Advancing the Construction of China’s Independent Knowledge System through a Revolution in Terminology

Terminology is the most condensed crystallization of a system of thought and theory, the core carrier of the content of knowledge, and the key fulcrum for guiding academic direction and shaping the pattern of discourse. At present, China is undergoing the most extensive and profound social transformation in its history. A profound and extensive “revolution in terminology” is quietly emerging and vigorously unfolding alongside the pace of practical innovation, becoming an important pathway for breaking dependence on Western discourse, manifesting the subjectivity of Chinese scholarship, and enhancing cultural soft power.

术语是思想理论体系最凝练的结晶，是知识内涵的核心载体，是引领学术方向、塑造话语格局的关键支点。当下，中国正经历历史上最为广泛而深刻的社会变革，一场深刻而广泛的“术语革命”，正伴随实践创新的步伐悄然兴起、蓬勃展开，成为破解对西方话语依赖、彰显中国学术主体性、提升文化软实力的重要路径。

What is the essence of this “revolution”? What contemporary value does it bear? What sparks of exploration does it stir up across various disciplinary fields? And along what path will it deepen? Recently, our newspaper’s reporters conducted in-depth interviews with scholars from multiple fields, including philosophy, Marxist theory, economics, classical literature, and literary theory, to observe this era-defining academic evolution that is quiet on the surface yet profoundly significant.

这场“革命”的本质是什么？它承载着怎样的时代价值？在各学科领域激荡出怎样的探索火花？又将沿着何种路径走向深入？近日，本报记者深入采访哲学、马克思主义理论、经济学、古代文学、文艺理论等多个领域的学者，观察这场静水深流却意义深远的时代性学术演进。

The Essence and Value of the Revolution in Terminology

术语革命的本质与价值

The concept of a “revolution in terminology,” since it was proposed by Engels in the preface to the English edition of *Capital*, has been closely linked to major transformations in theoretical systems. In the view of Chen Xudong, Vice Dean of the Institute for the Development of Chinese Economic Thought at Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, what Engels emphasized was precisely that, in the process of profound change in systems of thought and theory, the renewal, reconstruction, and creation of core terminology drives a fundamental transformation in the theoretical core, mode of thinking, and research paradigm. Marx used the term “surplus value” to reveal the inner mechanism of capitalist exploitation, driving a revolution in political economy; Lavoisier proposed the concept of “oxygen,” overthrowing the phlogiston theory and opening a new era in chemical science. The logic by which a revolution in terminology drives disciplinary development transcends time and space, consistent throughout.

“术语的革命”这一概念，自恩格斯在《资本论》英文版序言中提出以来，便与理论体系的重大变革紧密相连。在上海财经大学中国经济思想发展研究院副院长陈旭东看来，恩格斯所强调的，正是在思想理论体系发生深刻变革的过程中，通过核心术语的更新、重构与创造，推动理论内核、思维方式和研究范式的根本性转变。马克思用“剩余价值”这一术语，揭示了资本主义剥削的内在机理，推动了政治经济学的革命；拉瓦锡提出“氧气”概念，推翻了燃素说，开启了化学科学的新纪元。术语革命驱动学科发展的逻辑，跨越时空，一以贯之。

Tian Pengying, Dean of the Academy of Chinese-Path Modernization at Northeastern University, believes that for philosophy and social sciences, a “revolution in terminology” is not limited to the replacement of noun concepts and categories; it also reflects a revolutionary deepening of the understanding of the laws governing the Communist Party’s governance, the laws of socialist construction, and the laws of human societal development. It is an important engine and foundational support for constructing an independent knowledge system for Chinese philosophy and social sciences.

