五四時期新文化運動代表的大致是「新」、「西」、「現代」、「進步」等話語論述，如胡適提出「評判的態度」、「重新估定一切價值」，另一方面則介紹西洋新思想、新學術、新文學及新信仰。與之相對立的，是被視為「文化保守主義」的林紓、嚴復、章士釗以及《學衡》雜誌等。這些所謂的「文化保守分子」在思想史及文學史上，往往被視為違抗歷史潮流，蔑視歷史社會文化的新趨勢，試圖回歸傳統，因而他們在歷史評價上是負面的。 　　《學衡》在發刊詞中，提出「頌述先哲之精言以翼學」作為雜誌宗旨。但是他們批評新文化運動，並非只是回到過去，而是展現一極為複雜的歷史觀及傳統觀。在其反對新文化運動的言詞中，往往援引西方古典主義的觀點，來反駁新文化運動派以浪漫主義為理論依據的言論，並希冀結合中西文化精華，為中國文化尋求一出路。因而「學衡派」與「新文化運動派」之爭，不能簡單地以所謂新∕舊、中∕西、現代∕傳統之爭看待，毋寧更是一種權力關係的「話語權勢」之爭。兩派陣營在相當大幅度上有一種糾纏弔詭的對話關係。此一面向在對「文化保守主義」的研究上，是值得深入探討的。本文討論學衡派的支柱人物吳宓的思想發展，以及其與新文化運動之關聯，期能更深刻地掌握民初的思想發展。

The central tenets of the New Culture movement can be subsumed under the ideas of “new,” “West,” “modern,” and “progress.” Hu Shi, for instance, adopted a “critical attitude” and the concept of “transvaluation” to evaluate the Chinese tradition, on the one hand, and introduced Western thoughts, literature, and perspectives on the other hand. In opposition to the New Culture movement, however, were such famous men of letters as Lin Shu, Yan Fu, Zhang Shizhao, as well as the members of Critical Quarterly, who have been labeled “cultural conservatives.” These people have been dismissed as going against the current of their times and trying to revive tradition. 　　Even though the Critical Quarterly proclaimed that it would appraise the best ideas of previous thinkers to fully develop Chinese learning, the proponents of this quarterly consistently used the ideas of Western classicism to criticize the romantic stance adopted by the New Culture movement. What they wanted was a combination and merging of Western and Chinese cultures to form a new kind of syncretic culture that could serve China. Their thought was in fact an important part of the early Republican intellectual scene, and we should not quickly forget them.