秒词邦

原文：

“女性是否适宜称‘先生’的社会性争议，本质在于西方称谓体系挟话语霸权‘侵入’中国传统称谓后强行植入新的性别含义。”

　　近日，《妇女研究论丛》2024年第2期刊发了一篇题为《女性何以不宜称“先生”？——性别视域下“先生”概念在近代中国的历史性变迁》的文章，从概念史和性别视域出发，梳理了“先生”概念传统和近代中不同的发展路径及其演变的内在理路，辨析近代“先生”概念在跨语际实践中与英文“mister”之间的复杂关联。

　　该文作者为北京师范大学历史学院中国近代史教研室讲师、学生工作办公室老师潘若天，他出生于1990年1月，主要研究领域为中国近代文化史。

　　潘若天在文章中写道，“先生”作为现代中国称谓体系的核心概念之一，在日常社会交际中起到重要作用。颇为吊诡的是，对于这一使用频率如此高的概念，其确切内涵却存在巨大争议——一方面，大众将“先生”概念视作“男性”专有称谓，并认为此乃不言自明的“常识”；另一方面，在一些正式场合，“先生”成为部分杰出女性的称谓。由此常常引起社会上的轩然大波：男性天然可称“先生”，而女性只有杰出者才有资格称“先生”，这岂不是性别不平等的重要例证？

　　他指出，传统“先生”概念在历史演变过程中呈现出“男女皆可用”和“仅男性可用”两种含义的矛盾。

　　文章称，“先生”概念最初的“首生”含义，主要指时间上的先后，而非性别层面的区隔。传统中国的语言实践中，“先生”概念并非男性独享的话语空间，它在性别层面具有广泛的包容性。特别是在老师、医生、道士、占卜者、说书人等职业中，无论男女，皆可使用“先生”之称。至少在明清之际，“先生”概念“男女皆可用”的含义在社会上居于主流地位。

　　到了近代中国，由于“先生”概念的自身演变趋势和西学东渐的时代大变局，以上两种含义的冲突日益加剧。一方面，西方“mister”的翻译和传播，给“先生”概念带来全新内涵，性别因素完整渗入“先生”概念谱系中；另一方面，国民政府在性别平等和政治平等的诉求之下，赋予“先生”概念“民间普通称呼”的政治地位，官方承认这一概念“男女皆可用”。

　　文章指出，由此，两种含义的“先生”概念产生竞逐：“仅男性可用”的含义挟西方话语霸权而被社会广泛认知；“男女皆可用”的含义则因政府“钦定”而具有合法性，在两者之间白热化的角力中占据一定的优势地位。

　　1949年新中国成立后，“先生”概念的含义大幅度萎缩，成为对党外人士、无党派人士或海外华侨群体不分性别的称谓，“男女皆可用”这一含义在这一时期还在延续。作者认为，新中国摒弃“先生”的关键原因在于它内在的阶级意识。随着“先生”概念的失势，“同志”这一具有政治平等性和无性别区隔的称谓开始占据社会主流。

　　文章认为，晚清时期由西方汉学家建构起来的“miser”与“先生”的互译联系，虽然1949年之后在我国内地一度消亡，但在港澳台地区依旧盛行。20世纪80年代改革开放之后，作为“mister”对译的“先生”概念再次从港澳台地区回流。随后，“先生”概念指涉范围日益膨胀，逐步瓦解“同志”“师傅”在男性称谓上的统摄地位，“成了对男性公民的第一位的称呼语”。“先生”席卷中国并隐然成为社会主流和共识，既是改革开放后多元化社会对新称谓的诉求，也是“新政治的春风催发的一粒词汇的芽粒”。而根植于传统的“男女皆可用”的“先生”概念则被迫居于支流。

　　潘若天强调，从历史的角度而言，当代社会关于“先生”的争议与讨论，凸显的是自清末以来“先生”概念在演变过程中一直潜藏的价值危机。

　　在他看来，传统“先生”概念谱系中，“男女皆可用”占据主导地位。自19世纪中期西方汉学家强行将“mister”和“先生”建构起互译关系开始，“mister”作为一种特殊含义开始悄然“寄生”在“先生”概念的躯壳之中。最初它仅位于边缘位置，无法对“先生”概念的核心含义造成威胁。但在近现代社会，西方语言、文字、观念、文化等被渲染上了一层“天然的合法性”，“mister”藉此“合法性”的庇佑不断挤压其他含义的生存空间。久而久之，“男女皆可用”的含义逐步边缘化，“mister”及其背后的性别因素在不知不觉间从“寄生”转为“主宰”，一跃而成“先生”概念谱系中最核心的含义。

　　潘若天表示，如今广泛使用的“先生”，早已与前近代时期的“先生”无甚关联，两者虽使用同一个“皮囊”，却拥有着截然不同的实质与内核。从这一点而言，女性之所以不宜称“先生”，其根源在于近代以来西方语言“侵入”后对中国称谓体系的改造与重构。

