All poems

春秋春秋 · 文 Prose

烛之武退秦师

Zhu Zhiwu Dissuades the Qin Army

左丘明

Zuo Qiuming

名篇Masterpiece 史传Historical narrative 外交辞令Diplomatic rhetoric 智谋Strategic wisdom

晋侯、秦伯围郑，以其无礼于晋，且贰于楚也。
晋军函陵，秦军氾南。
佚之狐言于郑伯曰：国危矣，若使烛之武见秦君，师必退。
公从之。

The Marquis of Jin and the Earl of Qin besieged Zheng, because Zheng had been discourteous to Jin and moreover was disloyal to Jin in favoring Chu. The Jin army camped at Hanling, the Qin army at the south of the Fan River. Yi Zhi Hu said to the Lord of Zheng: 'The state is in peril; if you send Zhu Zhiwu to see the ruler of Qin, the army will surely withdraw.' The duke followed his counsel.

Listen

Meaning

This excerpt from the Zuo Zhuan narrates the opening of the famous episode in which Zheng, besieged by a Jin–Qin alliance, finds rescue through the counsel of the official Yi Zhi Hu. In a few taut sentences it establishes the crisis, the troop dispositions, and the identification of the man whose eloquence will later dissolve the coalition—showcasing the historian's gift for compression and suspense.

晋文公、秦穆公联合出兵围攻郑国，是因为郑国曾经对晋文公无礼，而且对晋国怀有二心、倒向楚国。晋军驻扎在函陵，秦军驻扎在氾水南岸。佚之狐对郑伯说：国家危急了，如果派烛之武去拜见秦君，秦军一定会撤退。郑伯听从了他的建议。

Appreciation

[Plain Paraphrase] The passage tells how Jin and Qin besieged Zheng, why, where their armies camped, and how Yi Zhi Hu advised the Zheng lord to send Zhu Zhiwu, predicting the Qin army would withdraw. [Structure] In four layers—cause of siege, troop placement, recommendation of talent, acceptance of advice—the historian compresses a vast situation into minimal strokes; dialogue alone drives the plot. [Technique] Zuo Qiuming withholds explicit praise, yet judgment emerges from the narration itself. Yi Zhi Hu's single line both names the crisis and introduces the hero, setting up the later triumph of words over arms. [Significance] As the prelude to 'dissuading the Qin army,' the passage already displays the classic 'narrative in miniature' art of the Zuo Zhuan.

【白话串讲】左丘明写《烛之武退秦师》：晋国和秦国围攻郑国。郑国派烛之武去劝说秦伯。烛之武说：“越国以鄙远，君知其难也”——灭了郑国对秦国没有好处。“若不阙秦，将焉取之”——“阙秦以利晋，唯君图之”——秦伯听后撤军。烛之武凭一张嘴退了秦师。【意象与手法】此段属于《左传》典型的「缩千里于尺幅」式叙事：围郑之由、驻军之地、荐贤之语、从谏之行，四层信息以极俭笔墨一气写尽。对话是推动情节的唯一引擎，佚之狐的一句话既点出危局，又引出主角；史家不置一赞，而褒贬自见于叙述之中。【情感与主旨】表面写的是军国大事的危局，骨子里褒扬的是烛之武的才智与佚之狐、郑伯的用人之明，暗含《左传》「国之将兴，必有忠智之士」的史鉴精神。【名句点睛】常考「若使烛之武见秦君，师必退」——一句预言式的举荐，既是全篇叙事枢纽，也预先揭示下文以言退兵的奇局。

Background

This passage is excerpted from the Zuo Zhuan (Duke Xi, year 30), one of the most celebrated diplomatic episodes in the Spring and Autumn annals. The Zuo Zhuan is traditionally attributed to the Lu historian Zuo Qiuming and was completed in the early Warring States period; it narrates the twelve reigns of Lu with meticulous, dignified prose and is revered as the ancestor of narrative literature. The event dates to 630 BCE: Duke Wen of Jin, who had been poorly received by Zheng during his exile, joined Duke Mu of Qin to punish Zheng, which had also tilted toward Chu after the Battle of Chengpu. The excerpt forms the prologue—establishing the casus belli, the deployment, and the recommendation that sets the famous persuasion in motion.

