call forth unseemly retorts from him; I took upon me, one Saturday noon (he was always worse on Saturdays), to hint to him, very kindly, that perhaps now that he was growing old, it might be well to abridge his labors; in short, he need not come to my chambers after twelve o'clock, but, dinner over, had best go home to his lodgings and rest himself till teatime. But no; he insisted upon his afternoon devotions. His countenance became intolerably fervid, as he oratorically assured me—gesticulating with a long ruler at the other end of the room—that if his services in the morning were useful, how indispensable, then, in the afternoon?"With submission, sir," said Turkey on this occasion, "I consider myself your right-hand man. In the morning I but marshal and deploy my columns; but in the afternoon I put myself at their head, and gallantly charge the foe, thus!"—and he made a violent thrust with the ruler."But the blots, Turkey," intimated I."True,—but, with submission, sir, behold these hairs! I am getting old. Surely, sir, a blot or two of a warm afternoon is not to be severely urged against gray hairs. Old age—even if it blot the page—is honorable. With submission, sir, we&nbsp;both&nbsp;are getting old."This appeal to my fellow-feeling was hardly to be resisted. At all events, I saw that go he would not. So I made up my mind to let him stay, resolving, nevertheless, to see to it, that during the afternoon he had to do with my less important papers.Nippers, the second on my list, was a whiskered, sallow, and, upon the whole, rather piratical-looking young man of about five and twenty. I always deemed him the victim of two evil powers—ambition and indigestion. The ambition was evinced by a certain impatience of the duties of a mere copyist, an unwarrantable usurpation of strictly professional affairs, such as the original drawing up of legal documents. The indigestion seemed betokened in an occasional nervous testiness and grinning irritability, causing the teeth to audibly grind together over mistakes committed in copying; unnecessary maledictions, hissed, rather than spoken, in the heat of business; and especially by a continual discontent with the height of the table where he worked. Though of a very ingenious mechanical turn, Nippers could never get this table to suit him. He put chips under it, blocks of various sorts, bits of pasteboard, and at last went so far as to attempt an exquisite adjustment by final pieces of folded blotting paper. But no invention would answer. If, for the sake of easing his back, he brought the table lid at a sharp angle well up towards his chin, and wrote there like a man using the steep roof of a Dutch house for his desk:—then he declared that it stopped the circulation in his arms. If now he lowered the table to his waistbands, and stooped over it in writing, then there was a sore aching in his back. In short, the truth of the matter was, Nippers knew not what he wanted. Or, if he wanted any thing, it was to be rid of a scrivener's table altogether. Among the manifestations of his diseased ambition was a fondness he had for receiving visits from certain ambiguous-looking fellows in seedy coats, whom he called his clients. Indeed I was aware that not only was he, at times, considerable of a ward-politician, but he occasionally did a little business at the Justices' courts, and was not unknown on the steps of the Tombs. I have good reason to believe, however, that one individual who called upon him at my chambers, and who, with a grand air, he insisted was his client, was no other than a dun, and the alleged title-deed, a bill. But with all his failings, and the annoyances he caused me, Nippers, like his compatriot Turkey, was a very useful man to me; wrote a neat, swift hand; and, when he chose, was not deficient in a gentlemanly sort of deportment. Added to this, he always dressed in a gentlemanly sort of way; and so, incidentally, reflected credit upon my chambers. Whereas with respect to Turkey, I had much ado to keep him from being a reproach to me. His clothes were apt to look oily and smell of eating-houses. He wore his pantaloons very loose and baggy in summer. His coats were execrable; his hat not to be handled. But while the hat was a thing of indifference to me, inasmuch as his natural civility and deference, as a dependent Englishman, always led him to doff it the moment he entered the room, yet his coat was another matter. Concerning his coats, I reasoned with him; but with no effect. The truth was, I suppose, that a man of so small an income, could not afford to sport such a lustrous face and a lustrous coat at one and the same time. As Nippers once observed, Turkey's money went chiefly for red ink. One winter day I presented Turkey with a highly-respectable looking coat of my own, a padded gray coat, of a most comfortable warmth, and which buttoned straight up from the knee to the neck. I thought Turkey would appreciate the favor, and abate his rashness and obstreperousness of afternoons. But no. I verily believe that buttoning himself up in so downy and blanket-like a coat had a pernicious effect upon him; upon the same principle that too much oats are bad for horses. In fact, precisely as a rash, restive horse is said to feel his oats, so Turkey felt his coat. It made him insolent. He was a man whom prosperity harmed.Though concerning the self-indulgent habits of Turkey I had my own private surmises, yet touching Nippers I was well persuaded that whatever might by his faults in other respects, he was, at least, a temperate young man. But indeed, nature herself seemed to have been his vintner, and at his birth charged him so thoroughly with an irritable, brandy-like disposition, that all subsequent potations were needless. When I consider how, amid the stillness of my chambers, Nippers would sometimes impatiently rise from his seat, and stooping over his table, spread his arms wide apart, seize the whole desk, and move it, and jerk it, with a grim, grinding motion on the floor, as if the table were a perverse voluntary agent, intent on thwarting and vexing him; I plainly perceive that for Nippers, brandy and water were altogether superfluous.It was fortunate for me that, owing to its peculiar cause—indigestion—the irritability and consequent nervousness of Nippers, were mainly observable in the morning, while in the afternoon he was comparatively mild. So that Turkey's paroxysms only coming on about twelve o'clock, I never had to do with their eccentricities at one time. Their fits relieved each other like guards. When Nippers' was on, Turkey's was off; and&nbsp;vice versa. This was a good natural arrangement under the circumstances.Ginger Nut, the third on my list, was a lad some twelve years old. His father was a carman, ambitious of seeing his son on the bench instead of a cart, before he died. So he sent him to my office as student at law, errand boy, and cleaner and sweeper, at the rate of one dollar a week. He had a little desk to himself, but he did not use it much. Upon inspection, the drawer exhibited a great array of the shells of various sorts of nuts. Indeed, to this quick-witted youth the whole noble science of the law was contained in a nut-shell. Not the least among the employments of Ginger Nut, as well as one which he discharged with the most alacrity, was his duty as cake and apple purveyor for Turkey and Nippers. Copying law papers being proverbially dry, husky sort of business, my two scriveners were fain to moisten their mouths very often with Spitzenbergs to be had at the numerous stalls nigh the Custom House and Post Office. Also, they sent Ginger Nut very frequently for that peculiar cake—small, flat, round, and very spicy—after which he had been named by them. Of a cold morning when business was but dull, Turkey would gobble up scores of these cakes, as if they were mere wafers—indeed they sell them at the rate of six or eight for a penny—the scrape of his pen blending with the crunching of the crisp particles in his mouth. Of all the fiery afternoon blunders and flurried rashnesses of Turkey, was his once moistening a ginger-cake between his lips, and clapping it on to a mortgage for a seal. I came within an ace of dismissing him then. But he mollified me by making an oriental bow, and saying—"With submission, sir, it was generous of me to find you in stationery on my own account."Now my original business—that of a conveyancer and title hunter, and drawer-up of recondite documents of all sorts—was considerably increased by receiving the master's office. There was now great work for scriveners. Not only must I push the clerks already with me, but I must have additional help. In answer to my advertisement, a motionless young man one morning, stood upon my office threshold, the door being open, for it was summer. I can see that figure now—pallidly neat, pitiably respectable, incurably forlorn! It was Bartleby.After a few words touching his qualifications, I engaged him, glad to have among my corps of copyists a man of so singularly sedate an aspect, which I thought might operate beneficially upon the flighty temper of Turkey, and the fiery one of Nippers.I should have stated before that ground glass folding-doors divided my premises into two parts, one of which was