古文与白话文（二）

“雅致”白话文探讨

融古而不能复古：从古典中文到“雅致”白话文的演进与未来

中国文字的演进，是文化传承与社会需求之间不断调和的过程。古典中文，也称文言文，以其高度的凝练、对仗之美与节奏之韵，承载了千年文明的精华，成为中华文化的重要载体。然而，随着社会结构与知识传播的剧变，这种语言形式也暴露出其局限，促使白话文应运而生。今人若欲重建文化高度，非复古之道，宜融古之长而纳今之需。

古文的优点不胜枚举。它用字简省，一字可抵今人之三五；其句式灵活，或虚或实，读来可留白、可回味，正所谓“字少意丰”；它讲究修辞之美，讲究“辞采”，讲究声律对仗，使其具有诗意的表现力。然而，它的表达并不总是精确。由于缺乏明确的语法规则，同一结构可作多解，歧义时常存在，这在口耳相传的古代尚可接受，放在科学、法律、国际条约等现代社会语境中，却会酿成严重后果。

白话文运动兴起于20世纪初的新文化运动，其历史背景是民智未开、教育不普，文言文成为士人阶层专属，而广大民众无缘接触知识。鲁迅、胡适等人提倡“我手写我口”，主张以民众日常语言入文，以通俗之笔，书社会之事，启大众之智，打破语言与阶级的界限。白话文因此成为现代中国通行的标准书面语，极大推动了文化普及、科技传播与社会现代化。

然而，白话文在实现易懂的同时，牺牲了古文中那种“字有余味，句有馀韵”的文雅。如今，当大多数中国人都能接受良好教育的时代来临，我们或许应重新审视语言的美学价值。在不违背逻辑与语法严密性的基础上，尝试吸收古文中的某些优势：词语的雅致、结构的紧凑、修辞的节制、意境的营构——让现代中文既有思辨之清晰，也有情感之厚度。

由此，我们或可倡导一种新的书面表达形态——“雅致白话文”，即以白话为骨，以古意为神。它不回避现代语法逻辑，不抛弃明确表达的必要，却在文字风格上追求一种儒雅之气，一种凝练之力。例如，我们可以在科技说明中引入简洁而节制的修辞，使读者不仅得知识，也得文字之美。

当然，复兴古文作为“国家通用标准语”并不现实，甚至是不可行的。古文表达的歧义性、逻辑链条的松散，与现代社会对语言精准性的要求背道而驰。科学研究、法律条文、合同协议、国际交往等领域，都必须以无歧义、结构清晰的语言为基础，这是白话文无可替代的优势。新文化运动的本义，正是为了解决古文无法承担新时代语言需求的问题。

综上所述，古文之美应被珍视，但不可被神化；白话之力须被延续，但不应止步不前。我们今日之责，不是复古，而是融古，以现代之笔，写时代之文；以民族之美，拓语言之境。唯其如此，才能让我们的文字既通于理，又动于情；既服务于当下，也通达于未来。

“Elegantizing” Vernacular Chinese

Toward a More “Elegant” Vernacular Chinese: Integrating Tradition Without Regression

In the rich tapestry of Chinese language history, two major strands have long coexisted: the succinct and rhythmic Classical Chinese (古文), and the grammatically structured, widely accessible vernacular Chinese (白话文). The transformation from the former to the latter, particularly marked by the Vernacular Movement (白话文运动) in the early 20th century, was a cultural and social watershed. While this transition significantly improved literacy among the general population, it also raised a long-standing tension between accessibility and aesthetic sophistication — a tension that remains relevant today.

The Merit and Mission of the Vernacular Movement

At the time of the movement, the majority of Chinese citizens were illiterate, especially those from rural or impoverished backgrounds who had no access to formal education. Classical Chinese, distant from everyday speech and often limited to the educated elite, proved an insurmountable barrier to widespread literacy and national modernization. The proponents of the New Culture Movement (新文化运动) believed that in order for China to modernize — in science, democracy, education, and law — it must first reform its language to match the lived experiences of its people.

Thus, the vernacular Chinese language was adopted as the new standard. It reflected spoken Chinese more closely, followed a clearer grammatical structure, and greatly facilitated the dissemination of modern knowledge in science, law, philosophy, and politics. This reform was essential. The social and intellectual progress of 20th-century China would have been inconceivable without the wide adoption of modern Chinese.

The Irreplaceable Value of Modern Chinese

Modern Chinese, despite lacking some of the aesthetic compactness of Classical Chinese, is indispensable for contemporary society. Scientific papers, legal documents, international treaties, and governmental policies demand clarity, precision, and unambiguous expression. Classical Chinese, with its ellipses, loose syntax, and rich but ambiguous nuances, simply cannot support the complexity and rigor of modern knowledge systems. This linguistic limitation was precisely one of the major targets of reformers like Hu Shi (胡适) and Chen Duxiu (陈独秀).

The Enduring Charm of Classical Chinese

That said, it would be unwise to discard the immense literary and cultural value of Classical Chinese. Its brevity, tonal rhythm, and elegance embody an artistic depth that continues to inspire readers and writers alike. From Tang poetry to Song prose, the beauty of ancient Chinese lies in what is left unsaid — the pregnant pauses, the unspoken metaphors, the careful balance of sound and form.

This refined quality is exactly what modern Chinese writing often lacks. In pursuit of accessibility and directness, much of today's writing has become flat, lacking layers of meaning or poetic rhythm. This has led some intellectuals and writers to call for a reevaluation: Can we not enrich modern Chinese by reintroducing some of the elegance of the classical style?

“雅致” as a New Direction for Vernacular Writing

Rather than advocating a wholesale return to ancient forms — which would be both impractical and culturally regressive — we propose a more nuanced path: to cultivate a 雅致 (elegant and refined) version of modern Chinese. This “elegant vernacular” would retain the grammatical precision and logical clarity necessary for modern discourse, while selectively incorporating stylistic elements from Classical Chinese: pithy expressions, parallelism, cadence, and metaphorical depth.

This process should be gradual and organic, not enforced. As people's education levels continue to rise and as classical texts are more widely taught in schools and appreciated by the public, writers may naturally begin to adopt classical elements in their expression. Over time, this could lead to a new literary style — one that bridges the 7past and present, that speaks clearly yet beautifully, that is both accessible and cultivated.

Integrating Tradition Without Returning to It

Yet it is crucial to emphasize: this process must be one of integration, not restoration. We cannot return to Classical Chinese as the standard form of communication in modern society. Its structural looseness and lack of standardized grammar are fundamentally incompatible with the requirements of modern civilization. Instead, we can “draw from the past without becoming bound by it” — using classical elements to enrich, not to replace, the foundation of modern Chinese.

As the old saying goes: “取其精华，去其糟粕” — take the essence, discard the dross. The future of Chinese writing lies not in reverting to the past, but in evolving a new style that honors its legacy while addressing the needs of the present. A 雅致白话文 — an elegant vernacular — may well be the language of a culturally rooted yet forward-looking Chinese society.