本文节选自《左传·僖公三十年》，是春秋编年体史书中最负盛名的外交名篇之一。《左传》相传为鲁国史官左丘明所作，成书于战国前期，以鲁国十二公为经、以诸侯各国史事为纬，叙事详赡而笔法谨严，被后世尊为「叙事之宗」。《烛之武退秦师》所叙之事在鲁僖公三十年（公元前630年）：晋文公重耳早年流亡十九年，途经郑国时郑文公未以礼相待；城濮之战（前632年）晋胜楚后，郑国又暗中倾向楚国，故晋国兴师问罪。值得注意的是，晋文公联合秦穆公围郑，秦晋之间本是姻亲同盟（史称「秦晋之好」），而烛之武正是利用秦晋之间的潜在矛盾，以「阙秦以利晋」挑拨两国关系，使秦穆公欣然退兵，晋国亦因孤掌难鸣而撤围。这一段是全文的序幕：交代围郑的缘由（无礼于晋、贰于楚）、兵力部署（晋军函陵、秦军氾南）、荐贤与纳谏（佚之狐荐烛之武、郑伯从之），把「山雨欲来」的危局写得紧凑而富悬念。战国诸子与史传多借外交辞令展现智慧，此篇与《曹刿论战》《晏子使楚》等同列，皆以短章写大智慧，是先秦散文「言约而意丰」的典范。

Art

The passage exemplifies the Zuo Zhuan's art of 'commanding the complex through simplicity, establishing character through speech.' [Compression] The cause of siege is given in one clause ('discourteous to Jin and disloyal in favoring Chu'); the two armies' positions in eight characters—no battle array described, yet the situation is clear, and the split deployment hints at a fissure Zhu Zhiwu will exploit. [Character through brevity] Yi Zhi Hu's insight ('the state is in peril… the army will surely withdraw') displays his discernment in three short phrases, while the duke's 'followed his counsel' is clean and decisive; the hero Zhu Zhiwu is evoked but not yet shown, creating suspense. [Language] Words like 贰 (disloyalty), 围 (besiege), 军 (to camp) carry immense weight; the parallel 'Jin army at Hanling, Qin army south of Fan' has the orderliness of a battle line. Dialogue is the skeleton; the progression 'crisis—summon the man—he appears' is classic suspense-building.

此段充分体现《左传》的叙事艺术，可概括为「以简驭繁、以言立人」。其一，叙事裁剪极精：围郑之由只用「以其无礼于晋，且贰于楚也」两句交代，驻军只用「晋军函陵，秦军氾南」八个字分写两军位置，不铺陈战阵而局势自明，暗含两军分驻、郑人可乘间用计的伏笔。其二，详略安排极妙：本段详写的是「人」——佚之狐的识人之明（「国危矣」三字先张其势，「师必退」三字再立其信），郑伯的从善如流（「公从之」三字干净利落），而主角烛之武此时尚未露面，只以「若使烛之武见秦君」一句虚写引出，悬念陡生。其三，语言极简而表现力极强：「贰」字写郑之离心，「围」字写形势之迫，「军」字名词用作动词写驻军，一字千金；「晋侯、秦伯」并举，见出两国联军之势；「氾南」与「函陵」对举成文，句式整齐而有兵阵之象。其四，全文以对话为骨：佚之狐一言定策，郑伯一言从之，为后文烛之武的长篇说辞作了最好的铺垫——先写「无人能退」的困境与「有人可退」的慧眼，再写烛之武的出场，章法上「蓄势—点将—登场」三阶递进，是叙事文学中设置悬念的经典范式。

Allusions

'Discourteous to Jin' recalls Duke Wen of Jin's nineteen-year exile: passing Zheng, its lord gave him no ritual welcome—a slight now avenged. 'Disloyal to Chu' points to the post-Chengpu diplomatic landscape where small states wavered between powers, a recurrent Spring and Autumn motif. The geography—Hanling north of Zheng, Fan River south—forms a pincer, yet the separation of Qin (south) and Jin (north) also conveniently explains how Zhu Zhiwu could reach the Qin camp by night. Yi Zhi Hu's recommendation reflects the era's ideal of 'in peril, seek the worthy minister.' The prophetic 'the army will surely withdraw' anticipates the later fiction and drama trope of 'the strategist's one word decides the realm,' marking this passage as a progenitor of Chinese narrative literature.