东北大学中国式现代化研究院院长田鹏颖认为，对于哲学社会科学而言，“术语的革命”并非仅限于名词概念和范畴的更新换代，更折射出对共产党执政规律、社会主义建设规律、人类社会发展规律认识的革命性深化，是构建中国哲学社会科学自主知识体系的重要引擎和基础支撑。

What is the difference between a term and a concept? Chen Xudong believes that a term is a symbolic carrier for expressing and disseminating a specialized concept, while a concept is the unit of thought and knowledge behind the term. A mature knowledge system is precisely an organic whole composed of a series of interrelated, logically self-consistent terms, concepts, and their structures. For example, terms such as “whole-process people’s democracy” and “a community with a shared future for mankind” possess distinct originality and identifiability, and together they support the unique discursive framework and practical paradigm of China’s independent knowledge system.

术语与概念有何区别？陈旭东认为，术语是表达和传播专业概念的符号载体，概念则是术语背后的思想单元和知识单元。成熟的知识体系，正是由一系列相互关联、逻辑自洽的术语、概念及其结构共同构成的有机整体。例如，“全过程人民民主”“人类命运共同体”等术语，既具有鲜明的原创性与标识性，又共同支撑起中国自主知识体系独特的话语框架与实践范式。

In the view of Zhong Weimin, Executive Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the *Journal of Tsinghua University (Philosophy and Social Sciences)*, the formation and development of terminology is the result of a two-way interaction between history and reality, which then precipitates into an important foundation for tradition, culture, and deep exchange. Therefore, lacking basic terminology makes it difficult to form a complete knowledge system. Constructing an independent Chinese knowledge system should not simply discard or negate currently prevalent terminology, nor should it blindly return to the expression of traditional terminology. Instead, it should, on the basis of existing terminology and in combination with new great practices, advance steady and resolute innovation.

在《清华大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》常务副主编仲伟民看来，术语的形成与发展，是历史与现实双向互动的结果，进而沉淀为传统、文化和深度交流的重要基础。因此，缺乏基本术语便难以形成完整的知识体系。构建中国自主知识体系，不应简单抛弃或否定当前已通行的术语，也不能盲目回归传统术语表达，而应在现有术语基础上，结合新的伟大实践，推进稳步而坚定的创新。

The revolution in terminology is an important “catalyst” for theoretical innovation. Taking the typical term “socialist market economy” as an example, Chen Xudong believes that this term creatively combines the seemingly opposing “socialism” and “market economy” from traditional political economy, establishing a completely new theoretical analytical framework and providing key theoretical support for China’s economic development practice.

术语革命是理论创新的重要“催化剂”。陈旭东以“社会主义市场经济”这一典型术语为例认为，该术语将传统政治经济学中看似对立的“社会主义”与“市场经济”创造性地结合在一起，确立了全新的理论分析框架，为中国经济发展实践提供了关键理论支撑。

Pei Yajun, Full-time Deputy Director of the China National Committee for Terminology in Science and Technology, believes that knowledge systems originally rooted in Western experience and the process of social development are increasingly facing a “crisis of interpretation” and a “discourse deficit” when explaining China’s unique and complex practices. The revolution in terminology is precisely about refining original and identifying concepts from China’s own experience, promoting knowledge production that conforms to reality, and thereby systematically elevating the rich “Chinese experience” into a “Chinese theory” with universal significance. Chen Xudong believes that the revolution in terminology is not only a concentrated manifestation of theoretical achievements but also possesses a distinct action orientation. For example, after the important term “new quality productive forces” was proposed, it rapidly drove a series of policy arrangements and strategic deployments, such as leading industrial innovation with technological innovation, developing the digital economy, and promoting green transformation.

全国科学技术名词审定委员会专职副主任裴亚军认为，原本植根于西方经验和社会发展历程的知识体系，在解释中国独特而复杂的实践时，日益面临“诠释危机”和“话语赤字”。术语革命正是通过从中国自身经验中提炼原创性、标识性概念，推动符合实际的知识生产，进而将丰富的“中国经验”系统升华为具有普遍意义的“中国理论”。陈旭东认为，术语的革命不仅是理论成果的集中体现，也具有鲜明的行动指向。例如，“新质生产力”这一重要术语提出后，迅速带动了以科技创新引领产业创新、发展数字经济、推进绿色转型等一系列政策安排与战略部署。

Most importantly, the revolution in terminology is also a key link in striving for international academic discourse power, economic discourse power, and even civilizational discourse power. Chen Xudong indicates that by proposing identifying concepts with its own characteristics to tell China’s story well and explain China’s logic, China effectively breaks through the single narrative mode centered on the West and attempts to provide new conceptual tools and intellectual public goods for global development. For example, the term “open economy” and its related explanations, from the two levels of deepening factor-flow-driven opening up and advancing institution-based opening up, forcefully respond to the impact of anti-globalization trends of thought.

