AI 已经进入论文写作、资料整理、文献阅读、课堂教学和学术发表现场。问题不再是“要不要用 AI”，而是：
怎样用，才不失去自己的学术判断？
怎样用，才不违背学术伦理与引用规范？
怎样用，才能真正提高研究效率，而不是制造更多混乱？
《AIGC 时代的人文学术研究方法》正是为这些问题而写。
这本书不是单纯介绍 AI 工具，而是从人文学术研究的实际需要出发，提供一套可以直接使用的研究方法、操作流程、写作模板与判断标准，帮助研究者在 AIGC 时代建立自己的学术能力。
书中将讨论：
AIGC 时代，人文学术研究发生了什么变化
如何使用 AI 辅助选题、文献整理、资料分析与论文写作
如何避免 AI 生成内容造成的错误、幻觉与学术风险
如何区分“辅助研究”与“代写代做”的界线
如何建立可说明、可检查、可负责的 AI 协作流程
如何以“ AIGC 文图学”的方法，理解文字、图像、声音、影像等多种文本的生成与意义判断
预购单：https://forms.gle/doqk2E2gKyEEaeZb6
大家好，我今天要开箱的是我的新书——《大美之言：唐宋题画文图学》武漢：崇文書局Chongwen Publishing House Co.,Ltd.，2026年。ISBN 9787540384999 Unboxing I Lo-fen’s The Aesthetic Power of Words: Text and Image Studies on Painting Inscriptions in the Tang and Song Dynasties! 这本书为什么叫“大美之言”？因为唐宋人的题画诗、题画文，不只是写在画旁边的几行字。它们其实是在告诉我们：一幅画，应该怎样被看见；一个时代的审美，怎样被说出来；文字和图像之间，怎样互相照亮。 传统水墨画有一个非常重要的特点：画上有诗，诗中有画；图像需要文字诠释，文字也因为图像而产生新的书写题材。 这就是我长期研究的“文图学”关心的问题。 《大美之言：唐宋题画文图学》讨论的，不只是“题画诗写了什么”，而是进一步追问： 文字如何进入图像？图像如何影响文字？诗、书、画如何共同构成中国艺术的美学世界？ 在这本书里，我以唐宋时期的题画文学为核心，讨论诗画关系、观看方式、艺术批评、文人审美，以及题画文字如何成为中国艺术史中不可忽略的一部分。 如果你喜欢中国古典文学、书画艺术、宋代美学，或者你想理解“诗中有画，画中有诗”到底是什么意思，这本书会带你进入一个更细致、更有层次的世界。 它不是一本只给专家看的书。 我希望读者翻开它的时候，可以重新发现：原来一幅画旁边的几行字，竟然藏着这么丰富的审美思想和文化记忆。 这也是我想通过“文图学”做的事情： 让我们不只是看见图像，也读懂图像；不只是阅读文字，也看见文字描绘的画面。 所以，如果你想更深入理解唐宋艺术，想知道中国文人为什么要在画上题诗，想从文字和图像的关系重新认识中国美学，欢迎关注这本书——《大美之言：唐宋题画文图学》。 新书已经上架，欢迎大家进入唐宋题画文图学的大美世界。
同一天，当时担任新加坡总理的李显龙先生在社交媒体发了一段话，提到”今天是五四百年纪念日，这天也因星际大战日（Star Wars
Day）而闻名。“
如此有趣的并置，被学者罗乐然写进了新著《五四在南洋——新马华人的文化记忆与中华想象》的开篇。我读到这里，忍不住会心一笑：这不正是南洋华人处境的缩影吗？一脚踩在中华文化的百年传统里，另一脚站在全球流行文化的当下。
罗博士这本书，是我近年读到的关于五四运动研究最令人耳目一新的著作之一。它不是传统意义上"五四对南洋的影响与回应"的路数，而是追问一个更根本的问题：五四在新加坡与马来西亚是如何被接收、被改造、被遗忘，又被不断重新发明？
这个问题，我自己也思考过。2019年，我写了《百年五四.南洋余波》，后来收录在拙著《星洲创意：文本·传媒·图像新加坡》中，试图梳理这段脉络。但罗博士的研究更为全面，视野也更为开阔。他引入"新南洋研究"的视角，主张摆脱传统的"中国中心论"，认为南洋华人不只是中国文化的被动接受者，而是有自己的主体性，有自己在地的选择与创造。
学术方法上，罗博士借鉴了傅柯"权力的毛细管作用"的概念，让研究从精英叙事走向日常生活：不只看学者、知识分子如何讨论五四，还要看报纸副刊、学校课堂、街头漫画里藏着什么。这种"社会史化"的转向，使读者得以看见五四在新马展现出的多样性与矛盾性，五四运动从来不是整齐单一的"影响"，在无数普通人的日常里，悄悄渗透、悄悄变形。
书中最打动我的，是关于语言的章节。五四白话文运动如何在新马推展，从方言私塾转向国语学校，这不只是教育工具的更替，更是对整整几代人"舌头"与"脑袋"的重塑。这种语言的统一，为后来新马华人身份认同的形成奠定了基石。
