论文部分内容阅读
“同点”和“异点”不能偏废李蓁非同志在《对文言文教学的几点意見》(見《人民教育》1962年1月号)一文中认为,文言文教学应該充分利用其与白話文的相同点,是正确的。但是,李蓁非同志否定文言文教学从异点出发,也有失于片面。为什么这样說呢? 第一、文言文与白話文之間,相同点不完全是“远远大于相异点”的。就句子結构来說,相同点的确是基本的。但就詞汇方面来看,情况就不完全是这样的了。斯大林同志在《馬克思主义与語言学問題》这一論著中早
“Same points” and “spots” can’t be ignored. Li Zhifei pointed out in his article “Several Opinions on Classical Chinese Teaching” (see People’s Education, January 1962) that classical Chinese teaching should make full use of its similarities with the vernacular Chinese. ,is correct. However, Li Xiaofei’s denial of classical Chinese teaching was based on a different point of view, but it also failed. Why do you say this? First, between the classical Chinese and the vernacular, the similarities are not exactly “more than the difference.” In terms of sentence structure, the same point is indeed basic. But from a vocabulary point of view, the situation is not exactly like this. Comrade Stalin’s Early Commentary on “Problems of Marxism and Linguistics”