尤为重要的是，术语革命也是争取国际学术话语权、经济话语权乃至文明话语权的关键环节。陈旭东表示，中国通过提出具有自身特色的标识性概念来讲好中国故事、阐释中国逻辑，有效突破了西方中心主义的单一叙事方式，并尝试为全球发展提供新的概念工具和思想公共产品。例如，“开放型经济”这一术语及其相关阐释，从深化要素流动型开放与推进制度型开放两个层面，有力回应了逆全球化思潮带来的冲击。

Pei Yajun believes that only by constructing new concepts, new categories, and new expressions that are easy for the international community to understand and accept can the international discourse pattern be gradually improved and the soft power and international influence of Chinese culture be effectively enhanced. At the same time, using a national language rich in Chinese style and Chinese manner to explain and disseminate theory helps the independent knowledge system take deep root in the fertile soil of fine traditional Chinese culture, strengthens the people’s cultural confidence and value identification, and enables the theory to be truly understood and recognized by the masses, radiating lasting and powerful vitality.

裴亚军认为，只有构建易于国际社会理解和接受的新概念、新范畴、新表述，才能逐步改善国际话语格局，切实提升中国文化的软实力和国际影响力。同时，运用富有中国风格、中国气派的民族语言对理论进行阐释和传播，有助于推动自主知识体系深深植根于中华优秀传统文化的沃土，增强人民群众的文化自信与价值认同，使理论真正为群众所理解、所认同，焕发持久而强大的生命力。

Disciplinary Terminology Innovation Blossoms in a Hundred Flowers

学科术语创新百花齐放

As socialism with Chinese characteristics has entered a New Era, China’s economic and social development has achieved historic accomplishments and undergone historic transformations. Accompanying this, various fields of philosophy and social sciences, based on Chinese practice and responding to the concerns of the times, have produced a large number of representative terms with Chinese characteristics and the features of the era, laying a solid foundation for constructing an independent knowledge system.

中国特色社会主义进入新时代，我国经济社会发展取得历史性成就、发生历史性变革。与之相伴，哲学社会科学各领域立足中国实践、回应时代关切，涌现出一大批具有中国特色、时代特征的代表性术语，为构建自主知识体系奠定了坚实基础。

In the field of economics, a series of terms closely linked to the pulse of development have emerged one after another, profoundly influencing policy formulation and practical processes. Modernized economic system, supply-side structural reform, unified national market, high-quality development, new quality productive forces… Chen Xudong believes that these terms firmly base themselves on the national conditions and development practices of China in the new stage of development, precisely respond to the new situations, new contradictions, and new challenges faced by economic development, profoundly reveal the new characteristics, new laws, and new requirements of economic operation, and help to extract and summarize the regular achievements of China’s economic development practice from complex and diverse real-world phenomena, thereby forming a systematized economic theory to guide new development practices.

在经济学领域，一系列紧扣发展脉搏的术语相继涌现，并深刻影响着政策制定与实践进程。现代化经济体系、供给侧结构性改革、统一大市场、高质量发展、新质生产力……陈旭东认为，这些术语牢牢立足新发展阶段的中国国情与发展实践，精准回应经济发展面临的新情况、新矛盾、新挑战，深刻揭示了经济运行的新特点、新规律、新要求，有助于从纷繁复杂的现实现象中提炼和总结我国经济发展实践的规律性成果，进而形成系统化的经济学说，指导新的发展实践。

