二十世紀初歷經五四新文學運動及狂飊奮進的二0 年代，在胡適、顧頡剛等學者鼓吹之下，去《序》廢經、疑古辨偽、引進新的學術研究方法，以及用白話文書寫，已成為《詩經》研究的新趨勢。吳闓生《詩義會通》成書於1927 年，適逢此《詩經》研究變動時代，但仍尊《序》，並用桐城古文義法詮釋《詩經》，可謂其中異數。本文從吳闓生生平事蹟與著述、新文學運動至二0年代的學術思潮與詮詩特點、《詩義會通》的版本與體例、《詩義會通》的詮《詩》觀點、《詩義會通》的撰寫特色、以文學說《詩》、《詩義會通》的局限與缺失等七個面向，全面探討這部被批評為保守派的《詩經》研究論著。研究結果提出《詩義會通》具有包容漢宋、注重字詞訓解、注重異文、會通眾說等小學經學上的優點。此外它的最大特色是發揮桐城義法，精闢詮釋《詩經》的文章學、篇章語言學、文藝風格學，對《詩經》的文筆、風格、體式、意境、結構、修辭等審美層面，作出欣賞範式。在變動時代的《詩經》研究中仍不失為一部參驗舊文，抒所獨得，發掘《詩經》文學價值的獨特之作。正因為它既不違背傳統經學說詩，又要從桐城古文義法發掘《詩經》的文學價值，有時難免出現游移其間的態度，反而更具鮮明的時代色彩，是傳統《詩經》詮釋過渡到現代的橋樑。

After the May Fourth New Literature Movement and the stormy years of 20s in the early 20th century, scholarly researches on the Book of Ode could not remain the same. New approaches were set forth by Hu Shi, Gu Jie-gang, and others, who heralded the use of vernacular language and new research methods, and launched campaigns such as “abrogating classics and the teachings of the Preface of the Book of Ode ,” and “questioning antiquities and identifying falsities.” Written somehow against this new current in 1927 and dubbed conservative, Wu Kai-sheng’s Shi-yi Hui-tong （詩義會通） held onto the doctrine of the Preface and reinterpreted the Book of Ode in terms of the compositional principle of the Tongcheng School. This paper provides a complete evaluation of Shi-yi Hui-tong by bringing into consideration Wu’s biographical data, his other publications, the academic situation, and the trends of thought in his time. The paper also investigates variant edition of the book and its principle of compilation, elucidates its literary hermeneutic of the Book of Ode,and the characteristic and limitation of its research perspective. The study reveals that Shi-yi Hui-tong writes in the tradition of the Han and the Song scholarship of the classics and philological studies, and therefore makes quality contributions in its heed to lexical interpretation and textual variations, and its integration of various strands of comment. The genuine achievement of Shi-yi Hui-tong, moreover, lies in its explication of the Book of Ode in terms of the literary principle of the Tongcheng School. By looking into the compositional, the linguistic and the literary aspects of the Book of Ode, Wu highlights its rhetoric, form, style and structure, setting an example of aesthetic approach to the classic. Among the contemporary attempts to provide new readings of the Book of Ode, Shi-yi Hui-tong stands out as one that sheds new lights to the literary value of the classic by blending the approach of the Tongcheng School with an otherwise traditional hermene tic. There are ambiguities in Wu’s attitude toward the two lines of approach that he combines, but that only reflects all the more truthfully the cultural situation of his time, a time when even the hermeneutic of the Book of Ode needs to find its ways to the modern.