八九十年代是中国儿童文学学术史上的转折期，但目前学界倾向于将一时期 的学术研究浪漫化、概念化和意识形态化，往往将其概括为两个方向：回归文学 和回归儿童，即回归儿童文学的主体性。然而，却甚少有人追问诸如文学性、儿 童性、主体性等概念的内涵及其演变过程，它们往往作为一种常识被学界反复言 说，但也在言说的过程中走向空洞。基于此，本文试图以历史化的方法，通过挖 掘这一时期中国儿童文学学术研究的资料，探究学界在中国儿童文学本体论、批 评标准、文体论以及文学史问题上的演进。 在中国儿童文学本体论的建构中，学界分别从文学、儿童和中国的角度进行 讨论。在马克思主义唯物辩证法的视域下，儿童文学与成人文学的关系被认为是 特殊性与一般性的关系，学界分别尝试从“共性”和“个性”两种路径来建构本 体论。然而，主观感性的研究方法和单一片面的研究思路造成了结论的模棱两可。 儿童观和成人作者——儿童读者的创作机制的发掘使得学界从“儿童”的角度探 究儿童文学的本体。儿童观的概念这一时期最先由班马提出，经由王泉根、方卫 平、朱自强、汤锐等人发展完善。同时，成人作者的自我表现及其限度的问题在 成人作者——儿童读者的创作机制的视角下得到了有效解决。在这个机制中，童 年和儿童文学作品分别是双方的连接点和交流呈现的形态。学者对复演说和诗化 哲学两种理论资源的援引导致了对童年的不同理解：前者从线性发展的角度将其 看作种族发展或个人生命的初级阶段，后者以同心圆的模式阐释了童年的丰满和 富饶，这也影响了他们对儿童文学美学形态特别是“成长”的不同看法。中西儿童文学的比较则显示了学界从中国这一维度构建本体论的尝试，类型学、文化学 以及《大英百科全书》中的“儿童文学”词条是这一路径的主要理论资源。显性 的二元对立思维模式后则是这一时期研究者普遍存在的“二十世纪”意识。这种落后于西方的危机感和焦虑感使得他们以西方儿童文学作为修正中国儿童文学的标准，在发现本国儿童文学不足的同时也忽视了本国儿童文学的主体性。 在本体论的多维建构之外，不同的批评标准也在这一时期呈现为相互博弈的 状态。在新的历史时期，中国儿童文学的批评标准由政治性的一元标准走向了教 育性、文学性、儿童性和视觉艺术性多元标准，其中前三者聚焦文字内容，最后 一个聚焦插图和装帧。这些标准具有不同的面向和内涵，在相互作用中会显示出 不同含义。教育性与文学性、教育性与儿童性和文学性与儿童性的两两组合分别 指向感性和理性、规训和天性和深刻与浅显之间的矛盾。在学界对这些关系的讨 论中，现实主义、纯文学观念、“儿童本位”观等问题与其交织。总体而言，这 一时期儿童文学的批评标准更加重视儿童作为独立个体的心理需求，这并不意味 着儿童性取代教育性成为这一时期的主导标准，而是学界开始更为深入认识儿童， 无论是文学性还是教育性都要从利于儿童发展的角度理解和赋予其内涵，合理借 鉴成人文学的概念，这正是儿童观变革所引发文学观和教育观变革的结果。 本体论和批评标准的探讨着眼于中国儿童文学的宏观层面，文体论的建构着 眼于微观层面。因为中国儿童文学的本体和批评标准最终都在具体而微的文体中 得以体现。这一时期的文体分类与“五四”时期相比，更加突出原创文学并在理 论层面对科学文艺、报告文学、儿童影视剧等文体进行确认以及以读者为中心的 文体分类实践的深化。这一时期的文体论建设在儿童小说、童话、科幻小说、少 年报告文学、儿童影视戏剧以及图画书方面较为活跃，问题的核心聚焦于文体的 跨界与杂糅现象，即异质性甚至完全相反的元素如何在同一文体中进行整合，这 涉及文体的本体、性质、特征和功能问题。同时，文体论的建构也与本体论和批 评标准的建构相互交叉，如对儿童小说中“社会主义新人”问题的讨论与中国儿 童文学在新的历史时期教育性内涵的更新紧密相关，对童话和科幻小说中幻想性 的张扬与学界对儿童性和儿童本位观的重新认识是分不开的，对报告文学中文学 性与报告性关系的讨论、对图画书的文学性的认识都影响了整个学界对儿童文学 文学性的认识。 本体论、批评标准和文体论的建构属中国儿童文学理论批评研究范畴，中国 儿童文学史的编纂与研究则与之形成互补。这一时期奠定了中国儿童文学史写作 的基本面貌。学界在许多问题上存在分歧，如中国儿童文学是否古已有之，如何 看待传统资源与现代儿童文学的关系、对作为现代儿童文学起源的“五四”也存 在“五四”时期和“五四”运动两种理解，造成这些分歧实际上是革命文学史观 与启蒙文学史观混杂的结果。由于此前除了一些简要的纲领并无真正意义上的中 国儿童文学史问世，因此这一时期同时是中国现代儿童文学史和中国当代儿童文 学史写作的初创期。现代儿童文学史的目的在于建构经典，随着研究观念的变革 和史料工作的深入，“周氏兄弟”在文学史中的形象日渐丰满，他们各自对儿童文学的贡献特别是周作人的儿童文学理论贡献得到了较为客观的评价。作家方面， 叶圣陶和张天翼经典性在现代时期就已得到肯定，八九十年代学人大多从现实主 义方向、中国特色童话、幽默的风格等方面巩固他们的文学史地位，同时为正在 崛起的文学流派寻找源头，建立其合法性。但也有部分学者受到当时成人文学界 “重写文学史”思潮的影响，对两位作家的经典性进行质疑，最终目的仍然是为 了最大程度体现儿童文学儿童性特别是幻想性的维度。 当代儿童文学史的写作分为“十七年”时期和新时期两段。首先，尽管不同 版本的文学史在具体的文学史分期上存在细微差别，但都秉持的是文学审美性的 分期标准。其次，在具体的作家作品的评价上，“第二次全国儿童文艺创作评奖” 作为“十七年”时期作品入史的重要标准，文学史同样存在对他们正反两面的评 价，但都是依据八九十年代以儿童文学审美性为核心的评价标准。而八九十年代 对于 1977 年后中国儿童文学的叙述则更接近于对中国儿童文学的现场记录和作 品赏析，但其中也不乏从思潮史这一新颖的角度对 1977 年之后的中国当代儿童 文学作深度剖析的尝试。总体而言，这一时期的当代儿童文学史写作“历史化” 程度不高。 总体而言，作为构成当下中国儿童文学学术起点的八九十年代本身并不是单 一的，而是丰富驳杂的。它与五六十年代既有的观念和概念高度关联，为不同代 际的批评家提供了对话交流的场域，在具体议题、文学史观上也体现出多元混杂 的面貌。因此，对中国儿童文学学术现状的反思应当以充分认识到这一转折期的 复杂性和生动性为前提，尤其需要继承和发扬那些尘封在历史地表下的学术富矿。

 The 1980s and 1990s is a turning point in the academic field of Chinese children's literature. Yet, the academic community tends to romanticize, conceptualize, and ideologize the scholarship during this period and often summarizes it in two directions: returning to literature and returning to children, that is, returning to the subjectivity of children's literature. However, few people have questioned the connotations and evolution process of concepts such as literariness, childishness, and subjectivity. They are often repeatedly discussed as common knowledge in academia, but they also become hollow in the process of speaking. Based on this, this dissertation attempts to explore the academic evolution on the issue of ontology, critical standards, stylistic theory, and literary history of Chinese children's literature by digging into the academic research on Chinese children's literature during this period with a historicized approach. In the construction of the ontology of Chinese children's literature, the academic community discusses it from the perspectives of literature, children, and China. From the perspective of Marxist dialectical materialism, the relationship between children's literature and adult literature is paralleled by the relationship between particularity and universality, and the academic community attempts to construct ontology from two paths: "commonality" and "individuality". However, subjective and intuitive research methods and a single, one-sided research approach have resulted in ambiguous conclusions. The exploration of children's views and the mechanism of creation in the forms of adult authors - children's readers are to enter the ontology of children's literature from the perspective of "children". The concept of children's view was first proposed by Ban Ma during this period and was developed and perfected by Wang Quangen, Fang Weiping, Zhu