In the discipline of Marxist theory, the creation of new terms and new expressions is particularly active and holds significant theoretical importance. Terms such as the “Five-Sphere Integrated Plan,” the “Four-Pronged Comprehensive Strategy,” the “Four Greats,” the “Two Integrations,” “Chinese-path modernization,” and the “new form of human civilization” have been formed successively. Tian Pengying believes that these terms collectively embody the strategic requirements and theoretical innovation achievements of the Party’s and the state’s undertakings in the New Era, constituting important discursive carriers and theoretical identifiers of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era. In particular, the important term “new form of human civilization” breaks through the cognitive framework and path dependence that take capitalist modern civilization as the sole reference, fully manifests the unique advantages and diverse possibilities of socialist civilization, and provides a Chinese solution for the development of human civilization towards a higher form.

在马克思主义理论学科，新术语、新表述的创造尤为活跃，且具有重要理论意义。“五位一体”总体布局、“四个全面”战略布局、“四个伟大”“两个结合”“中国式现代化”“人类文明新形态”等术语相继形成。田鹏颖认为，这些术语集中体现了新时代党和国家事业发展的战略要求与理论创新成果，构成了习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想的重要话语载体和理论标识。特别是“人类文明新形态”这一重要术语，突破了以资本主义现代文明为唯一参照的认知框架与路径依赖，充分彰显了社会主义文明的独特优势与多样可能性，为人类文明向更高形态的发展提供了中国方案。

Even in traditional humanities fields such as classical literature, terminological innovation is displaying vigorous vitality. Luo Shijin, a professor in the School of Literature at Soochow University, reports that over the past decade or so, research in classical literature, on the basis of deeply elucidating the essence of indigenous Chinese literary theory and absorbing and drawing on foreign cultural resources, has combined new research methods and problem awareness to produce a batch of terms of significant academic value. In the study of literary history, there are expressions such as “layered accumulation” (层累), “synthesis and communication” (会通), and “concurrent differentiation” (兼别); at the level of literary concepts, notions such as “collective identity” (集体认同) and “public force” (公因力) have emerged; in the field of stylistics, formulations such as “stylistic hierarchy” (文体差序) and “manifestation of Chinese linguistic nature” (汉语性开显) have taken shape; in the area of documentary historical sources, the concept of “document clusters” (文献集群) has been proposed; and in research methods, analytical paradigms such as “returned gaze—re-examination” (返视—重审) have gradually formed. Terminological innovation in the study of poetics has been particularly rich and diverse, including “situational poetics” (情境诗学), “event poetics” (事件诗学), “everyday poetics” (日用诗学), “narrative construction” (叙事构造), “image configuration” (意象构境), and so on. As research on family literature, regional literature, and literati associations continues to heat up, new terms such as “family lineage transmission” (家族裔传), “regional circles” (地域圈层), and “affinity through writing” (文字缘), which fit indigenous literary practice and cultural ecology, have emerged one after another, powerfully advancing the deepening and expansion of related research.

即便在古代文学这样的传统人文学科领域，术语创新同样展现出蓬勃活力。苏州大学文学院教授罗时进介绍，近十多年来，古代文学研究在深入阐释中国本土文论精髓、吸收借鉴外来文化资源的基础上，结合新的研究方法与问题意识，产生了一批具有重要学术价值的术语。在文学史研究中，有“层累”“会通”“兼别”等表述；在文学观念层面，出现了“集体认同”“公因力”等概念；在文体学领域，形成了“文体差序”“汉语性开显”等说法；在文献史料学方面，则提出了“文献集群”；在研究方法上，逐步形成了“返视—重审”等分析范式。诗学研究中的术语创新尤为丰富多样，如“情境诗学”“事件诗学”“日用诗学”“叙事构造”“意象构境”等。随着家族文学、地域文学、文人社团等研究持续升温，“家族裔传”“地域圈层”“文字缘”等贴合本土文学实践与文化生态的新术语相继出现，有力推动了相关研究的深化与拓展。

In the area of terminological standardization, the results of systematic promotion are gradually becoming apparent. Pei Yajun reports that by the end of 2025, the number of standard terms examined and published by the China National Committee for Terms in Sciences and Technologies had reached over 600,000, of which nearly 40,000 were terms related to philosophy and social sciences, covering ten disciplinary fields including economics and linguistics. During the period of the 14th Five-Year Plan [n1], with support from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and some universities, the work of examining and standardizing terms in various disciplines of philosophy and social sciences has continued to advance, gradually building a relatively complete work system and set of standard norms, providing solid support for the accurate expression and effective dissemination of an independent knowledge system.