关于高等教育的章节同样精彩。南洋大学的创立，带着浓烈的民间热情与民国学术气息；马来亚大学中文系则在殖民政府的框架下，在"汉学传统"与"在地需求"之间艰难平衡。两所大学对五四精神的继承方式各异，却都以不同方式成为五四记忆的载体。这种分析将教育史、政治史与思想史编织在一起，令人信服。
还有一章让我格外欣慰,就是漫画与绘本中的历史记忆。这也是我与罗博士长期共同关注的领域，我们曾经合作编写《四方云集：台·港·中·新的绘本漫画文图学》。透过刘敬贤《陈福财的艺术》等作品，可以看到历史记忆如何在大众文化中被"玩味"与重新诠释。
五四运动百年纪念，新加坡官方将五四与文化传承、建国史相挂钩；马来西亚华社则更多将其与华文教育的焦虑联系在一起。同一场运动，在不同的土地上长出了不同的面貌。这提醒我们：每一次纪念，都是一次重写；每一次重写，都折射着当下的诠释与期望。
李显龙总理说：“不了解过去历史、起源和文化的人民，就像无根之树。”放在《五四在南洋》的语境里，又多了一层意思：根，不一定只有一条；树，也可以在异乡的土壤里，长出属于自己的形状。
2026年4月25日，新加坡《联合早报》“上善若水”专栏
The May Fourth Movement That Went “Down to Nanyang”
I Lo-fen
On May 4, 2019, the centenary of the May Fourth Movement, the Text and
Image Studies Society, which I founded, organized a forum in Singapore titled
“A Century of May Fourth in Singapore: So What?” The phrase “So What” spoke
precisely to a long-standing question among Chinese communities in Nanyang:
What, after all, does a movement that took place in distant Beijing have to do
with us?
On the same day, Mr. Lee Hsien Loong, then Prime Minister of Singapore,
posted a message on social media, noting that “today marks the centenary of May
Fourth, a day also known as Star Wars Day.”
This intriguing juxtaposition appears at the beginning of Dr. Law Lok-yin’s
new book, *May Fourth in Nanyang: The Cultural Memory and Chinese Imagination
of the Chinese Communities in Singapore and Malaysia*. When I read this
passage, I could not help but smile knowingly. Is this not a perfect snapshot
of the situation of Nanyang Chinese? One foot stands in the century-old
tradition of Chinese culture, while the other stands in the present moment of
global popular culture.
Dr. Law’s book is one of the most refreshing studies of the May Fourth
Movement that I have read in recent years. It does not follow the conventional
approach of examining “the influence of May Fourth on Nanyang and its
responses.” Instead, it asks a more fundamental question: how was May Fourth
received, transformed, forgotten, and continuously reinvented in Singapore and
Malaysia?
