借鑑歷史學的說法，能進入歷史論述中的任何事件，皆具某種程度的「新異性」 (novelty)；一般《中國文學批評史》均會提及的明代「詩學盛唐」觀念自不應例外。弔詭的是，這類著作對明人觀念「新異性」之所在竟都隻字未言。 本文即擬為此稍作補白。首先，檢討現行的研究成果及其方法，以調整重新論述的策略。在此基礎上，解析明人對嚴羽的各項評論，指出他們甚為關注嚴羽在「理論」與「實踐」兩端的分裂問題，並深刻地省察如何去履踐早經嚴羽提出的「詩學盛唐」觀念，當中實涉及一種探求「理論實效」的思維。後績，則進一步研討明人如何回應這個「理論實效」的問題，同時逐漸凸顯「法」與「悟」的辯證思考，而成為明代「詩學盛唐」觀念之「新異性」所在。

This study explores the “novelty” of a concept popular in the Ming dynasty that “High Tang poetry is the poetry to learn.” First of all, a review of current research and methods used is conducted. This is to ensure the methods used in this paper are unique. Next, analysis of Ming scholar’s critiques on Yan Yu 嚴羽 are presented, including the discovery that many critics took note of discrepancies between his “theory” and “practice.” Discussion by these scholars on how to put into practice Yan's theory that “High Tang poetry is the poetry to learn” reveals distinct thought on the practicality of theories. This study also discusses how Ming scholars responded to this problem of “implementation.” The novelty of this concept is found in the fact that the implementation problem gradually evolved into a difference of imitation and enlightenment.