近代西方的"治外法權"概念由外交豁免權與領事裁判權兩種性質有別的域外司法管轄權組合而成。這一矛盾含混的內涵結構及其在日常使用中后者遮蔽前者的語用強勢,導致中國知識精英有關認知的長期分歧;而中日漢字構詞習慣的差異,又曾一度引發國人對"治外法權"的誤讀。清末時,即有人試圖將"治外法權"兩層矛盾含義予以分離,甚至加以對立,寧愿選擇以"領事裁判權"來明確指代列強在華司法特權,以避免含混的"治外法權"名義。北洋后期特別是國民政府時期,此一認知傾向經由政府提倡和實踐,得到進一步強化。但抗戰全面爆發后,又因故出現某種逆轉。盡管存在認知分歧,"治外法權"由領事裁判權所代表的不平等的司法特權內涵,卻一直主導著社會上的傳播。作為一種概念工具,"治外法權"在清末主要被用于喚起危亡意識、鼓吹變法維新,有效充當了效法西方和日本的改革輿論之話語組件;五四運動及其后,則成為帝國主義罪惡的象征符號和動員國人進行反帝斗爭的話語武器。

The Western modern concept of"extraterritoriality"consists of two distinctive rights,namely diplomatic immunity and consular jurisdiction. In the daily usage of this term, the latter often overshadowed the former and led to the misunderstanding of this concept among the Chinese educated elites. In the late Qing period,some tried to separate the two meanings of extraterritoriality and chose"consular jurisdiction"to refer to the judicial privilege that the Powers enjoyed in China. This trend was reinforced in the late Beiyang period and the Nanjing nationalist government. However,in public media,the meaning of consular jurisdiction always dominated the popular understanding of this concept. As a conceptual tool,"extraterritoriality"was used to appeal to people’s passion for national survival and advocate the political reform in late Qing. During and after the May Fourth Movement,it also became the symbol of evil imperialism and the discursive weapon to mobilize the masses to join in the anti-imperialist movements.