劉勰云；「文辭之有諧讔，譬九流之有小說」(<諧讔>)；，小說家在目錄學上雖不入九流之列，但總算躋身十家之中；而劉勰把<諧讔>列為「論文」之末，已有文體辨析的概念；「諧讔」之在文辭，猶如小說家之在九流；然則，「諧讔」與小說之間的關係，便不言可喻了。「諧讔」在文辭上與「雜文」一般，為「文章之枝派」，雖是小道末流，但聖賢也不輕忽它。小說在班固時代，已是文體專名，列在子部，而構成小說的某些元素，則早在先秦時即已產生；神話、傳說、寓言、民間故事中的奇情異想；以及歷史著作中某些虛構的成分及細膩的鋪陳，如《左傳》中那些文情洋溢、引人入勝的細節描寫等都是。可是當時「小說」僅是貶意的泛稱，人們並沒有意識到這些元素與小說文體之間的相通性，自然不曾予以抽象地概括或命名，因此，小說之「名」與小說之「實」，產生錯位的現象，此種情況經過漫長時間的孕育，一直到清末民初，小說概念的演化才算大致完成。本文旨在論證從《文心雕龍》的文原論和文體論中，已可看出劉勰對小說之「名」與小說之「實」的認知；<序志>篇云：「酌乎緯，變乎騷」，認為酌取《緯書》的「事豐辭富」，可作為文學創作的張本；而辨別<屈騷>的「異乎經典」所在，欣賞其「自鑄偉辭」，更可得到無窮的沾溉；劉勰開宗明義即昭示我們要正視文學多樣化的特質。劉勰的文體論，雖是文、筆兩分，但僅以有韻、無韻作為區分的標準，他認為「經」「史」「子」都是「文」，這種文、筆無間的特識，有利於小說的發展，而在文體論中，也可析論出許多小說文體的元素。如<論說>篇中的「說」體，對後世小說有極大的啟發與參考價值；其他如<諸子>的「踳駁」、「鴻洞虛誕」；<史傳>的「愛奇」、「穿鑿傍說」；辭賦的「夸麗」；<諧讔>的「本體不雅」；<雜文>的「飛靡弄巧」，劉勰都標舉依經附聖的最高指導原則批判它們，但另一方面卻從文學的視角客觀地賞析它們，以不少的篇幅論述「夸誕」、「奇詭」、「瓌麗」等小說文體元素，肯定其有助於文學的創作，提昇作品的生命力。劉勰從文學的高度全面而深入的觀察問題，剖析問題，提出完整的思想體系，這種折衷古今的卓越眼光，為我國文學找到大本大源，開示後學可資依循的康莊大道，尊稱其為文學思想家，的確是實至名歸。劉勰對小說文體及其內涵的認知，在當時已是難能可貴，雖然還未曾把小說之「名」與小說之「實」連貫起來，結合成純文學意義的小說，換言之，對「小說」這文體的概念仍是明而未融；但他別具隻眼的見識，選精拔萃，整紛理蠹的文論，已足啟導後學窮畢生之力鑽研。

The distinguishing feature of Liu Hsieh’s “The Theory of Genres” in Wen Hsin Tiao Lung (The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons) is to include articles with and without rhymes in the literary field. At this rate, the classics, histories and biographies are all literary works. It provides immense space for the development of later fiction. Thus successors can absorb nutrition from the classics, histories and biographies to proceed with fiction-writing. In Liu Hsieh’s “The Origin of Literature”, he allocates two chapters, “Rectifying Latitude” and “Distinguishing Lisao”, to compliment the fantastic imagination of books on divination and to affirm the figures of speech in Chu Yuan’s “Lisao”. In various chapters of “The Theory of Genres”, embellishment of certain histories and biographies, exaggeration of the thinkers’ prose, and elegance of the poetic works are affirmed from the perspective of literature. The aforementioned factors happen to be the characteristics of literary fiction. Fiction as a genre was established in the Han dynasty by Ban Gu. It was listed along with the thinkers’ prose. At that time, it was not combined with the nonexistent contents of literary fiction. But early in the Pre-Qin dynasty, mythology, fable, legend, story and the description of some fictitious elements and details in “Zuo Zhuan” had contained the emerging factors of fiction. “The Theory of Styles” in Wen Hsin Tiao Lung includes a genre called “Burlesque” which the author Liu Hsieh compares to fiction author as the latter is classified in “the nine schools and ten professionals”. It has the concept of genre distinction and analysis. A variety of chapters in “The Theory of Genres”, such as “Argumentation”, “Historical Biographies”, “Thinkers’ Prose”, “Interpretive Poesy”, “Essay” and “Burlesque”, all refer to the attribution of literary fiction.From the pro-classic stance, Liu Hsieh criticizes innovation, absurdity, exaggeration and elegance as they do not conform to the classic genres. Nevertheless, he endorses their artistic achievement from the literary perspective. This article aims to illustrate the exclusive knowledge of “Rectifying Latitude” and “Distinguishing Lisao” in Wen Hsin Tiao Lung. It also elaborates on the fiction-related imagination, exaggeration, absurdity and elegance in “Argumentation”, “Historical Biographies”, “Thinkers’ Prose”, “Interpretive Poesy”, “Essay” and “Burlesque” in “The Theory of Genres” so as to demonstrate Liu Hsieh’s excellent vision which compromises the past and the present. He was indeed an outstanding literary thinker. In the early 20th century, fiction, after having been cultivated for a long period of time finally, in the sense of pure literature, reached the state in which the name and the reality of fiction were in complete accord.