在术语规范化建设方面，系统性推进成效逐步显现。裴亚军介绍，截至2025年底，经全国科学技术名词审定委员会审定并公布的规范名词已达60余万条，其中哲学社会科学相关名词近4万条，涵盖经济学、语言学等10个学科领域。“十四五”时期，在中国社会科学院及部分高校的支持下，哲学社会科学各学科的名词审定工作持续推进，逐步构建起较为完善的工作体系与规范标准，为自主知识体系的准确表达与有效传播提供了坚实支撑。

Both innovation and standardization are needed.

既要创新 也要规范

Philosophy and social sciences have a broad coverage and numerous sub-disciplines. As different disciplinary terms constantly emerge and rapidly iterate, will this increase the difficulty of interdisciplinary exchange and public understanding? How can we encourage sharpness of thought and innovation in expression while maintaining the smooth flow of academic communication and the basic order of knowledge transmission? These issues are becoming practical topics of widespread concern in the current academic community.

哲学社会科学覆盖面广、分支学科繁多。不同学科术语不断涌现、快速迭代，是否会增加跨学科交流与公众理解的难度？如何在鼓励思想锐度与表达创新的同时，维护学术交流的畅通与知识传承的基本秩序？这些问题正成为当前学界普遍关注的现实议题。

Zang Fengyu, Dean of the School of Philosophy at Renmin University of China, believes that in academic discourse expression, we must both recognize that serious and in-depth academic exploration will inevitably generate professional discourse rich in meaning and profound in connotation—this is a natural result of theoretical deepening—and also recognize that in the process of interdisciplinary exchange and popular dissemination, it is necessary to strive to make profound academic thought obtain a clearer and more fluent form of expression. Taking the term “Chinese-path modernization” (中国式现代化) as an example, he analyzed that this term highly condenses the practical stipulations of socialism with Chinese characteristics; its internal logic encompasses a complete set of mutually supporting conceptual systems such as the socialist market economy, whole-process people’s democracy, and a community with a shared future for mankind, providing a broad real-world field and problem space for constructing China’s independent philosophical and social science knowledge system.

中国人民大学哲学院院长臧峰宇谈到，在学术话语表达上，既要看到严肃而深入的学术探索必然会生成意涵丰富、内涵深邃的专业话语，这是理论深化的自然结果；也要认识到在跨学科交流与大众化传播过程中，有必要努力使深邃的学术思想获得更加清晰、晓畅的表达形式。他以“中国式现代化”这一术语为例分析认为，该术语高度凝练了中国特色社会主义的实践规定性，其内在逻辑涵盖社会主义市场经济、全过程人民民主、人类命运共同体等一整套相互支撑的概念系统，为构建中国自主的哲学社会科学知识体系提供了宏阔的现实场域与问题空间。

Zhao Tao, President and Editor-in-Chief of the *Jianghai Academic Journal*, believes that advocating a terminology revolution and pursuing plain and powerful academic language are not contradictory. The fundamental purpose of promoting a terminology revolution is to construct a philosophical and social science discourse system with Chinese characteristics, Chinese style, and Chinese manner. Such terms are both a re-creation based on absorbing all excellent ideological and cultural achievements of humanity and a crystallization of thought refined from the vivid great practice of socialism with Chinese characteristics; they are important results of Chinese-style thinking and interpretation of Chinese problems. Compared with those foreign terms that have not been fully digested and feel somewhat alien, such concepts should be more approachable and perceptible, possess greater expressive tension, and be more conducive to connecting with practice and communicating with the public.