occupied by my scriveners, the other by myself. According to my humor I threw open these doors, or closed them. I resolved to assign Bartleby a corner by the folding-doors, but on my side of them, so as to have this quiet man within easy call, in case any trifling thing was to be done. I placed his desk close up to a small side-window in that part of the room, a window which originally had afforded a lateral view of certain grimy back-yards and bricks, but which, owing to subsequent erections, commanded at present no view at all, though it gave some light. Within three feet of the panes was a wall, and the light came down from far above, between two lofty buildings, as from a very small opening in a dome. Still further to a satisfactory arrangement, I procured a high green folding screen, which might entirely isolate Bartleby from my sight, though not remove him from my voice. And thus, in a manner, privacy and society were conjoined.At first Bartleby did an extraordinary quantity of writing. As if long famishing for something to copy, he seemed to gorge himself on my documents. There was no pause for digestion. He ran a day and night line, copying by sun-light and by candle-light. I should have been quite delighted with his application, had he been cheerfully industrious. But he wrote on silently, palely, mechanically.It is, of course, an indispensable part of a scrivener's business to verify the accuracy of his copy, word by word. Where there are two or more scriveners in an office, they assist each other in this examination, one reading from the copy, the other holding the original. It is a very dull, wearisome, and lethargic affair. I can readily imagine that to some sanguine temperaments it would be altogether intolerable. For example, I cannot credit that the mettlesome poet Byron would have contentedly sat down with Bartleby to examine a law document of, say five hundred pages, closely written in a crimpy hand.Now and then, in the haste of business, it had been my habit to assist in comparing some brief document myself, calling Turkey or Nippers for this purpose. One object I had in placing Bartleby so handy to me behind the screen, was to avail myself of his services on such trivial occasions. It was on the third day, I think, of his being with me, and before any necessity had arisen for having his own writing examined, that, being much hurried to complete a small affair I had in hand, I abruptly called to Bartleby. In my haste and natural expectancy of instant compliance, I sat with my head bent over the original on my desk, and my right hand sideways, and somewhat nervously extended with the copy, so that immediately upon emerging from his retreat, Bartleby might snatch it and proceed to business without the least delay.In this very attitude did I sit when I called to him, rapidly stating what it was I wanted him to do—namely, to examine a small paper with me. Imagine my surprise, nay, my consternation, when without moving from his privacy, Bartleby in a singularly mild, firm voice, replied, "I would prefer not to."I sat awhile in perfect silence, rallying my stunned faculties. Immediately it occurred to me that my ears had deceived me, or Bartleby had entirely misunderstood my meaning. I repeated my request in the clearest tone I could assume. But in quite as clear a one came the previous reply, "I would prefer not to.""Prefer not to," echoed I, rising in high excitement, and crossing the room with a stride. "What do you mean? Are you moon-struck? I want you to help me compare this sheet here—take it," and I thrust it towards him."I would prefer not to," said he.I looked at him steadfastly. His face was leanly composed; his gray eye dimly calm. Not a wrinkle of agitation rippled him. Had there been the least uneasiness, anger, impatience or impertinence in his manner; in other words, had there been any thing ordinarily human about him, doubtless I should have violently dismissed him from the premises. But as it was, I should have as soon thought of turning my pale plaster-of-paris bust of Cicero out of doors. I stood gazing at him awhile, as he went on with his own writing, and then reseated myself at my desk. This is very strange, thought I. What had one best do? But my business hurried me. I concluded to forget the matter for the present, reserving it for my future leisure. So calling Nippers from the other room, the paper was speedily examined.A few days after this, Bartleby concluded four lengthy documents, being quadruplicates of a week's testimony taken before me in my High Court of Chancery. It became necessary to examine them. It was an important suit, and great accuracy was imperative. Having all things arranged I called Turkey, Nippers and Ginger Nut from the next room, meaning to place the four copies in the hands of my four clerks, while I should read from the original. Accordingly Turkey, Nippers and Ginger Nut had taken their seats in a row, each with his document in hand, when I called to Bartleby to join this interesting group."Bartleby! quick, I am waiting."I heard a slow scrape of his chair legs on the uncarpeted floor, and soon he appeared standing at the entrance of his hermitage."What is wanted?" said he mildly."The copies, the copies," said I hurriedly. "We are going to examine them. There"—and I held towards him the fourth quadruplicate."I would prefer not to," he said, and gently disappeared behind the screen.For a few moments I was turned into a pillar of salt, standing at the head of my seated column of clerks. Recovering myself, I advanced towards the screen, and demanded the reason for such extraordinary conduct."Why&nbsp;do you refuse?""I would prefer not to."With any other man I should have flown outright into a dreadful passion, scorned all further words, and thrust him ignominiously from my presence. But there was something about Bartleby that not only strangely disarmed me, but in a wonderful manner touched and disconcerted me. I began to reason with him."These are your own copies we are about to examine. It is labor saving to you, because one examination will answer for your four papers. It is common usage. Every copyist is bound to help examine his copy. Is it not so? Will you not speak? Answer!""I prefer not to," he replied in a flute-like tone. It seemed to me that while I had been addressing him, he carefully revolved every statement that I made; fully comprehended the meaning; could not gainsay the irresistible conclusions; but, at the same time, some paramount consideration prevailed with him to reply as he did."You are decided, then, not to comply with my request—a request made according to common usage and common sense?"He briefly gave me to understand that on that point my judgment was sound. Yes: his decision was irreversible.It is not seldom the case that when a man is browbeaten in some unprecedented and violently unreasonable way, he begins to stagger in his own plainest faith. He begins, as it were, vaguely to surmise that, wonderful as it may be, all the justice and all the reason is on the other side. Accordingly, if any disinterested persons are present, he turns to them for some reinforcement for his own faltering mind."Turkey," said I, "what do you think of this? Am I not right?""With submission, sir," said Turkey, with his blandest tone, "I think that you are.""Nippers," said I, "what do&nbsp;you&nbsp;think of it?""I think I should kick him out of the office."(The reader of nice perceptions will here perceive that, it being morning, Turkey's answer is couched in polite and tranquil terms, but Nippers replies in ill-tempered ones. Or, to repeat a previous sentence, Nippers' ugly mood was on duty and Turkey's off.)"Ginger Nut," said I, willing to enlist the smallest suffrage in my behalf, "what do you think of it?""I think, sir, he's a little&nbsp;luny," replied Ginger Nut with a grin."You hear what they say," said I, turning towards the screen, "come forth and do your duty."But he vouchsafed no reply. I pondered a moment in sore perplexity. But once more business hurried me. I determined again to postpone the consideration of this dilemma to my future leisure. With a little trouble we made out to examine the papers without Bartleby, though at every page or two, Turkey deferentially dropped his opinion that this proceeding was quite out of the common; while Nippers, twitching in his chair with a dyspeptic nervousness, ground out between his set teeth occasional hissing maledictions against the stubborn oaf behind the screen. And for his (Nippers') part, this was the first and the last time he would do another man's business without pay.Meanwhile Bartleby sat in his hermitage, oblivious to every thing but his own peculiar business there.Some days passed, the scrivener being employed upon another lengthy work. His late remarkable conduct led me to regard his ways narrowly. I observed that he never went to dinner; indeed that he never went any where. As yet I had never of my personal knowledge known him to be outside of my office. He was a perpetual sentry in the corner. At about eleven o'clock though, in the morning, I noticed that Ginger Nut would advance toward the opening in Bartleby's screen, as if silently beckoned thither by a gesture invisible to me where I sat. The boy would