此段涉及的历史典故与语汇源流颇为深厚。其一，「无礼于晋」暗含晋文公重耳流亡十九年的旧事：重耳过郑，郑文公不礼，郑大夫叔詹谏曰「晋公子有三焉，天其或者将建诸」，郑伯不听，遂种下今日围郑之因；此典在《左传》僖公二十三年已有交代，前后照应，正是编年史书「事具前篇、语约后篇」的笔法。其二，「贰于楚」点出城濮之战后的外交格局：晋胜楚而郑贰于楚，实为小国在两强之间摇摆求生的常态，《左传》屡书「贰于晋」「贰于楚」，已成春秋外交的习用语，读者从中可见当时「礼崩乐坏、诸侯力政」的时代背景。其三，「晋军函陵，秦军氾南」的地理意象：函陵在今河南新郑北，氾南在氾水之南，两军分驻郑国东西两侧，形成钳形合围，而秦军在南、晋军在北，也为下文烛之武夜缒出城、直入秦营的地理便利埋下伏笔。其四，佚之狐荐贤之举，体现春秋时期「国有难，思良臣」的文化传统，与《国语》所载贤臣辅国的故事同调。此外，「师必退」的预言式表达，开后世小说戏曲「军师一语定乾坤」的先声，可见此段不仅是史，更是后世叙事文学的祖型。

Commentary

Long a required masterpiece of pre-Qin prose, the episode is prized for both literary and moral value. Wu Chucai and Wu Diaohou included it in the Guwen Guanzhi, praising the Zuo Zhuan's 'excellence of narration and beauty of rhetoric.' Liu Xizai called the Zuo Zhuan 'the ancestor of a hundred generations' prose,' and this section especially shows 'narrative skill and rhetorical grace.' Ideologically it celebrates Zhu Zhiwu's solitary wisdom saving a state, embodying the Spring and Autumn esteem for 'strategic wisdom' and diplomacy; Yi Zhi Hu's recommendation and the duke's acceptance model 'wise use of talent.' As the prologue, its 'building suspense' is often praised: 'without writing one word about Zhu Zhiwu, his spirit already appears.' A staple of textbooks, it makes Zhu a household name of intellect.

《烛之武退秦师》历来是先秦散文的必读名篇，其文学价值与思想价值均极可观。文学上，此文被清人吴楚材、吴调侯编入《古文观止》卷一，与《郑伯克段于鄢》《曹刿论战》并列，成为天下士人研习《左传》笔法的入门津梁；清人刘熙载《艺概》谓《左传》「百世文章之祖」，烛之武一节尤见「叙事之工、辞令之美」。思想上，文章高度褒扬烛之武以一人之智解一国之厄的壮举，集中体现了春秋时期「尚智」的文化精神与纵横捭阖的外交艺术；佚之狐的荐贤、郑伯的纳谏，也被后世视为「用人之明」的政治典范。此段作为全文序幕，其「蓄势」之功常为论者称道：清代评点家赞其「不写烛之武一字，而烛之武精神已见」。在教学与传播史上，此文长期入选中学语文教材，其「以言退兵」的奇局、「夜缒而出」的细节，使烛之武成为家喻户晓的智士形象；「秦晋之好」「图穷匕见」等典故虽另有所出，而此文所写的秦晋离合，恰是理解战国合纵连横之前奏的关键史料。一篇六百字的短文，集史笔、文笔、哲理于一身，足称先秦叙事散文的压卷之作。

Prosody

Form Pre-Qin annalistic historical prose (Zuo Zhuan narrative)先秦编年体史传散文（《左传》叙事文字）

Rhyme This is unrhymed prose with strong rhythm: four-character phrases dominate (Jin marquis Qin earl; Jin army Hanling; Qin army Fan south; 'the state is in peril'), interspersed with longer clauses, and three short bursts ('peril,' 'withdraw,' 'followed') strike like metal—a slow-fast-slow-fast beat.本段为散体叙事，不押韵，而节奏感极强：以四言为主干（晋侯秦伯、晋军函陵、秦军氾南、国危矣哉），间以长短句（以其无礼于晋，且贰于楚也），三处短句（国危矣、师必退、公从之）如金石相击，形成「缓—急—缓—急」的节拍变化。句尾虚字「也」「矣」「曰」交替，语势顿挫。

Tone pattern Parallel and loose phrases alternate: 'Jin army at Hanling, Qin army south of Fan' is a balanced couplet like a battle array, while 'discourteous to Jin and disloyal to Chu' flows freely. Speech is urgent and short; narration is stately—the tone shifts from calm to tense as the plot quickens.句式上骈散相间：「晋军函陵，秦军氾南」两句对偶如阵；「以其无礼于晋，且贰于楚也」则散行纡徐。对话语（佚之狐言）以短句促节出之，叙事语以整句舒缓出之，文气随情节由平缓转向急促，朗读时「国危矣」三字须高扬急读，方见危局之迫。

