CAJ | 학술논문

刘攽在《中山诗话》中认为，晏殊词与冯延巳词一样具有可歌性，而不是晏殊词继承冯延巳词风格；晁无咎《评本朝乐章》中晏元献一句出现晏几道的词句，当确为评论晏殊而非晏几道，只是其后的词句将晏几道词误记为晏殊词；李清照《词论》中批评晏殊词有“以诗为词”和“不协音律”两项，前一项已确证，而后一项可能事实并非如此。
류반재《중산시화》중인위，안수사여풍연사사일양구유가가성，이불시안수사계승풍연사사풍격；조무구《평본조악장》중안원헌일구출현안궤도적사구，당학위평론안수이비안궤도，지시기후적사구장안궤도사오기위안수사；리청조《사론》중비평안수사유“이시위사”화“불협음률”량항，전일항이학증，이후일항가능사실병비여차。
The paper analyzes three pieces of critiques on Yan Shu ’ s poetry.Liu Ban’ s remark in Zhong Shan Poetry that Yan’ s poetry was adaptable to songs just as that of Feng yansi ’ s did not mean that his poetry was an inheritance to Feng yansi ’ s style;Yao Wujiu quoted a line from Yan Jidao ’ s poem in his criticism of Yan Shu ’ s poetry in Critiques on Contemporary Movements.This must be a mistake made by the critic himself where he confused Yan Shu ’ s poem with Yan Jidao ’ s.Li Qingzhao , in her Critiques on Song Poems, said that Yan Shu“wrote Song poetry in Tang style and failed to represent rhythmical beauty”, while the first remark stood to rea-son, the second one was not exactly the case .