Ziqiang, Tang Rui, and others. Meanwhile, the self-expression and limitations of adult authors have been effectively addressed from the perspective of the creative mechanism of adult authors and children's readers. In this mechanism, childhood and children's literature works are the connecting points and forms of communication presentation for both parties. The use of two theoretical resources, namely, rhetorical speeches and poetic philosophy, has led to different understandings of childhood: the former views it as a primary stage of racial development or individual life from a linear perspective, while the latter interprets the richness and abundance of childhood in a concentric circle pattern, which also affects their different views on the aesthetic form of children's literature, especially "growth". The comparison of Chinese and Western children's literature shows the academic attempt to construct ontology from the perspective of China, with typology, cultural studies, and the entry for "children's literature" in the Encyclopedia Britannica being the main theoretical resources for this path. The explicit binary oppositional thinking pattern was followed by the prevalent "20th century" consciousness among researchers during this period. This crisis and anxiety that lags the West have led them to use Western children's literature as the standard for correcting Chinese children's literature. While discovering the shortcomings of their own children's literature, they have also overlooked the characteristics of their own children's literature. In addition to the multidimensional construction of ontology, different criteria of criticism also presented a state of mutual game during this period. In the new historical period, the criteria of criticism of Chinese children's literature have shifted from a single political standard to multiple standards of education, literariness, childness, and artistry. The first three focus on textual content, while the last focuses on illustrations and binding. These criteria have different orientations and connotations and will display different meanings in their interactions. The pairwise combination of education and literariness, education and childless, and literariness and childless respectively points to the contradiction between sensibility and rationality, discipline and nature, and profoundness and superficiality. In the discussion of these relationships in academia, issues such as realism, the concept of belles-lettres, and "child-centred" views are intertwined with them. Overall, the standards of criticism of children's literature during this period placed more emphasis on the psychological needs of children as independent individuals. This does not mean that childishness replaced education as the dominant standard of this period, but rather that the academic community began to have a deeper understanding of children. Both literary and educational aspects should be understood and endowed with connotations from the perspective of promoting children's development, and the concept of adult literature should be reasonably learned. This is precisely the result of the transformation of literary and educational views caused by the transformation of children's views. The exploration of ontology and standards of criticism focuses on the macro level of Chinese children's literature, while the construction of stylistic theory focuses on the micro level. Because the ontology and criteria embody concrete and subtle genres. Compared with the May Fourth period, the literary genre classification during this period highlighted the original literary genres. At the theoretical level, it confirmed literary genres such as science-literature-art, reportage, and children's film and television drama, as well as deepened the practice of reader-centred literary genre classification. The construction of literary theory during this period was relatively active in children's fiction, fairy tales, science fiction, youth reportage, children's film and television drama, and picture books. The core of the issue focused on the boundaries and hybridization of literary styles, that is, how heterogeneous or even opposite elements can be integrated into a genre, which involves the ontology, nature, characteristics, and function of literary styles. At the same time, the construction of stylistic theory also intersects with the construction of ontology and critical standards, such as the discussion of the issue of the "socialist new person" in children's fiction, which is closely related to