陳奐，自碩甫，為乾嘉《詩經》古文學三大家之一，其《詩毛氏傳疏》與胡承珙《毛詩後箋》為詮釋毛《傳》著述中的雙璧，梁啟超更譽其為「疏體模範」。陳氏一生揅治經學，專守家法，尊崇古義，不滿鄭《箋》因「不分時代」，混同今古文經，又多「別下己意」，未能貼切詮釋毛義；而孔《疏》又「不尚專脩」，以鄭說毛，誤合毛、鄭，更是遠離毛義，強說《詩》旨；故採全面疏解《毛詩詁訓傳》的方式，以證成毛氏《詩》說。本文以陳氏所著《傳疏》、《毛詩說》、《毛詩音》等著述為主要考察範圍，首先探討陳氏對假借的定義；其次疏通陳氏藉以表示假借關係的術語；最後釐析陳氏所說的各個假借類型，並由上述的分析，紬繹出陳奐的假借條件。試圖透過上述諸點的討論，蠡測陳奐假借說的實質內涵。

Chen Huan, also known as Shuo-pu, was one of three main writers for The book of Songs. His “Shi Mao Shi Chuan Shu” and Hu Cheng-hong's “Mao Shi Hou Jian” were considered two masterpieces in interpreting Ma's “Chuan Shu”. Liang Chi-chao was regarded as the “model for Shu Ti”. Chen devoted his whole life to study while following the norms and holding respect for ancient principles. He felt that Cheng's “Jian” did not differentiate the era, and was mixed up with the ancient books and unable to interpret Mao's connotation accurately, and found Kong's “Shu” did not fit the cultivation, and interpreted based on Cheng's wrong interpretation, thus, even less accurate. Therefore, he wrote “Scholium for Mao's Poetry”. This studied reviewed Chen's “Chuan Shu”, “Mao Shi Shuo”, and “Mao Shi Yin”. discussed the definition of “borrowing”by Chen, and clarified types of “borrowing” stated by Chen. Based on the above analysis, this study organized the “borrowing” conditions of Chen and attempted to find out about the substantial content of Chen's “borrowing”.