在台灣文學史的論述裡，黃得時被視為「先行者」，他也是在殖民時期討論台灣文學史應該如何寫的學者、創作者。他對文學史的關懷，是自覺而且持久的，他的「台灣文學史」的論述範疇，橫跨古典、現代文學；於台灣古典文學的部分，迄今無人得與爭鋒。本文便以其台灣古典文學史論述所呈現的意義與問題為關懷，追跡黃得時的論述脈絡，以及其隨筆所載列的相關意見，主要參照韋勒克對文學史書寫的觀點加以梳理，說明他如何根據重層土著化的原則，以民族主義與場域概念去建構他的台灣文學範疇論，此一建構如何呈現在他詮釋作家作品時所使用的修辭與敘事。接著，本文並檢視論者對黃得時的古典文學史論述承襲連橫、何以未完的看法，提出若干新解，聊供後來者參考。

In the field of Taiwanese Literary history, Huang De-shi has been seen as a pioneer, an innovator, and one of the first scholars of the colonial era to question how the history of Taiwanese literature ought best be written. His concern for literary history was self-conscious and ongoing, and thus the discursive parameters of his ＂history of Taiwanese literature＂ encompassed both the classical and the contemporary periods. To this day, no one has surpassed his treatment of the classical era of Taiwan's literature. This paper seeks to uncover the overall discursive structure of Huang's research through an examination of the ideas and interrogations inherent in his treatment of classical Taiwanese literary history. Related opinions found in his journals will also be considered, especially with reference to René Wellek's (1903-1995) views on the writing of literary history. The intention is to discover how Huang applied principles of multi-layered localism, nationalism, and Pierre Bourdieu's (1930-2002) concept of “field”(champs) to construct his category theory of Taiwanese literature. This in turn helps establish the rhetorical and narrative devices that he employed in explicating the works of various authors. This article also tries to shed new light on a number of issues, such as why he was not able to finish his writing of Taiwanese literary history, and whether it is true that he plagiarized his contemporary, Lian heng's ideas in his discussion of classical literary history.