朱东润对中国文学批评史的研究在内容、方式上都和同时期的其他研究者不同。朱东润秉着客观的分析态度，对研究内容进行了拓展和创新，在研究著作的撰写上采取了独特的“传记式”写法和“远略近详”的布局方式。朱东润的研究拓宽了中国文学批评史的研究视野和研究领域，在中国文学批评研究学术史上有着重要的地位和价值。

ZhuDongrun’shistoryofChineseliterarycriticismstudyisdifferentfromotherresearchersincontentandmethods.ZhuDongrunperseveresw ithobjectiveanalysisattitudeandhebroadensthefieldofhistoryofChineseliterarycriticism.InZhuDongrun’swriting,hetakesamethodofbiographicalwriti nganda“yuanlvjinxiang”layout.ZhuDongrun’shistoryofChineseliterarycriticismstudybroadenthehorizonandthefieldofhistoryofChineseliterarycriti cism,hisstudyhasanimportantstatusandvalueintheacademichistoryofChineseliterarycriticism.

内容院通过对朱东润主编叶中国历代文学作品选曳与姚鼐叶古文辞类纂曳中所选的唐宋古文进行随机抽样做定量分析,我们发现院宋代古文在句子长度上比唐代古文多约1个字,每百字所使用的语气虚词比唐代古文多1.17个字曰在篇幅上,宋代赠序比唐代多约20个字,墓志则比唐代多300字以上遥这一定量分析的结果证实了古文确实是唐野瘦冶宋野肥冶遥在此基础上,我们从三个方面分析了唐、宋古文风格上的差异,并对明代散文艺术形式上的演变及其复杂生态进行了一定程度的解释.

@@@@After a quantitative analysis of classical prose from Zhu Dongrun’s Selected Literary Works from the Chinese Dynasties and Yao Nai’s Selected Classical Prose with Categories, we can reveal that the sentence length in classical prose of the Song dynasty is averagely one word longer than that of the Tang dynasty, that in every 100 words there are 1.17 more function words of mood in classical prose of the Song dynasty than in that of Tang dynasty, and that there are 20 more words in the a gift-preface of prose in the Song dynasty than in the Tang dynasty and 300 more words in a epitaph in the Song dynasty than in the Tang dynasty. The phenomenon of the“thin”of classical prose in the Tang Dynasty and the“fat”of classical prose in the Song dynasty is confirmed by the quantitative analysis. Accordingly, we make a stylistic and artistic analysis from three aspects on the differences between the classical prose of the Tang dynasty and the Song dynasty, and provide an explan