《江海学刊》杂志社社长、主编赵涛认为，倡导术语革命与追求平实、有力的学术语言并不矛盾。推动术语革命的根本目的，在于构建具有中国特色、中国风格、中国气派的哲学社会科学话语体系。这样的术语，既是在吸收人类一切优秀思想文化成果基础上的再创造，也是从鲜活的中国特色社会主义伟大实践中提炼而来的思想结晶，是对中国问题进行中国式思考与阐释的重要成果。相较于那些未经充分消化、略显隔膜的外来术语，这类概念理应更加亲切可感、更具表达张力，也更有利于与实践对接、与大众沟通。

Regarding how to vigorously promote terminological innovation while avoiding the pitfall of indiscriminately creating concepts and piling up nouns, Pei Yajun emphasized the importance of standardization and review mechanisms. He believes that new terms can indeed bring new perspectives and open up new realms, but behaviors of excessive term creation that are divorced from reality or blindly seek novelty can also cause confusion in understanding and obstacles to communication. The key lies in maintaining a dynamic balance between encouraging innovation and strengthening standardization, and its fundamental direction should always serve knowledge progress and civilizational exchange. Conceptual innovation must be closely tied to practical needs, and term creation should also follow the internal logic of the discipline and the basic norms of language. Pei Yajun further emphasized that terminological standardization is a systematic project that requires long-term promotion and is quite difficult; it concerns the foundation and future of the national scientific and technological language system and the independent knowledge system. It is necessary to fully recognize its fundamental, overall, and guiding role from a strategic height, and to construct a more complete, efficient, and authoritative mechanism and work network for promoting the standardization of philosophical and social science terms, providing a stable institutional guarantee for this profound “terminology revolution.”

围绕如何在大力推动术语创新的同时，避免陷入滥造概念、堆砌名词的误区，裴亚军强调了规范与审查机制的重要性。他认为，新术语确实能够带来新视角、开辟新境界，但脱离实际、盲目求新等过度创造术语行为，同样可能造成理解混乱与交流障碍。关键在于在鼓励创新与加强规范之间保持动态平衡，其根本指向始终应服务于知识进步与文明交流。概念创新必须紧扣实践需求，术语创造也应遵循学科内在逻辑与语言基本规范。裴亚军进一步强调，术语规范化是一项需要长期推进、难度较大的系统工程，事关国家科技语言体系和自主知识体系的根基与未来，必须从战略高度充分认识其基础性、全局性与先导性作用，构建更加完善、高效、权威的哲学社会科学术语规范化推进机制与工作网络，为这场深刻的“术语革命”提供稳固的制度保障。

Anchor the foundation in practice; integrate the ancient and modern, Chinese and foreign.

锚定实践根基 融通古今中外

Guided by the Party’s innovative theory [n2], the academic community is systematically sorting out and elucidating a series of iconic concepts in philosophy and social sciences, demonstrating the increasingly enhanced cultural subjectivity and theoretical self-awareness of Chinese philosophical and social science research. Zang Fengyu believes that China’s independent knowledge system is gradually generated and continuously enriched in the grand practical process of Chinese-path modernization, vividly presenting the dialectical unity of “universality and particularity,” “tradition and modernity,” and “subjectivity and openness.” It achieves a comprehensive innovation of Chinese philosophical thought through a grand view of history and practical dialectics, displaying a distinct philosophical character oriented toward modernization, the world, and the future. Currently, the creativity of Chinese discourse still needs to be further rooted in practice, to systematically summarize, refine, and elucidate practical experience, so that the “small logic” of the independent knowledge system more accurately reflects the “grand logic” of the great cause of building a strong country and national rejuvenation [n3], further manifesting the philosophical self and ideological subjectivity of the Chinese nation.

