邯郸学院学报

20世纪以来,学术界关于《左传》成书的讨论,一个最大的成果是否定了刘歆伪造说,而肯定其成书于战国时期,部分学者甚至认为成书于春秋末年。在研究方法上则体现出“走出疑古时代”的倾向,一些出土文献如马王堆帛书《春秋事语》等受到学者关注。关于《左传》的作者,学术界提出左丘明、子夏、吴起、鲁国左姓人等不同说法,但多数学者倾向认为是左丘明,同时又指出《左传》的编撰经历了一个过程,左氏后人和孔门后学可能都参与了编撰,这种研究方法明显体现出“释古”的特色。关于《左传》是否传《春秋》,学术界也进行了深入讨论,提出了“一次成书”说、“二次成书”说等不同观点。学术界关于《左传》的讨论往往和《国语》联系在一起,学者围绕《国语》与《左传》是否同为左丘明所作,《国语》成书时间在《左传》之前还是之后等问题展开了深入讨论。

Since the 20th century,among the discussions of the time of the formation of Zuozhuan(左传) in the academic circle,the most important achievement has been to deny that it is fabricated by Liu Xin,and to affirm that it was published during the Warring States period.Some scholars even think that it is published at the end of the Spring and Autumn Period.Their research methodology reflects an inclination of “stepping out of the times of suspecting the old time”.Some unearthed documents such as the books copied on silk unearthed from king ma’s tomb Sayings of the Events Happened in the Spring and Autumn Period has been paid more and more attention by scholars.As to the author of Zuozhuan,the academic circle has such opinions as Zuo Qiuming,Zi Xia,Wu Qi and some person named Lu in the state of Lu.Most scholars incline to agree with the opinion that the author is Zuo Qiuming,and at the same time points out that the compiling of Zuozhuan underwent a period during which both Zuo’s descendents and Confucius followers joined the compiling.This methodology apparently reflects a characteristic of “interpreting the past”.As to whether Zuozhuan was written to comment on The Spring and Autumn Annals,the academic circle also conducted a deep discussion,proposing different ideas such as “a lump-sum publication”,“a second-time publication”.In the academic circle,discussions concerning Zuozhuan is always associated with Guoyu(国语).Scholars conduct a deep discussion concerning such questions as whether both Guoyu and Zuozhuan were written by Zuo Qiuming,whether the publication time of Guoyu was before or behind that of Zuozhuan.