then leave the office jingling a few pence, and reappear with a handful of ginger-nuts which he delivered in the hermitage, receiving two of the cakes for his trouble.He lives, then, on ginger-nuts, thought I; never eats a dinner, properly speaking; he must be a vegetarian then; but no; he never eats even vegetables, he eats nothing but ginger-nuts. My mind then ran on in reveries concerning the probable effects upon the human constitution of living entirely on ginger-nuts. Ginger-nuts are so called because they contain ginger as one of their peculiar constituents, and the final flavoring one. Now what was ginger? A hot, spicy thing. Was Bartleby hot and spicy? Not at all. Ginger, then, had no effect upon Bartleby. Probably he preferred it should have none.Nothing so aggravates an earnest person as a passive resistance. If the individual so resisted be of a not inhumane temper, and the resisting one perfectly harmless in his passivity; then, in the better moods of the former, he will endeavor charitably to construe to his imagination what proves impossible to be solved by his judgment. Even so, for the most part, I regarded Bartleby and his ways. Poor fellow! thought I, he means no mischief; it is plain he intends no insolence; his aspect sufficiently evinces that his eccentricities are involuntary. He is useful to me. I can get along with him. If I turn him away, the chances are he will fall in with some less indulgent employer, and then he will be rudely treated, and perhaps driven forth miserably to starve. Yes. Here I can cheaply purchase a delicious self-approval. To befriend Bartleby; to humor him in his strange willfulness, will cost me little or nothing, while I lay up in my soul what will eventually prove a sweet morsel for my conscience. But this mood was not invariable with me. The passiveness of Bartleby sometimes irritated me. I felt strangely goaded on to encounter him in new opposition, to elicit some angry spark from him answerable to my own. But indeed I might as well have essayed to strike fire with my knuckles against a bit of Windsor soap. But one afternoon the evil impulse in me mastered me, and the following little scene ensued:"Bartleby," said I, "when those papers are all copied, I will compare them with you.""I would prefer not to.""How? Surely you do not mean to persist in that mulish vagary?"No answer.I threw open the folding-doors near by, and turning upon Turkey andNippers, exclaimed in an excited manner—"He says, a second time, he won't examine his papers. What do you think of it, Turkey?"It was afternoon, be it remembered. Turkey sat glowing like a brass boiler, his bald head steaming, his hands reeling among his blotted papers."Think of it?" roared Turkey; "I think I'll just step behind his screen, and black his eyes for him!"So saying, Turkey rose to his feet and threw his arms into a pugilistic position. He was hurrying away to make good his promise, when I detained him, alarmed at the effect of incautiously rousing Turkey's combativeness after dinner."Sit down, Turkey," said I, "and hear what Nippers has to say. What do you think of it, Nippers? Would I not be justified in immediately dismissing Bartleby?""Excuse me, that is for you to decide, sir. I think his conduct quite unusual, and indeed unjust, as regards Turkey and myself. But it may only be a passing whim.""Ah," exclaimed I, "you have strangely changed your mind then—you speak very gently of him now.""All beer," cried Turkey; "gentleness is effects of beer—Nippers and I dined together to-day. You see how gentle&nbsp;I&nbsp;am, sir. Shall I go and black his eyes?""You refer to Bartleby, I suppose. No, not to-day, Turkey," I replied; "pray, put up your fists."I closed the doors, and again advanced towards Bartleby. I felt additional incentives tempting me to my fate. I burned to be rebelled against again. I remembered that Bartleby never left the office."Bartleby," said I, "Ginger Nut is away; just step round to the Post Office, won't you? (it was but a three minute walk,) and see if there is any thing for me.""I would prefer not to.""You&nbsp;will&nbsp;not?""I&nbsp;prefer&nbsp;not."I staggered to my desk, and sat there in a deep study. My blind inveteracy returned. Was there any other thing in which I could procure myself to be ignominiously repulsed by this lean, penniless wight?—my hired clerk? What added thing is there, perfectly reasonable, that he will be sure to refuse to do?"Bartleby!"No answer."Bartleby," in a louder tone.No answer."Bartleby," I roared.Like a very ghost, agreeably to the laws of magical invocation, at the third summons, he appeared at the entrance of his hermitage."Go to the next room, and tell Nippers to come to me.""I prefer not to," he respectfully and slowly said, and mildly disappeared."Very good, Bartleby," said I, in a quiet sort of serenely severe self-possessed tone, intimating the unalterable purpose of some terrible retribution very close at hand. At the moment I half intended something of the kind. But upon the whole, as it was drawing towards my dinner-hour, I thought it best to put on my hat and walk home for the day, suffering much from perplexity and distress of mind.Shall I acknowledge it? The conclusion of this whole business was, that it soon became a fixed fact of my chambers, that a pale young scrivener, by the name of Bartleby, and a desk there; that he copied for me at the usual rate of four cents a folio (one hundred words); but he was permanently exempt from examining the work done by him, that duty being transferred to Turkey and Nippers, one of compliment doubtless to their superior acuteness; moreover, said Bartleby was never on any account to be dispatched on the most trivial errand of any sort; and that even if entreated to take upon him such a matter, it was generally understood that he would prefer not to—in other words, that he would refuse pointblank.As days passed on, I became considerably reconciled to Bartleby. His steadiness, his freedom from all dissipation, his incessant industry (except when he chose to throw himself into a standing revery behind his screen), his great, stillness, his unalterableness of demeanor under all circumstances, made him a valuable acquisition. One prime thing was this,—he was always there;—first in the morning, continually through the day, and the last at night. I had a singular confidence in his honesty. I felt my most precious papers perfectly safe in his hands. Sometimes to be sure I could not, for the very soul of me, avoid falling into sudden spasmodic passions with him. For it was exceeding difficult to bear in mind all the time those strange peculiarities, privileges, and unheard of exemptions, forming the tacit stipulations on Bartleby's part under which he remained in my office. Now and then, in the eagerness of dispatching pressing business, I would inadvertently summon Bartleby, in a short, rapid tone, to put his finger, say, on the incipient tie of a bit of red tape with which I was about compressing some papers. Of course, from behind the screen the usual answer, "I prefer not to," was sure to come; and then, how could a human creature with the common infirmities of our nature, refrain from bitterly exclaiming upon such perverseness—such unreasonableness. However, every added repulse of this sort which I received only tended to lessen the probability of my repeating the inadvertence.Here it must be said, that according to the custom of most legal gentlemen occupying chambers in densely-populated law buildings, there were several keys to my door. One was kept by a woman residing in the attic, which person weekly scrubbed and daily swept and dusted my apartments. Another was kept by Turkey for convenience sake. The third I sometimes carried in my own pocket. The fourth I knew not who had.Now, one Sunday morning I happened to go to Trinity Church, to hear a celebrated preacher, and finding myself rather early on the ground, I thought I would walk around to my chambers for a while. Luckily I had my key with me; but upon applying it to the lock, I found it resisted by something inserted from the inside. Quite surprised, I called out; when to my consternation a key was turned from within; and thrusting his lean visage at me, and holding the door ajar, the apparition of Bartleby appeared, in his shirt sleeves, and otherwise in a strangely tattered dishabille, saying quietly that he was sorry, but he was deeply engaged just then, and—preferred not admitting me at present. In a brief word or two, he moreover added, that perhaps I had better walk round the block two or three times, and by that time he would probably have concluded his affairs.Now, the utterly unsurmised appearance of Bartleby, tenanting my law-chambers of a Sunday morning, with his cadaverously gentlemanly&nbsp;nonchalance, yet withal firm and self-possessed, had such a strange effect upon me, that incontinently I slunk away from my own door, and did as desired. But not without sundry twinges of impotent rebellion against the mild effrontery of this unaccountable scrivener. Indeed, it was his wonderful mildness chiefly, which not only disarmed me, but unmanned me, as it were. For I consider that one, for the time, is a sort of unmanned when he tranquilly permits his hired clerk to dictate to him, and order him away from his own premises. Furthermore, I was full of uneasiness as to what Bartleby could possibly be doing in my office in his shirt sleeves, and in an otherwise dismantled condition of a Sunday morning. Was any thing amiss going on? Nay, that was out of the question. It was not to be thought of for a moment that Bartleby was an immoral person. But what could he be doing there?