the updating of the connotation of education in Chinese children's literature in the new historical period. The promotion of fantasy in fairy tales and science fiction is inseparable from the academic community's renewed understanding of childishness and the child-oriented view. The discussion of the relationship between the literariness and non-fictional reportage, as well as the understanding of the literary nature of picture books, all affect the researchers’ understanding of the literariness of children's literature. The construction of ontology, standards of criticism, and stylistic theory belongs to the field of theoretical criticism of Chinese children's literature. In contrast, the compilation and study of the history of Chinese children's literature is complementary to it. This period laid the foundation for the writing of the history of Chinese children's literature. There are disagreements in the academic community on many issues, such as whether Chinese children's literature existed in ancient times, how to view the relationship between traditional resources and modern children's literature, and the understanding of the May Fourth period and the May Fourth Movement as the originality of modern children's literature. These disagreements are the result of the mixed historical views of revolutionary literature and enlightenment literature. Due to the lack of a formal Chinese children's literature history before, apart from some brief guidelines, this period marked the beginning of both modern and contemporary Chinese children's literature history writing. The former focuses on constructing classics, but with the change of research concepts and the deepening of historical data work, the image of the "Zhou Brothers" in literary history has become increasingly full. Their respective contributions to children's literature, especially Zhou Zuoren's theoretical contributions to children's literature, have received relatively objective evaluations. In terms of writers, the classicism of Ye Shengtao and Zhang Tianyi has been affirmed in the modern era. In the 1980s and 1990s, many scholars consolidated their literary history status from the perspective of realism, Chinese characteristic fairy tales, humorous style, and other aspects. At the same time, they searched for the source of emerging literary styles and established their legitimacy. However, some scholars were influenced by the trend of "rewriting literary history" in the adult literature community at that time, questioning the classicality of the two writers, to maximize the dimension of childlessness, especially fantasy. The writing of contemporary children's literature history can be divided into two periods: the "Seventeen-Year period" and the" New Era". Firstly, although there are slight differences in the specific stages of literary history between different versions, they all adhere to the aesthetic standards of literary stages. Secondly, in the evaluation of specific author works, the "Second National Children's Literature and Art Creation Award" is an important reference for the entry of works into the history of the "Seventeen-Year period". There are also positive and negative evaluations of them in literary history, but both are based on the evaluation criteria centred on the aesthetic value of children's literature in the 1980s and 1990s. During this period, the narration of Chinese children's literature after 1977 was closer to the on-site recording and appreciation of Chinese children's literature, but there were also attempts to deeply analyze contemporary Chinese children's literature after 1977 from the perspective of the history of thought. Overall, the level of historicization in contemporary children's literature history writing during this period was not high.

      All in all, the 1980s and 1990s, as the starting point for the academic development of children's literature in China today, are not singular and simple in themselves, but complex and diverse. It is highly related to the existing ideas and concepts of the 1950s and 1960s, providing a field for dialogue and exchange among critics of different generations. It also reflects a diverse and mixed situation in specific issues and literary historical views. Therefore, the reflection on the academic situation of Chinese children's literature should be based on a full understanding of the complexity and vividness of this transitional period, especially the need to inherit and carry forward the academic wealth that has been buried beneath the surface of history.