This is a question I have also reflected on. In 2019, I wrote “A Century
of May Fourth: Ripples in Nanyang,” later included in my book *Creativity in
Singapore: Texts, Media, and Images*, in an attempt to trace this historical
thread. Yet Dr. Law’s research is more comprehensive and broader in vision. He
introduces the perspective of “New Nanyang Studies,” advocating a departure
from the traditional “China-centered” framework. In his view, Nanyang Chinese
were not merely passive recipients of Chinese culture; they possessed their own
agency, as well as their own local choices and forms of creativity.
In terms of academic method, Dr. Law draws on Foucault’s concept of the
“capillary action of power,” shifting the study from elite narratives to
everyday life. He does not only examine how scholars and intellectuals
discussed May Fourth; he also looks at what was hidden in newspaper supplements,
school classrooms, and street cartoons. This turn toward social history allows
readers to see the diversity and contradictions of May Fourth as it unfolded in
Singapore and Malaysia. The May Fourth Movement was never a neat and singular
“influence”; rather, it quietly permeated and transformed itself in the daily
lives of countless ordinary people.
What moved me most in the book is the chapter on language. The promotion
of the May Fourth vernacular language movement in Singapore and Malaysia, and
the transition from dialect-based private schools to Mandarin-medium schools,
was not merely a replacement of educational tools. It was also a reshaping of
the “tongues” and “minds” of several generations. This linguistic unification
laid the foundation for the later formation of Chinese identity in Singapore
and Malaysia.
The chapter on higher education is equally compelling. The founding of
Nanyang University was marked by strong popular enthusiasm and the academic
atmosphere of Republican China. By contrast, the Department of Chinese Studies
at the University of Malaya had to operate within the framework of the colonial
government, struggling to balance the “Sinological tradition” with “local
needs.” The two universities inherited the spirit of May Fourth in different
ways, yet each became, in its own manner, a carrier of May Fourth memory. This
analysis weaves together educational history, political history, and
intellectual history in a convincing way.
Another chapter that gave me particular pleasure is the one on
historical memory in comics and picture books. This is also a field that Dr. Law
and I have long been concerned with. We once co-edited *Converging from All
Directions: Text and Image Studies of Picture Books and Comics in Taiwan, Hong
Kong, Mainland China, and Singapore*. Through works such as Liu Jingxian’s *The
Art of Chen Fu Cai*, one can see how historical memory is “played with” and
reinterpreted in popular culture.
During the centenary commemorations of the May Fourth Movement,
Singapore’s official discourse linked May Fourth with cultural heritage and the
history of nation-building, while the Chinese community in Malaysia more often
associated it with anxieties over Chinese-language education. The same movement
grew into different forms on different lands. This reminds us that every act of
commemoration is an act of rewriting, and every act of rewriting reflects the
interpretations and expectations of the present.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong once said, “A people who do not
understand their past history, origins, and culture are like trees without
roots.” Placed in the context of *May Fourth in Nanyang*, this statement gains
another layer of meaning: roots do not necessarily have to be singular; a tree
can also grow its own shape in the soil of a foreign land.
April 25, 2026, “Shang Shan Ruo Shui” column, Lianhe Zaobao,
Singapore.
【文图学】【AIGC文图学】的定义
引用来源：衣若芬《AIGC时代的人文学术研究方法》（2026）
I Lo-fen,Humanities Research Methods in the Age of AIGC,2026
文图学是由衣若芬提出的跨学科研究领域与方法，以广义文本观为基础，研究文字、图像及其他文本形态的关系、互动、张力与生成，探讨文本及其意义在媒介机制、社会网络、文化背景与历史语境中的生产、传递、转化与理解。
Text and Image Studies: an interdisciplinary field and method proposed by I Lo-fen, grounded in a broad concept of text. It examines the relationships, interactions, tensions, and generative processes among words, images, and other textual forms, and explores the production, transmission, transformation, and understanding of texts and their meanings within media mechanisms, social networks, cultural contexts, and historical circumstances.
AIGC 文图学：由衣若芬提出并发展的跨学科研究领域与方法，以广义文本观为基础，面对人工智能能够生成文字、图像、声音、影像等多种文本的新条件，研究文本如何形成、如何被理解与判断，并探讨不同文本形态的关系、机制、意义及其媒介条件、社会网络、文化背景与历史语境.