—copying? Nay again, whatever might be his eccentricities, Bartleby was an eminently decorous person. He would be the last man to sit down to his desk in any state approaching to nudity. Besides, it was Sunday; and there was something about Bartleby that forbade the supposition that he would by any secular occupation violate the proprieties of the day.Nevertheless, my mind was not pacified; and full of a restless curiosity, at last I returned to the door. Without hindrance I inserted my key, opened it, and entered. Bartleby was not to be seen. I looked round anxiously, peeped behind his screen; but it was very plain that he was gone. Upon more closely examining the place, I surmised that for an indefinite period Bartleby must have ate, dressed, and slept in my office, and that too without plate, mirror, or bed. The cushioned seat of a rickety old sofa in one corner bore the faint impress of a lean, reclining form. Rolled away under his desk, I found a blanket; under the empty grate, a blacking box and brush; on a chair, a tin basin, with soap and a ragged towel; in a newspaper a few crumbs of ginger-nuts and a morsel of cheese. Yes, thought I, it is evident enough that Bartleby has been making his home here, keeping bachelor's hall all by himself. Immediately then the thought came sweeping across me, What miserable friendlessness and loneliness are here revealed! His poverty is great; but his solitude, how horrible! Think of it. Of a Sunday, Wall-street is deserted as Petra; and every night of every day it is an emptiness. This building too, which of week-days hums with industry and life, at nightfall echoes with sheer vacancy, and all through Sunday is forlorn. And here Bartleby makes his home; sole spectator of a solitude which he has seen all populous—a sort of innocent and transformed Marius brooding among the ruins of Carthage!For the first time in my life a feeling of overpowering stinging melancholy seized me. Before, I had never experienced aught but a not-unpleasing sadness. The bond of a common humanity now drew me irresistibly to gloom. A fraternal melancholy! For both I and Bartleby were sons of Adam. I remembered the bright silks and sparkling faces I had seen that day, in gala trim, swan-like sailing down the Mississippi of Broadway; and I contrasted them with the pallid copyist, and thought to myself, Ah, happiness courts the light, so we deem the world is gay; but misery hides aloof, so we deem that misery there is none. These sad fancyings—chimeras, doubtless, of a sick and silly brain—led on to other and more special thoughts, concerning the eccentricities of Bartleby. Presentiments of strange discoveries hovered round me. The scrivener's pale form appeared to me laid out, among uncaring strangers, in its shivering winding sheet.Suddenly I was attracted by Bartleby's closed desk, the key in open sight left in the lock.I mean no mischief, seek the gratification of no heartless curiosity, thought I; besides, the desk is mine, and its contents too, so I will make bold to look within. Every thing was methodically arranged, the papers smoothly placed. The pigeon holes were deep, and removing the files of documents, I groped into their recesses. Presently I felt something there, and dragged it out. It was an old bandanna handkerchief, heavy and knotted. I opened it, and saw it was a savings' bank.I now recalled all the quiet mysteries which I had noted in the man. I remembered that he never spoke but to answer; that though at intervals he had considerable time to himself, yet I had never seen him reading—no, not even a newspaper; that for long periods he would stand looking out, at his pale window behind the screen, upon the dead brick wall; I was quite sure he never visited any refectory or eating house; while his pale face clearly indicated that he never drank beer like Turkey, or tea and coffee even, like other men; that he never went any where in particular that I could learn; never went out for a walk, unless indeed that was the case at present; that he had declined telling who he was, or whence he came, or whether he had any relatives in the world; that though so thin and pale, he never complained of ill health. And more than all, I remembered a certain unconscious air of pallid—how shall I call it?—of pallid haughtiness, say, or rather an austere reserve about him, which had positively awed me into my tame compliance with his eccentricities, when I had feared to ask him to do the slightest incidental thing for me, even though I might know, from his long-continued motionlessness, that behind his screen he must be standing in one of those dead-wall reveries of his.Revolving all these things, and coupling them with the recently discovered fact that he made my office his constant abiding place and home, and not forgetful of his morbid moodiness; revolving all these things, a prudential feeling began to steal over me. My first emotions had been those of pure melancholy and sincerest pity; but just in proportion as the forlornness of Bartleby grew and grew to my imagination, did that same melancholy merge into fear, that pity into repulsion. So true it is, and so terrible too, that up to a certain point the thought or sight of misery enlists our best affections; but, in certain special cases, beyond that point it does not. They err who would assert that invariably this is owing to the inherent selfishness of the human heart. It rather proceeds from a certain hopelessness of remedying excessive and organic ill. To a sensitive being, pity is not seldom pain. And when at last it is perceived that such pity cannot lead to effectual succor, common sense bids the soul rid of it. What I saw that morning persuaded me that the scrivener was the victim of innate and incurable disorder. I might give alms to his body; but his body did not pain him; it was his soul that suffered, and his soul I could not reach.I did not accomplish the purpose of going to Trinity Church that morning. Somehow, the things I had seen disqualified me for the time from church-going. I walked homeward, thinking what I would do with Bartleby. Finally, I resolved upon this;—I would put certain calm questions to him the next morning, touching his history, etc., and if he declined to answer them openly and unreservedly (and I supposed he would prefer not), then to give him a twenty dollar bill over and above whatever I might owe him, and tell him his services were no longer required; but that if in any other way I could assist him, I would be happy to do so, especially if he desired to return to his native place, wherever that might be, I would willingly help to defray the expenses. Moreover, if, after reaching home, he found himself at any time in want of aid, a letter from him would be sure of a reply.The next morning came."Bartleby," said I, gently calling to him behind his screen.No reply."Bartleby," said I, in a still gentler tone, "come here; I am not going to ask you to do any thing you would prefer not to do—I simply wish to speak to you."Upon this he noiselessly slid into view."Will you tell me, Bartleby, where you were born?""I would prefer not to.""Will you tell me&nbsp;any thing&nbsp;about yourself?""I would prefer not to.""But what reasonable objection can you have to speak to me? I feel friendly towards you."He did not look at me while I spoke, but kept his glance fixed upon my bust of Cicero, which as I then sat, was directly behind me, some six inches above my head."What is your answer, Bartleby?" said I, after waiting a considerable time for a reply, during which his countenance remained immovable, only there was the faintest conceivable tremor of the white attenuated mouth."At present I prefer to give no answer," he said, and retired into his hermitage.It was rather weak in me I confess, but his manner on this occasion nettled me. Not only did there seem to lurk in it a certain calm disdain, but his perverseness seemed ungrateful, considering the undeniable good usage and indulgence he had received from me.Again I sat ruminating what I should do. Mortified as I was at his behavior, and resolved as I had been to dismiss him when I entered my offices, nevertheless I strangely felt something superstitious knocking at my heart, and forbidding me to carry out my purpose, and denouncing me for a villain if I dared to breathe one bitter word against this forlornest of mankind. At last, familiarly drawing my chair behind his screen, I sat down and said: "Bartleby, never mind then about revealing your history; but let me entreat you, as a friend, to comply as far as may be with the usages of this office. Say now you will help to examine papers to-morrow or next day: in short, say now that in a day or two you will begin to be a little reasonable:—say so, Bartleby.""At present I would prefer not to be a little reasonable," was his mildly cadaverous reply.Just