國?臺灣大學日本語文學系Department of Japanese Language and Literature, National Taiwan University米山禎一Yoneyama, YoshikazuYoshikazuYoneyama2017-09-112018-05-292017-09-112018-05-292005-12http://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw//handle/246246/282809「繪畫的約束」?爭依紅野敏郎的?法是——???解這場?爭的重要性，則白樺派文學的研究也無法?深一層。 這場?爭一般認為是從明治44?(1911?)6月開始至第二?二月結束，筆者認為這場?爭的時間範圍應向前、後?方面延伸，才能真正地?解?爭的實情。因此一方面詳細地?述?爭的過程，評?雙方的?點，另一方面用可以實証的資???證延伸範圍的正當性。According to Toshiro Kohno, if we don’t understand the importance of the dispute over “Pictorial Conventions”, we cannot probe deeply into the essence of Shirakaba School. Generally speaking, this dispute began in June of 1911, and ended in February of 1912. But I do believe that unless the dispute is prolonged for some more years forward and backward, we shall never grasp the true state of it. So on one hand, this paper tries to discuss in detail the process of the dispute and the arguments of both sides, and on the other hand, I am going to expound and prove the properness of our prolonging the range with substantial evidence.623907 bytesapplication/pdf繪畫的約束生命力高村光太郎白樺派後印象派promises for paintingsvitalityKotaro TakamuraShirakaba SchoolPost-Impressionismjournal articlehttp://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw/bitstream/246246/282809/1/0010_200512_6.pdf