本文旨在發現歐文．拉鐵摩爾的邊疆研究，和後冷戰中英文世界從事拉鐵摩爾研究的研究者們，兩者之間彼此敘事出現的扞格關係。文中首先簡介拉鐵摩爾生平如何處於其自認的邊疆位置，進而整理他研究生涯如何運用其邊疆敘事方法研究中國及其內亞邊疆的歷史，以及對政治時局的分析。隨後透過筆者自身相關的經驗為例，嘗試提煉出拉鐵摩爾理解世界的邊疆敘事方法模型，並分析在後冷戰語境裡，中英文世界研究拉鐵摩爾的文獻之間存在的敘事特徵。最後比較拉鐵摩爾的邊疆敘事方法模型與後冷戰下的拉鐵摩爾研究文獻，兩者之間的敘事區別。通過本文，作者對映拉鐵摩爾的邊疆敘事，與後冷戰中英文語境間通過拉鐵摩爾研究，研究者們如何闡釋其各自的關懷，提供讀者於今天對拉鐵摩爾的邊疆世界觀一種理解可能。

This paper aims to discover the discourse relationship between Owen Lattimore’s frontier studies and the researchers engaging in Lattimore's studies in the post-Cold War Chinese and English world. At the start, it introduces how Lattimore is in the frontier position he considers to remain in his life. Then sorts out how he used his frontier discourse to explore the history of China, the frontiers of Inner Asia in his research career, and analyze the political situation. Second, it tries to extract Lattimore's frontier approach through his own experience. Third, it analyzes the discourse features existing in the research literature of Lattimore in the Chinese and English world in the post-Cold War context. Finally, it compares the discourse differences between Lattimore's frontier approach and Lattimore's research literature under the post-Cold War. This paper examines how researchers interpret their respective concerns through the frontier discourse of Lattimore and provides readers with a way of understanding Lattimore's frontier worldview.