then the folding-doors opened, and Nippers approached. He seemed suffering from an unusually bad night's rest, induced by severer indigestion then common. He overheard those final words of Bartleby."Prefer not, eh?" gritted Nippers—"I'd&nbsp;prefer&nbsp;him, if I were you, sir," addressing me—"I'd&nbsp;prefer&nbsp;him; I'd give him preferences, the stubborn mule! What is it, sir, pray, that he&nbsp;prefers&nbsp;not to do now?"Bartleby moved not a limb."Mr. Nippers," said I, "I'd prefer that you would withdraw for the present."Somehow, of late I had got into the way of involuntarily using this word "prefer" upon all sorts of not exactly suitable occasions. And I trembled to think that my contact with the scrivener had already and seriously affected me in a mental way. And what further and deeper aberration might it not yet produce? This apprehension had not been without efficacy in determining me to summary means.As Nippers, looking very sour and sulky, was departing, Turkey blandly and deferentially approached."With submission, sir," said he, "yesterday I was thinking about Bartleby here, and I think that if he would but prefer to take a quart of good ale every day, it would do much towards mending him, and enabling him to assist in examining his papers.""So you have got the word too," said I, slightly excited."With submission, what word, sir," asked Turkey, respectfully crowding himself into the contracted space behind the screen, and by so doing, making me jostle the scrivener. "What word, sir?""I would prefer to be left alone here," said Bartleby, as if offended at being mobbed in his privacy."That's&nbsp;the word, Turkey," said I—"that's it.""Oh,&nbsp;prefer? oh yes—queer word. I never use it myself. But, sir, asI was saying, if he would but prefer—""Turkey," interrupted I, "you will please withdraw.""Oh certainly, sir, if you prefer that I should."As he opened the folding-door to retire, Nippers at his desk caught a glimpse of me, and asked whether I would prefer to have a certain paper copied on blue paper or white. He did not in the least roguishly accent the word prefer. It was plain that it involuntarily rolled form his tongue. I thought to myself, surely I must get rid of a demented man, who already has in some degree turned the tongues, if not the heads of myself and clerks. But I thought it prudent not to break the dismission at once.The next day I noticed that Bartleby did nothing but stand at his window in his dead-wall revery. Upon asking him why he did not write, he said that he had decided upon doing no more writing."Why, how now? what next?" exclaimed I, "do no more writing?""No more.""And what is the reason?""Do you not see the reason for yourself," he indifferently replied.I looked steadfastly at him, and perceived that his eyes looked dull and glazed. Instantly it occurred to me, that his unexampled diligence in copying by his dim window for the first few weeks of his stay with me might have temporarily impaired his vision.I was touched. I said something in condolence with him. I hinted that of course he did wisely in abstaining from writing for a while; and urged him to embrace that opportunity of taking wholesome exercise in the open air. This, however, he did not do. A few days after this, my other clerks being absent, and being in a great hurry to dispatch certain letters by the mail, I thought that, having nothing else earthly to do, Bartleby would surely be less inflexible than usual, and carry these letters to the post-office. But he blankly declined. So, much to my inconvenience, I went myself.Still added days went by. Whether Bartleby's eyes improved or not, I could not say. To all appearance, I thought they did. But when I asked him if they did, he vouchsafed no answer. At all events, he would do no copying. At last, in reply to my urgings, he informed me that he had permanently given up copying."What!" exclaimed I; "suppose your eyes should get entirely well—better than ever before—would you not copy then?""I have given up copying," he answered, and slid aside.He remained as ever, a fixture in my chamber. Nay—if that were possible—he became still more of a fixture than before. What was to be done? He would do nothing in the office: why should he stay there? In plain fact, he had now become a millstone to me, not only useless as a necklace, but afflictive to bear. Yet I was sorry for him. I speak less than truth when I say that, on his own account, he occasioned me uneasiness. If he would but have named a single relative or friend, I would instantly have written, and urged their taking the poor fellow away to some convenient retreat. But he seemed alone, absolutely alone in the universe. A bit of wreck in the mid Atlantic. At length, necessities connected with my business tyrannized over all other considerations. Decently as I could, I told Bartleby that in six days' time he must unconditionally leave the office. I warned him to take measures, in the interval, for procuring some other abode. I offered to assist him in this endeavor, if he himself would but take the first step towards a removal. "And when you finally quit me, Bartleby," added I, "I shall see that you go not away entirely unprovided. Six days from this hour, remember."At the expiration of that period, I peeped behind the screen, and lo!Bartleby was there.I buttoned up my coat, balanced myself; advanced slowly towards him, touched his shoulder, and said, "The time has come; you must quit this place; I am sorry for you; here is money; but you must go.""I would prefer not," he replied, with his back still towards me."You&nbsp;must."He remained silent.Now I had an unbounded confidence in this man's common honesty. He had frequently restored to me sixpences and shillings carelessly dropped upon the floor, for I am apt to be very reckless in such shirt-button affairs. The proceeding then which followed will not be deemed extraordinary."Bartleby," said I, "I owe you twelve dollars on account; here are thirty-two; the odd twenty are yours.—Will you take it?" and I handed the bills towards him.But he made no motion."I will leave them here then," putting them under a weight on the table. Then taking my hat and cane and going to the door I tranquilly turned and added—"After you have removed your things from these offices, Bartleby, you will of course lock the door—since every one is now gone for the day but you—and if you please, slip your key underneath the mat, so that I may have it in the morning. I shall not see you again; so good-bye to you. If hereafter in your new place of abode I can be of any service to you, do not fail to advise me by letter. Good-bye, Bartleby, and fare you well."But he answered not a word; like the last column of some ruined temple, he remained standing mute and solitary in the middle of the otherwise deserted room.As I walked home in a pensive mood, my vanity got the better of my pity. I could not but highly plume myself on my masterly management in getting rid of Bartleby. Masterly I call it, and such it must appear to any dispassionate thinker. The beauty of my procedure seemed to consist in its perfect quietness. There was no vulgar bullying, no bravado of any sort, no choleric hectoring, and striding to and fro across the apartment, jerking out vehement commands for Bartleby to bundle himself off with his beggarly traps. Nothing of the kind. Without loudly bidding Bartleby depart—as an inferior genius might have done—I&nbsp;assumed&nbsp;the ground that depart he must; and upon that assumption built all I had to say. The more I thought over my procedure, the more I was charmed with it. Nevertheless, next morning, upon awakening, I had my doubts,—I had somehow slept off the fumes of vanity. One of the coolest and wisest hours a man has, is just after he awakes in the morning. My procedure seemed as sagacious as ever.—but only in theory. How it would prove in practice—there was the rub. It was truly a beautiful thought to have assumed Bartleby's departure; but, after all, that assumption was simply my own, and none of Bartleby's. The great point was, not whether I had assumed that he would quit me, but whether he would prefer so to do. He was more a man of preferences than assumptions.After breakfast, I walked down town, arguing the probabilities&nbsp;pro&nbsp;and&nbsp;con. One moment I thought it would prove a miserable failure, and Bartleby would be found all alive at my office as usual; the next moment it seemed certain that I should see his chair empty. And so I kept veering about. At the corner of Broadway and Canal-street, I saw quite an excited group of people standing in earnest conversation."I'll take odds he doesn't," said a voice as I passed."Doesn't go?