以党的创新理论为引领，学术界正在系统梳理和阐释一系列哲学社会科学标识性概念，彰显出中国哲学社会科学研究日益增强的文化主体性与理论自觉。臧峰宇认为，中国自主知识体系是在中国式现代化的宏大实践进程中逐步生成、不断丰富的，生动呈现了“普遍性与特殊性”“传统与现代”“主体性与开放性”的辩证统一关系，并以大历史观和实践辩证法实现了中国哲学思想的综合创新，展现出面向现代化、面向世界、面向未来的鲜明哲学品格。当前，中国话语的创造力仍需进一步扎根实践，对现实经验进行系统归纳、提炼与阐发，使自主知识体系的“小逻辑”更加精准地映现强国建设、民族复兴伟业的“大逻辑”，进一步彰显中华民族的哲学自我与思想主体性。

Facing the demands of the times and practical challenges, to solidly advance the construction of China’s independent knowledge system through a terminology revolution, we must adhere to the correct direction and scientific methods. Tian Pengying believes that the fundamental lies in adhering to the Two Integrations [n4], that is, integrating the basic tenets of Marxism with China’s specific realities and with the best of traditional Chinese culture. At the same time, we should treat the diversity of thought and culture with an open and inclusive attitude, be adept at absorbing various theoretical resources, and achieve genuine independent innovation on the basis of drawing on all outstanding achievements of human civilization.

面对时代要求与现实挑战，通过术语革命扎实推进中国自主知识体系建设，必须坚持正确方向与科学方法。田鹏颖认为，根本在于坚持“两个结合”，即把马克思主义基本原理同中国具体实际相结合、同中华优秀传统文化相结合。同时，应以开放包容的态度对待思想文化的多样性，善于吸纳各类理论资源，在借鉴人类一切优秀文明成果的基础上，实现真正意义上的自主创新。

Deeply excavating indigenous resources and courageously breaking down disciplinary barriers are important supports for the sustained advancement of the terminology revolution. Luo Dongqing, a professor in the School of Literature at Nanjing Normal University, believes that a “terminology revolution” often originates from a re-examination and innovative thinking about the foundations of a discipline, and may even give birth to new interdisciplinary fields or research paradigms. This requires researchers to break through existing disciplinary boundaries and solidified thinking patterns, to form new perspectives and new tools for observing the world and explaining practice, and to rethink some fundamental issues in civilization and scholarship.

深入挖掘本土资源、勇于打破学科壁垒是术语革命持续推进的重要支撑。南京师范大学文学院教授骆冬青认为，“术语革命”往往源自对学科根基的重新审视与创新思考，甚至可能催生新的交叉学科或研究范式。这要求研究者突破既有的学科边界与固化的思维模式，形成观照世界、解释实践的新视角、新工具，并重新思考文明与学术中的一些根本性问题。

“Terms are not fabricated out of thin air, nor are they a simple display of literary skill; they are the crystallization of thought condensed after deeply observing practice and systematically studying problems.” Taking Mr. Wen Yiduo’s [n5] creative interpretations of concepts such as “palace-style poetry” (宫体诗) and “the Four Elites” (四杰) as an example, Luo Shijin stated that a comprehensive review of his academic achievements reveals that extensive knowledge accumulation, profound textual understanding, and a highly refined capacity for theoretical generalization are the solid foundation for achieving precise term refinement and deep interpretation. This also enlightens contemporary scholars: only by settling down, consolidating professional foundations, and continuously expanding academic horizons can they hone their ability to create and interpret terms through long-term and solid accumulation, ensuring that every new term can withstand the test of practice and history.

“术语不是凭空臆造，也并非文字技巧的简单展示，而是深入体察实践、系统研究问题后凝结而成的思想成果。”罗时进以闻一多先生对“宫体诗”“四杰”等概念的创造性阐释为例谈到，通览其学术成果可以发现，广博的知识积累、深厚的文本理解力和高度凝练的理论概括能力，是实现精准术语提炼与深刻阐释的坚实基础。这也启示当代学者，唯有沉潜下来、夯实专业根基、不断拓展学术视野，才能在长期而扎实的积累中锤炼术语创造与阐释能力，使每一个新术语都经得起实践与历史的检验。

(Reporters for the *Chinese Social Sciences Today*, Wu Nan and Zhang Qingli)

中国社会科学报记者 吴楠 张清俐