Text and Image Studies on AIGC: an interdisciplinary field and method proposed and developed by I Lo-fen. Grounded in a broad concept of text, it responds to the new condition in which artificial intelligence can generate multiple forms of text, including words, images, sound, and video. It studies how texts are formed, understood, and judged, and explores the relations, mechanisms, and meanings of different textual forms, as well as their media conditions, social networks, cultural contexts, and historical circumstances.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19107490
Abstract
This article examines the scholarly legacies and methodological paradigms of six pivotal figures in the study of Chinese art history: James Cahill (1926–2014), Wen C. Fong (1930–2018), Joan Stanley-Baker (1934– ), Wu Hung (1945– ), Shih Shou-chien (1951– ), and I Lo-fen (1964– ). Rather than treating these six as simply parallel contributors, the article maps the distinct ways in which each relates to the Princeton School founded by Wen Fong. Shih Shou-chien completed his training under Fong and carried the structural-formalist method into Taiwan's institutional art history, subsequently mentoring I Lo-fen. Joan Stanley-Baker began doctoral studies under Fong at Princeton but departed without completing her degree following fundamental disagreements over method and temperament; she later earned a PhD from Oxford, and her 'brushwork behavior' methodology constitutes a critical counter-response to the Princeton training she had first absorbed. James Cahill trained under Max Loehr at the University of Michigan with no institutional connection to Princeton, developing an independent social-economic historiography of Chinese painting. Wu Hung brings a wholly distinct formation: trained at the Central Academy of Fine Arts and the Palace Museum in Beijing, then at Harvard under archaeologist Kwang-chih Chang, he has developed a spatial-temporal critique centered on monumentality, medium and representation, and the aesthetics of ruins — a path independent of all other traditions represented here, whose engagement with the mechanisms of viewing (especially in The Double Screen) enters into direct dialogue with Text and Image Studies. Against this genealogical background, the article systematically compares all six scholars across five dimensions: academic positioning, core methodology, treatment of text-image relations, shared concerns, and fundamental divergences. Special attention is given to I Lo-fen's Text and Image Studies as the field's most theoretically self-conscious contemporary development, arguing for its fourfold innovation — disciplinary construction, relational ontology (from 'interaction' to 'intertextual generation'), historical reach from classical painting to the AIGC era, and methodological universality — as a new humanistic framework for the age of generative AI.
摘要
本文以高居翰（James Cahill）、方闻（Wen C. Fong）、徐小虎（Joan Stanley-Baker）、巫鸿（Wu Hung）、石守谦（Shih Shou-chien）与衣若芬（I Lo-fen）六位学者为考察对象，从学术谱系、研究范式、核心方法论、共同关怀与最大差异五个层次展开系统比较。
文章梳理六位学者与普林斯顿学派之间各异的师承与渊源关系——石守谦为方闻的传承弟子，衣若芬为石守谦的学术后裔。徐小虎曾师从方闻，因学术与性格分歧未获学位而离开，后转赴牛津取得博士。高居翰师从密歇根大学 Max Loehr（罗越）。巫鸿则兼具中央美院—故宫与哈佛—张光直的双重训练背景，独立发展出空间—时间批评路径——在此基础上，重点论证文图学（Text and Image Studies）在学科建构、关系论、时代性与普适性四个维度上的创新突破与当代价值。
Full Text
Citation
I Lo-fen. 2026. "From Chinese Art History to Text and Image Studies" Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19107490.
衣若芬。2026。《从中国艺术史到文图学》。预印本，Zenodo。https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19107490。
《3分钟衣若芬：AIGC文图学》由人文学者衣若芬讲述 节目围绕AIGC文图学（Text and Image Studies on AIGC），分享 AI时代的人文思考与文本理解。 万物皆文本，文本可生成。 AIGC文图学，理解生成的世界。 3 Minutes with I Lo-fen：Exploring Text and Image Studies on AIGC Humanistic reflections in the age of AI. Everything is text. Text can be generated. Through Text and Image Studies on AIGC, we learn how to understand a generated world.