—done!" said I, "put up your money."I was instinctively putting my hand in my pocket to produce my own, when I remembered that this was an election day. The words I had overheard bore no reference to Bartleby, but to the success or non-success of some candidate for the mayoralty. In my intent frame of mind, I had, as it were, imagined that all Broadway shared in my excitement, and were debating the same question with me. I passed on, very thankful that the uproar of the street screened my momentary absent-mindedness.As I had intended, I was earlier than usual at my office door. I stood listening for a moment. All was still. He must be gone. I tried the knob. The door was locked. Yes, my procedure had worked to a charm; he indeed must be vanished. Yet a certain melancholy mixed with this: I was almost sorry for my brilliant success. I was fumbling under the door mat for the key, which Bartleby was to have left there for me, when accidentally my knee knocked against a panel, producing a summoning sound, and in response a voice came to me from within—"Not yet; I am occupied."It was Bartleby.I was thunderstruck. For an instant I stood like the man who, pipe in mouth, was killed one cloudless afternoon long ago in Virginia, by a summer lightning; at his own warm open window he was killed, and remained leaning out there upon the dreamy afternoon, till some one touched him, when he fell."Not gone!" I murmured at last. But again obeying that wondrous ascendancy which the inscrutable scrivener had over me, and from which ascendancy, for all my chafing, I could not completely escape, I slowly went down stairs and out into the street, and while walking round the block, considered what I should next do in this unheard-of perplexity. Turn the man out by an actual thrusting I could not; to drive him away by calling him hard names would not do; calling in the police was an unpleasant idea; and yet, permit him to enjoy his cadaverous triumph over me,—this too I could not think of. What was to be done? or, if nothing could be done, was there any thing further that I could&nbsp;assume&nbsp;in the matter? Yes, as before I had prospectively assumed that Bartleby would depart, so now I might retrospectively assume that departed he was. In the legitimate carrying out of this assumption, I might enter my office in a great hurry, and pretending not to see Bartleby at all, walk straight against him as if he were air. Such a proceeding would in a singular degree have the appearance of a home-thrust. It was hardly possible that Bartleby could withstand such an application of the doctrine of assumptions. But upon second thoughts the success of the plan seemed rather dubious. I resolved to argue the matter over with him again."Bartleby," said I, entering the office, with a quietly severe expression, "I am seriously displeased. I am pained, Bartleby. I had thought better of you. I had imagined you of such a gentlemanly organization, that in any delicate dilemma a slight hint would have suffice—in short, an assumption. But it appears I am deceived. Why," I added, unaffectedly starting, "you have not even touched that money yet," pointing to it, just where I had left it the evening previous.He answered nothing."Will you, or will you not, quit me?" I now demanded in a sudden passion, advancing close to him."I would prefer&nbsp;not&nbsp;to quit you," he replied, gently emphasizing the&nbsp;not."What earthly right have you to stay here? Do you pay any rent? Do you pay my taxes? Or is this property yours?"He answered nothing."Are you ready to go on and write now? Are your eyes recovered? Could you copy a small paper for me this morning? or help examine a few lines? or step round to the post-office? In a word, will you do any thing at all, to give a coloring to your refusal to depart the premises?"He silently retired into his hermitage.I was now in such a state of nervous resentment that I thought it but prudent to check myself at present from further demonstrations. Bartleby and I were alone. I remembered the tragedy of the unfortunate Adams and the still more unfortunate Colt in the solitary office of the latter; and how poor Colt, being dreadfully incensed by Adams, and imprudently permitting himself to get wildly excited, was at unawares hurried into his fatal act—an act which certainly no man could possibly deplore more than the actor himself. Often it had occurred to me in my ponderings upon the subject, that had that altercation taken place in the public street, or at a private residence, it would not have terminated as it did. It was the circumstance of being alone in a solitary office, up stairs, of a building entirely unhallowed by humanizing domestic associations—an uncarpeted office, doubtless, of a dusty, haggard sort of appearance;—this it must have been, which greatly helped to enhance the irritable desperation of the hapless Colt.But when this old Adam of resentment rose in me and tempted me concerning Bartleby, I grappled him and threw him. How? Why, simply by recalling the divine injunction: "A new commandment give I unto you, that ye love one another." Yes, this it was that saved me. Aside from higher considerations, charity often operates as a vastly wise and prudent principle—a great safeguard to its possessor. Men have committed murder for jealousy's sake, and anger's sake, and hatred's sake, and selfishness' sake, and spiritual pride's sake; but no man that ever I heard of, ever committed a diabolical murder for sweet charity's sake. Mere self-interest, then, if no better motive can be enlisted, should, especially with high-tempered men, prompt all beings to charity and philanthropy. At any rate, upon the occasion in question, I strove to drown my exasperated feelings towards the scrivener by benevolently construing his conduct. Poor fellow, poor fellow! thought I, he don't mean any thing; and besides, he has seen hard times, and ought to be indulged.I endeavored also immediately to occupy myself, and at the same time to comfort my despondency. I tried to fancy that in the course of the morning, at such time as might prove agreeable to him. Bartleby, of his own free accord, would emerge from his hermitage, and take up some decided line of march in the direction of the door. But no. Half-past twelve o'clock came; Turkey began to glow in the face, overturn his inkstand, and become generally obstreperous; Nippers abated down into quietude and courtesy; Ginger Nut munched his noon apple; and Bartleby remained standing at his window in one of his profoundest dead-wall reveries. Will it be credited? Ought I to acknowledge it? That afternoon I left the office without saying one further word to him.Some days now passed, during which, at leisure intervals I looked a little into "Edwards on the Will," and "Priestly on Necessity." Under the circumstances, those books induced a salutary feeling. Gradually I slid into the persuasion that these troubles of mine touching the scrivener, had been all predestinated from eternity, and Bartleby was billeted upon me for some mysterious purpose of an all-wise Providence, which it was not for a mere mortal like me to fathom. Yes, Bartleby, stay there behind your screen, thought I; I shall persecute you no more; you are harmless and noiseless as any of these old chairs; in short, I never feel so private as when I know you are here. At last I see it, I feel it; I penetrate to the predestinated purpose of my life. I am content. Others may have loftier parts to enact; but my mission in this world, Bartleby, is to furnish you with office-room for such period as you may see fit to remain.I believe that this wise and blessed frame of mind would have continued with me, had it not been for the unsolicited and uncharitable remarks obtruded upon me by my professional friends who visited the rooms. But thus it often is, that the constant friction of illiberal minds wears out at last the best resolves of the more generous. Though to be sure, when I reflected upon it, it was not strange that people entering my office should be struck by the peculiar aspect of the unaccountable Bartleby, and so be tempted to throw out some sinister observations concerning him. Sometimes an attorney having business with me, and calling at my office and finding no one but the scrivener there, would undertake to obtain some sort of precise information from him touching my whereabouts; but without heeding his idle talk, Bartleby would remain standing immovable in the middle of the room. So after contemplating him in that position for a time, the attorney would depart, no wiser than he came.Also, when a Reference was going on, and the room full of lawyers and witnesses and business was driving fast; some deeply occupied legal gentleman present, seeing Bartleby wholly unemployed, would request him to run round to his (the legal gentleman's) office and fetch some papers for him. Thereupon, Bartleby would tranquilly decline, and yet remain idle as before. Then the lawyer would give a great stare, and turn to me. And what could I say? At last I was made aware that all through the circle of my professional acquaintance, a whisper of wonder was running round, having reference to the strange creature I kept at my office. This worried me very much. And as the idea came upon me of his possibly turning out a long-lived man, and keep occupying my chambers, and denying my authority; and perplexing my visitors; and scandalizing my professional reputation; and casting a general gloom over the premises; keeping soul and body together to the last upon his savings (for doubtless he spent but half a dime a day), and in the end perhaps outlive me, and claim possession of my office by right of his perpetual occupancy: as all these dark anticipations crowded upon me more and more, and my friends continually intruded their relentless remarks