剧场性概念是戏剧学和文艺理论的核心概念之一。对此概念中外戏剧学界有长期的探讨和争论。本文在汪余礼等人研究的基础上简要、全面地梳理西方语境下此概念的流变，尤其是20世纪后半叶。比较评述了较为重要，但在中文学界较少介绍的费哈尔、特隆斯塔德、韦伯等人对剧场性不同方向的定义。同时，也兼顾梳理了中文语境中的一些意义流变。厘清剧场性概念中最核心的问题：即符号学方法和自律美学的辩证统一。其次，本文从由小到大，由“内”到“外”四个方面对剧场性概念中的关键美学问题作出辨析：作为剧场艺术形式本身的性质、被划归为剧场的审美特征、被其他艺术门类“借用”的性质、相关人文学科中使用和借用的剧场性、人生和社会中普遍的性质。最后，用上述梳理和辨析的结果，讨论剧场性-文学性争论背后反映的实践问题，并得出解释性结论：本文认为，用文学性来规定剧场性是不恰当的。

 The concept of theatricality is one of the core notions of theatre studies and the theory of arts. It has been discussed and debated for a long time in Chinese and Western contexts. Drawing on the works of Wang Yuli and others, this article examines the evolution of this concept in the Western context, especially in the second half of the twentieth century. This article provides a comparative review of the definitions of theatricality from different perspectives by Josette Féral, Ragnhild Tronstad, Samuel Weber, etc., which are important but less introduced in Chinese. The most pivotal issue in the concept is the dialectical unification of semiotic methods and autonomic aesthetics. Then this article analyzes the notion in detail on four levels: first, theatricality as the categorical feature of theatre as art; second, theatricality as appeared in other art disciplines; third, theatricality as a notion in relevant humanities; fourth, theatricality as a term to describe the nature of life and society in general. Using these theoretical discussions to analyze the practical problems reflected by the theatrical-literary conflict, I argue that it is inappropriate to prescribe theatricality in literary terms.