　　此外，“先生”还有两重含义也在不断发展与传播。其一，用“先生”称党外人士、无党派人士等，从历史的角度而言，这是1949年之后“先生”概念衍生含义的时代性延续；其二，用“先生”称年长而有威望者，这与自先秦以来用“先生”尊称“学士年长者”相关。目前以上两种用法皆不强调性别因素，并且在政界、学界的部分特殊场合得到广泛使用。不过在现代“先生”概念谱系中，以上两重含义仅居于支流地位。

　　刊发上述文章的《妇女研究论丛》是妇女/性别研究领域的全国性学术期刊，由中华全国妇女联合会主管、全国妇联妇女研究所和中国妇女研究会主办。1992年创刊，1999年成为中国妇女研究会会刊。该刊注重中国特色社会主义妇女理论构建，关注国内外妇女/性别研究前沿，及时反映中国社会重大现实问题的研究成果，推动中国妇女学学科建设的发展。

译文：

"The social controversy over whether women are suitable to be referred to as' sir 'essentially lies in the Western appellation system's use of discourse hegemony to' invade 'traditional Chinese appellations and forcibly implant new gender meanings."

Recently, the 2nd issue of the Women's Studies Journal in 2024 published an article titled "Why Women Should Not Be Called" Gentlemen "? - The historical Changes of the concept of" Gentlemen "in modern China from a Gender Perspective." Starting from the concept history and gender perspective, this article sorted out the different development paths and internal evolution paths of the concept of "Gentlemen" in traditional and modern times, and analyzed the complex relationship between the modern concept of "Gentlemen" and the English "Mister" in cross lingual practice.

The author of this article is Pan Ruotian, a lecturer in the Teaching and Research department of Modern Chinese History and a teacher in the Student Affairs Office at the School of History, Beijing normal University. He was born in January 1990 and his main research field is the history of modern Chinese culture.

Pan Ruotian wrote in the article that "Mr.", as one of the core concepts of the modern Chinese appellation system, plays an important role in daily social communication. It is quite paradoxical that there is great controversy over the exact connotation of this concept, which is so frequently used. On the one hand, the public regards the concept of "sir" as a proprietary title for "man" and considers it self-evident "common sense"; On the other hand, in some formal occasions, "sir" has become a title for some outstanding women. This often causes a great uproar in society: men can naturally be called "sir", while only outstanding women are qualified to be called "sir". Isn't this an important example of gender inequality?

He pointed out that the traditional concept of "Mr." has presented a contradiction between the two meanings of "both men and women can be used" and "only men can be used" in the historical evolution process.

The article states that the initial meaning of the concept of "sir" was mainly based on chronological order rather than gender differentiation. In traditional Chinese language practice, the concept of "sir" is not an exclusive discourse space for men, but has broad inclusiveness at the gender level. especially in professions such as teachers, doctors, Taoists, fortune tellers, and storytellers, both men and women can use the term "sir". At least during the Ming and Qing dynasties, the concept of "sir" held a mainstream position in society with the meaning of "both men and women can use it".

In modern China, due to the evolving trend of the concept of "sir" and the great changes in the era of Western and Eastern learning, the conflict between the above two meanings is increasingly intensifying. On the one hand, the translation and dissemination of "Mister" in the West have brought new connotations to the concept of "Mr.", and gender factors have fully penetrated into the spectrum of "Mr." concept; On the other hand, under the demand for gender and political equality, the Nationalist government granted the concept of "sir" a political status of "common folk address", which was officially recognized as "usable for both men and women".

The article points out that as a result, the concept of "sir" with two meanings competes: the meaning of "only available to men" is widely recognized by society as it carries Western discourse hegemony; The meaning of "available for both men and women" has legitimacy due to the government's "approval", occupying a certain advantage in the heated competition between the two.

After the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949, the meaning of the concept of "Mr." significantly shrank, becoming a term for non party members, non party members, or overseas Chinese groups regardless of gender. The meaning of "both men and women can be used" continued during this period. The author believes that the key reason for New China's rejection of "sir" lies in its inherent class consciousness. With the loss of the concept of "sir", the term "comrade", which has political equality and no gender distinction, has begun to dominate society.

The article argues that the mutual translation connection between "miser" and "sir" constructed by Western sinologists in the late Qing Dynasty, although it disappeared in mainland China after 1949, is still prevalent in Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan. After the reform and opening up in the 1980s, the concept of "sir" as a translation of "miss" returned from the Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan regions. Subsequently, the concept of "sir" expanded its scope and gradually undermined the dominant position of "comrade" and "master" in male titles, becoming the first term of address for male citizens. "Mr." has swept across China and faintly become the mainstream and consensus of society, which is not only the demand for new titles in a diversified society after the reform and opening up, but also the sprout of a vocabulary inspired by the spring breeze of new politics. The traditional concept of "Mr.", which is rooted in the concept of "both men and women can be used", is forced to be a tributary.

Pan Ruotian emphasized that from a historical perspective, the controversy and discussion about "Mr." in contemporary society highlight the value crisis that has been hidden in the evolution of the concept of "Mr." since the end of the Qing Dynasty.