upon the apparition in my room; a great change was wrought in me. I resolved to gather all my faculties together, and for ever rid me of this intolerable incubus.Ere revolving any complicated project, however, adapted to this end, I first simply suggested to Bartleby the propriety of his permanent departure. In a calm and serious tone, I commended the idea to his careful and mature consideration. But having taken three days to meditate upon it, he apprised me that his original determination remained the same in short, that he still preferred to abide with me.What shall I do? I now said to myself, buttoning up my coat to the last button. What shall I do? what ought I to do? what does conscience say I&nbsp;should&nbsp;do with this man, or rather ghost. Rid myself of him, I must; go, he shall. But how? You will not thrust him, the poor, pale, passive mortal,—you will not thrust such a helpless creature out of your door? you will not dishonor yourself by such cruelty? No, I will not, I cannot do that. Rather would I let him live and die here, and then mason up his remains in the wall. What then will you do? For all your coaxing, he will not budge. Bribes he leaves under your own paperweight on your table; in short, it is quite plain that he prefers to cling to you.Then something severe, something unusual must be done. What! surely you will not have him collared by a constable, and commit his innocent pallor to the common jail? And upon what ground could you procure such a thing to be done?—a vagrant, is he? What! he a vagrant, a wanderer, who refuses to budge? It is because he will&nbsp;not&nbsp;be a vagrant, then, that you seek to count him&nbsp;as&nbsp;a vagrant. That is too absurd. No visible means of support: there I have him. Wrong again: for indubitably he&nbsp;does&nbsp;support himself, and that is the only unanswerable proof that any man can show of his possessing the means so to do. No more then. Since he will not quit me, I must quit him. I will change my offices; I will move elsewhere; and give him fair notice, that if I find him on my new premises I will then proceed against him as a common trespasser.Acting accordingly, next day I thus addressed him: "I find these chambers too far from the City Hall; the air is unwholesome. In a word, I propose to remove my offices next week, and shall no longer require your services. I tell you this now, in order that you may seek another place."He made no reply, and nothing more was said.On the appointed day I engaged carts and men, proceeded to my chambers, and having but little furniture, every thing was removed in a few hours. Throughout, the scrivener remained standing behind the screen, which I directed to be removed the last thing. It was withdrawn; and being folded up like a huge folio, left him the motionless occupant of a naked room. I stood in the entry watching him a moment, while something from within me upbraided me.I re-entered, with my hand in my pocket—and—and my heart in my mouth."Good-bye, Bartleby; I am going—good-bye, and God some way bless you; and take that," slipping something in his hand. But it dropped upon the floor, and then,—strange to say—I tore myself from him whom I had so longed to be rid of.Established in my new quarters, for a day or two I kept the door locked, and started at every footfall in the passages. When I returned to my rooms after any little absence, I would pause at the threshold for an instant, and attentively listen, ere applying my key. But these fears were needless. Bartleby never came nigh me.I thought all was going well, when a perturbed looking stranger visited me, inquiring whether I was the person who had recently occupied rooms at No.—Wall-street.Full of forebodings, I replied that I was."Then sir," said the stranger, who proved a lawyer, "you are responsible for the man you left there. He refuses to do any copying; he refuses to do any thing; he says he prefers not to; and he refuses to quit the premises.""I am very sorry, sir," said I, with assumed tranquility, but an inward tremor, "but, really, the man you allude to is nothing to me—he is no relation or apprentice of mine, that you should hold me responsible for him.""In mercy's name, who is he?""I certainly cannot inform you. I know nothing about him. Formerly I employed him as a copyist; but he has done nothing for me now for some time past.""I shall settle him then,—good morning, sir."Several days passed, and I heard nothing more; and though I often felt a charitable prompting to call at the place and see poor Bartleby, yet a certain squeamishness of I know not what withheld me.All is over with him, by this time, thought I at last, when through another week no further intelligence reached me. But coming to my room the day after, I found several persons waiting at my door in a high state of nervous excitement."That's the man—here he comes," cried the foremost one, whom I recognized as the lawyer who had previously called upon me alone."You must take him away, sir, at once," cried a portly person among them, advancing upon me, and whom I knew to be the landlord of No.—Wall-street. "These gentlemen, my tenants, cannot stand it any longer; Mr. B—" pointing to the lawyer, "has turned him out of his room, and he now persists in haunting the building generally, sitting upon the banisters of the stairs by day, and sleeping in the entry by night. Every body is concerned; clients are leaving the offices; some fears are entertained of a mob; something you must do, and that without delay."Aghast at this torrent, I fell back before it, and would fain have locked myself in my new quarters. In vain I persisted that Bartleby was nothing to me—no more than to any one else. In vain:—I was the last person known to have any thing to do with him, and they held me to the terrible account. Fearful then of being exposed in the papers (as one person present obscurely threatened) I considered the matter, and at length said, that if the lawyer would give me a confidential interview with the scrivener, in his (the lawyer's) own room, I would that afternoon strive my best to rid them of the nuisance they complained of.Going up stairs to my old haunt, there was Bartleby silently sitting upon the banister at the landing."What are you doing here, Bartleby?" said I."Sitting upon the banister," he mildly replied.I motioned him into the lawyer's room, who then left us."Bartleby," said I, "are you aware that you are the cause of great tribulation to me, by persisting in occupying the entry after being dismissed from the office?"No answer."Now one of two things must take place. Either you must do something, or something must be done to you. Now what sort of business would you like to engage in? Would you like to re-engage in copying for some one?""No; I would prefer not to make any change.""Would you like a clerkship in a dry-goods store?""There is too much confinement about that. No, I would not like a clerkship; but I am not particular.""Too much confinement," I cried, "why you keep yourself confined all the time!""I would prefer not to take a clerkship," he rejoined, as if to settle that little item at once."How would a bar-tender's business suit you? There is no trying of the eyesight in that.""I would not like it at all; though, as I said before, I am not particular."His unwonted wordiness inspirited me. I returned to the charge."Well then, would you like to travel through the country collecting bills for the merchants? That would improve your health.""No, I would prefer to be doing something else.""How then would going as a companion to Europe, to entertain some young gentleman with your conversation,—how would that suit you?""Not at all. It does not strike me that there is any thing definite about that. I like to be stationary. But I am not particular.""Stationary you shall be then," I cried, now losing all patience, and for the first time in all my exasperating connection with him fairly flying into a passion. "If you do not go away from these premises before night, I shall feel bound—indeed I&nbsp;am&nbsp;bound—to—to—to quit the premises myself!" I rather absurdly concluded, knowing not with what possible threat to try to frighten his immobility into compliance. Despairing of all further efforts, I was precipitately leaving him, when a final thought occurred to me—one which had not been wholly unindulged before."Bartleby," said I, in the kindest tone I could assume under such exciting circumstances, "will you go home with me now—not to my office, but my dwelling—and remain there till we can conclude upon some convenient arrangement for you at our leisure? Come, let us start now, right away.""No: at present I would prefer not to make any change at all."I answered nothing; but effectually dodging every one by the suddenness and rapidity of my flight, rushed from the building, ran up Wall-street towards Broadway, and jumping into the first omnibus was soon removed from pursuit. As soon as tranquility returned I distinctly perceived that I had now done all that I possibly could, both in respect to the demands of the landlord and his tenants, and with regard to my own desire and sense of duty, to benefit Bartleby, and shield him from rude persecution. I now strove to be entirely care-free and quiescent; and my