当学者们扩展其模型和假说以涵盖更多案例时,他们一般都要调整分析范畴以适合新的背景。乔瓦尼·萨托利对概念“转移(traveling)”和概念“延伸(stretching)”的研究,为比较分析这项基础工作提供了有益的指导。但是,萨托利框架依赖于所谓的古典主义范畴化,这种范畴化根据分类学层级来分析范畴之间的关系,每个范畴都有清晰的边界,而且每个范畴的所有分子都具备相同的定义属性。我们考察对萨托利框架构成挑战的两类非古典式范畴:家族类同式范畴与放射式范畴。对于这两类范畴,过于严格地应用古典主义框架,会导致过早地舍弃范畴或不当地修正范畴。基于学者们在民主主义与独裁主义的比较研究中如何调整范畴的例子,我们讨论解决这些问题的方法。 When academics expand their models and hypotheses to cover more cases, they generally adjust their analytic scope to suit the new context. Giovanni Satoli’s study of the concept “traveling” and the concept “stretching” provide useful guidance for a comparative analysis of this basic work. However, the Sartori framework relies on the so-called classicist categorization, which analyzes the relationship between categories based on the taxonomic level, with clear boundaries for each category and the same for all of the categories The definition of attributes. We examine two categories of non-classical categories that pose a challenge to the Sartorius framework: family-like and radiative categories. For both categories, the application of the classical framework too strictly will lead to premature abandonment of the category or improper revision of the category. Based on the example of how scholars adjust their categories in the comparative study of democracy and authoritarianism, we discuss ways to solve these problems.