In his view, in the traditional "sir" concept spectrum, "both men and women can be used" occupies a dominant position. Since the mid-19th century, Western sinologists forcibly constructed a mutual translation relationship between "miss" and "sir", "miss" as a special meaning began to quietly "parasitize" within the body of the concept of "sir". At first, it was only located at the edge and could not pose a threat to the core meaning of the concept of "sir". But in modern society, Western language, writing, concepts, culture, etc. have been rendered with a layer of "natural legitimacy", and "miss" continuously squeezes the living space of other meanings with the protection of "legitimacy". Over time, the meaning of "usable for both men and women" gradually became marginalized, and "miss" and its underlying gender factors unconsciously shifted from "parasitic" to "dominant", leaping to become the most core meaning in the concept spectrum of "sir".

Pan Ruotian stated that the widely used "sir" nowadays is no longer closely related to the "sir" of the pre modern era. Although the two use the same "skin bag", they have completely different essence and core. From this perspective, the reason why women are not suitable to be called "sir" is rooted in the transformation and reconstruction of China's appellation system after the invasion of Western languages in modern times.

In addition, "sir" has two meanings that are constantly developing and spreading. Firstly, using the term "sir" to refer to non party members, independent individuals, etc., from a historical perspective, this is a temporal continuation of the derived meaning of the concept of "sir" after 1949; Secondly, using "sir" to refer to an elderly and prestigious person is related to the use of "sir" to respectfully refer to "senior scholars" since the pre Qin period. At present, both of the above usages do not emphasize gender factors and are widely used in some special occasions in politics and academia. However, in the modern concept of "sir", the above two meanings only occupy a tributary position.

The Women's Research Series, which publishes the above-mentioned articles, is a national academic journal in the field of women/gender research, managed by the All China Women's Federation, sponsored by the Women's Research Institute of the All China Women's Federation, and the China Women's Research Association. Founded in 1992, it became a journal of the Chinese Women's Research association in 1999. This magazine focuses on the construction of women's theory with Chinese characteristics, pays attention to the forefront of women's/gender research at home and abroad, timely reflects the research results of major practical issues in Chinese society, and promotes the development of the discipline of Chinese women's studies.

句子分析1：

This often causes a great uproar in society: men can naturally be called "sir", while only outstanding women are qualified to be called "sir".

句子成分分析：

This often causes a great uproar [in society]: men can naturally be called "sir", || while only outstanding women are qualified to be called "sir".

句子语法结构详解：

(men 为 man 的复数形式。women 为 woman 的复数形式。)

* causes 为谓语，采用一般现在时。动词采用第三人称单数形式。
* 第1个 be 为系动词作谓语。
* called 为过去分词作定语
* while 为连词，引导状语从句。
* qualified 为谓语，采用一般现在时和被动语态。
* to be 为不定式，作状语。
* 第2个 be 为系动词。
* can 为情态动词。this 为指示代词。are 为助动词。a 为不定冠词。

相关语法知识:
   时态
   动词的第三人称单数形式
   系动词
   过去分词
   状语从句
   被动语态
   不定式
   指示代词 | 情态动词 | 助动词

句子相关词汇解释：

Vocabulary:

句子语法错误检查：

(未发现错误)

句子相关学习点：

 can 与 be able to 的区别
 as, when, while 的区别

句子分析2：

The traditional concept of "Mr.", which is rooted in the concept of "both men and women can be used", is forced to be a tributary.

句子成分分析：

The traditional concept (of "Mr).",
which is rooted in the concept
of"
both men and women can be used"
, is forced to be a tributary.

句子语法结构详解：

(men 为 man 的复数形式。women 为 woman 的复数形式。)

* which 为疑问代词，引导特殊疑问句。
* 第1个 is 为系动词作谓语，采用一般现在时。
* rooted 为形容词作表语。
* 句中含有 both...and... 并列结构，意为“……和……（两者）都”；“既...又...”。
* 第1个 be 为助动词。
* used 为谓语，采用被动语态。
* 第2个 is 为助动词。
* forced 为谓语，采用一般现在时和被动语态。
* to be 为不定式，作主语补足语。
* 第2个 be 为系动词。
* can 为情态动词。the 为定冠词。a 为不定冠词。

相关语法知识:
   特殊疑问句
   系动词
   时态
   表语
   并列连词
   被动语态
   主语补足语
   不定式
   both, neither, either 的用法
   情态动词 | 助动词

句子相关词汇解释：

Phrase:

Vocabulary:

句子语法错误检查：

(未发现错误)

句子相关学习点：

 can 与 be able to 的区别

以上是秒词邦为您整理编写的文章《为何女性是否宜称“先生”引发争议？学者解读》的全部内容。秒词邦是国内权威分题型分考点背诵中高考/四六级考研/专升本/出国单词的专业单词软件。扫描如下小程序码，进入秒词邦官方小程序获取更多英语相关资料！ 【关键词：高考单词；高考英语；高中单词；高中英语；单词app；单词软件；记单词app；记单词软件；背单词软件；背单词app；英语单词；四六级单词；四六级英语；四六级单词app；四六级单词软件；考研单词app；考研单词软件；核心单词；高考冲刺复习；高考英语教材；高考英语真题；四六级真题；四六级试题；考研真题；考研英语单词；考研英语真题】