本文嘗試重新檢視近代詞學家顧隨與王國維的詞學傳承關係。近年來，大陸詞學界頗有將王國維、顧隨、葉嘉瑩三人，視為相沿而日漸完備的師承關係；葉嘉瑩師承顧隨，固無疑慮，然本文則希望釐清顧隨的詞學論述對於王國維是否具備嚴格的「傳承」意義，故針對學者提出的顧隨「高致說」做一分辨。本文之〈一•前人研究述略與問題的提出〉先梳理前人研究與論述，指出目前學界的一般認識：顧隨的詞學理論以「高致說」為主，「高致說」與王國維「境界說」有關，然比「境界說」更加完善。本文之〈二•境界與高致：《人間詞話》與顧隨的解讀〉辨析釐清王國維《人間詞話》中，關於「境界」與「高致」的意義與關係，指出：研究顧隨的學者，在「建立高致說」的前提下，對王國維詞學的有所未明，也並不符合顧隨所理解的王國維。本文之〈三•顧隨「高致」的理論與實踐〉進一步論析顧隨兩《詞說》中提出「高致」的論述脈絡與批評實踐，指出：顧隨提出「高致」的立論層次，沒有超越王國維的「境界說」；實際考察《稼軒詞說》與《東坡詞說》之內容，可發現顧隨並未意圖將「高致」發展為具有普遍性的理論。最後則探討《稼軒詞說》與《東坡詞說》之重點與創發，實在於分判蘇、辛異同，闡明其特色，並與顧隨講學之精神相互呼應。

This article analyses the relationship between Gu Sui(1897-1960) and Wang Guowei(1877-1927), especially focuses on Gu Sui’s theory of Gaozhi. Although many scholars believed that the theory of Gaozhi is what Gu sui went beyond Wang Guowei’s theory of Jingjie in the field of Ci criticism, the major argument of this article is that there is no independent theoretical use of Gaozhi in Gu’s Ci criticism practice. This proposition will be show in the following two analytical approaches. Firstly, this article examines a few Ci criticism terms which had been considered as not-fully-established in Wang Guowei’s theory of Jingjie but bettered in Gu’s theory. The analysis will show that these terms, instead of being drawbacks of Wang Guowei, were exactly what Gu sui had agreed and inherited from Wang's Comments on Ci potery (人間詞話). Secondly, this article analyses the practice of the term ＂Gaozhi＂ in the Comments on Su, Xin Ci potery (蘇辛詞說) written by Gu Sui. The observation indicates that Gu did not intend to use ＂Gaozhi＂ to replace the term ＂Jingjie＂, but broadened the the meaning of Gaozhi and thus made it close to Wang Guowei's using of Jingjie. In sum, many think that Gu’s theory of Gaozhi complemented Wang's theory of Jingjie. By contrast, this article is rather skeptical and aim to point out that we should not confuse Wang Guowei’s widespread influence over Ci criticism in the 20^(th) Century with a master-apprentice relationship.