conscience justified me in the attempt; though indeed it was not so successful as I could have wished. So fearful was I of being again hunted out by the incensed landlord and his exasperated tenants, that, surrendering my business to Nippers, for a few days I drove about the upper part of the town and through the suburbs, in my rockaway; crossed over to Jersey City and Hoboken, and paid fugitive visits to Manhattanville and Astoria. In fact I almost lived in my rockaway for the time.When again I entered my office, lo, a note from the landlord lay upon the desk. I opened it with trembling hands. It informed me that the writer had sent to the police, and had Bartleby removed to the Tombs as a vagrant. Moreover, since I knew more about him than any one else, he wished me to appear at that place, and make a suitable statement of the facts. These tidings had a conflicting effect upon me. At first I was indignant; but at last almost approved. The landlord's energetic, summary disposition had led him to adopt a procedure which I do not think I would have decided upon myself; and yet as a last resort, under such peculiar circumstances, it seemed the only plan.As I afterwards learned, the poor scrivener, when told that he must be conducted to the Tombs, offered not the slightest obstacle, but in his pale unmoving way, silently acquiesced.Some of the compassionate and curious bystanders joined the party; and headed by one of the constables arm in arm with Bartleby, the silent procession filed its way through all the noise, and heat, and joy of the roaring thoroughfares at noon.The same day I received the note I went to the Tombs, or to speak more properly, the Halls of Justice. Seeking the right officer, I stated the purpose of my call, and was informed that the individual I described was indeed within. I then assured the functionary that Bartleby was a perfectly honest man, and greatly to be compassionated, however unaccountably eccentric. I narrated all I knew, and closed by suggesting the idea of letting him remain in as indulgent confinement as possible till something less harsh might be done—though indeed I hardly knew what. At all events, if nothing else could be decided upon, the alms-house must receive him. I then begged to have an interview.Being under no disgraceful charge, and quite serene and harmless in all his ways, they had permitted him freely to wander about the prison, and especially in the inclosed grass-platted yard thereof. And so I found him there, standing all alone in the quietest of the yards, his face towards a high wall, while all around, from the narrow slits of the jail windows, I thought I saw peering out upon him the eyes of murderers and thieves."Bartleby!""I know you," he said, without looking round,—"and I want nothing to say to you.""It was not I that brought you here, Bartleby," said I, keenly pained at his implied suspicion. "And to you, this should not be so vile a place. Nothing reproachful attaches to you by being here. And see, it is not so sad a place as one might think. Look, there is the sky, and here is the grass.""I know where I am," he replied, but would say nothing more, and so I left him.As I entered the corridor again, a broad meat-like man, in an apron, accosted me, and jerking his thumb over his shoulder said—"Is that your friend?""Yes.""Does he want to starve? If he does, let him live on the prison fare, that's all.""Who are you?" asked I, not knowing what to make of such an unofficially speaking person in such a place."I am the grub-man. Such gentlemen as have friends here, hire me to provide them with something good to eat.""Is this so?" said I, turning to the turnkey.He said it was."Well then," said I, slipping some silver into the grub-man's hands (for so they called him). "I want you to give particular attention to my friend there; let him have the best dinner you can get. And you must be as polite to him as possible.""Introduce me, will you?" said the grub-man, looking at me with an expression which seem to say he was all impatience for an opportunity to give a specimen of his breeding.Thinking it would prove of benefit to the scrivener, I acquiesced; and asking the grub-man his name, went up with him to Bartleby."Bartleby, this is Mr. Cutlets; you will find him very useful to you.""Your sarvant, sir, your sarvant," said the grub-man, making a low salutation behind his apron. "Hope you find it pleasant here, sir;—spacious grounds—cool apartments, sir—hope you'll stay with us some time—try to make it agreeable. May Mrs. Cutlets and I have the pleasure of your company to dinner, sir, in Mrs. Cutlets' private room?""I prefer not to dine to-day," said Bartleby, turning away. "It would disagree with me; I am unused to dinners." So saying he slowly moved to the other side of the inclosure, and took up a position fronting the dead-wall."How's this?" said the grub-man, addressing me with a stare of astonishment. "He's odd, aint he?""I think he is a little deranged," said I, sadly."Deranged? deranged is it? Well now, upon my word, I thought that friend of yourn was a gentleman forger; they are always pale and genteel-like, them forgers. I can't pity'em—can't help it, sir. Did you know Monroe Edwards?" he added touchingly, and paused. Then, laying his hand pityingly on my shoulder, sighed, "he died of consumption at Sing-Sing. So you weren't acquainted with Monroe?""No, I was never socially acquainted with any forgers. But I cannot stop longer. Look to my friend yonder. You will not lose by it. I will see you again."Some few days after this, I again obtained admission to the Tombs, and went through the corridors in quest of Bartleby; but without finding him."I saw him coming from his cell not long ago," said a turnkey, "may be he's gone to loiter in the yards."So I went in that direction."Are you looking for the silent man?" said another turnkey passing me. "Yonder he lies—sleeping in the yard there. 'Tis not twenty minutes since I saw him lie down."The yard was entirely quiet. It was not accessible to the common prisoners. The surrounding walls, of amazing thickness, kept off all sounds behind them. The Egyptian character of the masonry weighed upon me with its gloom. But a soft imprisoned turf grew under foot. The heart of the eternal pyramids, it seemed, wherein, by some strange magic, through the clefts, grass-seed, dropped by birds, had sprung.Strangely huddled at the base of the wall, his knees drawn up, and lying on his side, his head touching the cold stones, I saw the wasted Bartleby. But nothing stirred. I paused; then went close up to him; stooped over, and saw that his dim eyes were open; otherwise he seemed profoundly sleeping. Something prompted me to touch him. I felt his hand, when a tingling shiver ran up my arm and down my spine to my feet.The round face of the grub-man peered upon me now. "His dinner is ready. Won't he dine to-day, either? Or does he live without dining?""Lives without dining," said I, and closed his eyes."Eh!—He's asleep, aint he?""With kings and counselors," murmured I.* * * * * * * *There would seem little need for proceeding further in this history. Imagination will readily supply the meager recital of poor Bartleby's interment. But ere parting with the reader, let me say, that if this little narrative has sufficiently interested him, to awaken curiosity as to who Bartleby was, and what manner of life he led prior to the present narrator's making his acquaintance, I can only reply, that in such curiosity I fully share, but am wholly unable to gratify it. Yet here I hardly know whether I should divulge one little item of rumor, which came to my ear a few months after the scrivener's decease. Upon what basis it rested, I could never ascertain; and hence, how true it is I cannot now tell. But inasmuch as this vague report has not been without certain strange suggestive interest to me, however sad, it may prove the same with some others; and so I will briefly mention it. The report was this: that Bartleby had been a subordinate clerk in the Dead Letter Office at Washington, from which he had been suddenly removed by a change in the administration. When I think over this rumor, I cannot adequately express the emotions which seize me. Dead letters! does it not sound like dead men? Conceive a man by nature and misfortune prone to a pallid hopelessness, can any business seem more fitted to heighten it than that of continually handling these dead letters, and assorting them for the flames? For by the cart-load they are annually burned. Sometimes from out the folded paper the pale clerk takes a ring:—the finger it was meant for, perhaps, moulders in the grave; a bank-note sent in swiftest charity:—he whom it would relieve, nor eats nor hungers any more; pardon for those who died despairing; hope for those who died unhoping; good tidings for those who died stifled by unrelieved calamities. On errands of life, these letters speed to death.Ah Bartleby! Ah humanity!&nbsp;End of Project Gutenberg's Bartleby, The Scrivener, by Herman Melville*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BARTLEBY, THE SCRIVENER ***This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.net&nbsp;

数据显示，在“晋升机会”、“工作报酬”、“工作稳定性”三个方面，中国青年律师的满意度都与美国青年律师有着明显的差距。而在“我的工作对社会的价值”的判断上，中国青年律师的评判还要稍微略高一些。