Reading note The sonic beauty of Zuo Zhuan prose lies not in rhyme or tone-pattern but in the interplay of varied sentence lengths and functional particles. The seven sentences range from three to eleven characters; the opening 'Jin marquis, Qin earl besieged Zheng' is grave and steady, the causal clauses swell like river waves, the four-character parallel tightens like martial orders, and the three final short clauses strike like a fast horse reining in—lifting narration to a climax. Particles 矣, 也, 曰 are indispensable.《左传》散文的声律之美，不在押韵与平仄，而在句式的参差错落与虚字的有无相济。本段正可作为先秦叙事散文音韵节奏的标本：全段凡七句，句长从三字（国危矣）到十一字（以其无礼于晋，且贰于楚也）不等，长短错落如乐之节拍。「晋侯、秦伯围郑」八字起句，四四节奏，庄重沉稳；「以其无礼于晋，且贰于楚也」两句以「以」「且」领起，如江水推波，气脉贯串；「晋军函陵，秦军氾南」陡然收紧为四字对偶，如军令齐发；「佚之狐言于郑伯曰」复又舒缓，为对话蓄势；终以「国危矣」「师必退」「公从之」三个短句连击，句句斩截，如快马收缰，把叙事推向高潮。虚字的运用尤为讲究：「矣」表已然之叹，「也」表判断之实，「曰」领起对话，皆不可省。这种「以散行之气、运四言之节」的声调艺术，上承《尚书》诰命之典重，下开汉赋骈俪之先声，诵读之间自有一种金声玉振的历史感。

Line by line

晋侯、秦伯围郑，以其无礼于晋，且贰于楚也。

The Marquis of Jin and the Earl of Qin besieged Zheng, because Zheng had been discourteous to Jin and moreover was disloyal to Jin in favoring Chu.

晋文公和秦穆公联合围攻郑国，是因为郑国曾经对晋国无礼，而且对晋国怀有二心、倒向楚国。

The Marquis of Jin and the Earl of Qin laid siege to Zheng, because Zheng had been discourteous to Jin and was also doubly inclined toward Chu.

开篇一句交代两军压境之势与兵衅之由，是全篇叙事的起点，也是「国危矣」三字的注脚。句法上，「围」字领起全篇，如巨雷震响，先声夺人；「晋侯、秦伯」并举，点明这是两国联军，分量沉重，郑国以一隅抗两强，危局立现。原因则用「以」字领出两条：一是「无礼于晋」，追述晋文公重耳流亡过郑时郑文公不礼的旧怨，此为历史积怨；二是「贰于楚」，点明城濮之战后郑国背晋亲楚的现实变节，此为当下罪状。一旧一新、一虚一实，罪名坐实，围郑便师出有名。「且」字表示递进，暗示第二条才是真正致命的导火索——在晋国看来，郑之「贰于楚」无异于在秦晋联盟的侧翼埋下钉子。史家不作一字议论，而战争的正义性、郑国的处境，已在这两句交代中尽数托出，正是《左传》「寓褒贬于叙事」的春秋笔法。

The opening fixes the dual threat and its cause, the premise for the cry the state is in danger. The word siege cracks like a thunderclap before any detail; the two rulers named together show it is a joint expedition, and Zheng, a small state facing two great powers, is instantly imperiled. The cause is introduced by because and given two counts: discourtesy to Jin—the old grudge when the future Duke Wen, in exile, was received coldly by Zheng—and double-dealing with Chu, the fresh sin of turning after the Battle of Chengpu. One old, one new; one historical, one current; the charges are made to stick so that the siege appears lawful. The word and, adding the second charge, hints that the second is the true trigger—a nail driven into the flank of the Jin-Qin alliance. The historian adds no opinion; the justice of the war and Zheng's plight are both already on the page.

晋军函陵，秦军氾南。

The Jin army camped at Hanling, the Qin army at the south of the Fan River.

晋国的军队驻扎在函陵，秦国的军队驻扎在氾水的南岸，两军分驻郑国两侧，虎视眈眈，形势十分危急。

The Jin army camped at Hanling; the Qin army camped south of the Fan River.

八个字分写两军驻地，是军事态势的定点，也是后文烛之武用计的伏笔。函陵、氾南皆是郑国边鄙之地，两军驻扎于此，如铁钳合围，郑国已无退路；而两军分驻、各守一方的格局，又暗示秦晋联盟并非铁板一块——这正是烛之武得以离间的基础。「晋军」「秦军」对举成文，「函陵」「氾南」地名相对，句式整饬如布阵，读来有森然兵气。尤其「军」字，名词活用作动词，作「驻扎」解，一字而尽显军旅肃杀之气，这是古汉语词类活用的经典用例，也是先秦散文炼字的典范。从章法看，此句紧承上句「围郑」，由「因」写到「势」，把抽象的危局落实为具体的地理空间；而「氾南」在南、「函陵」在北的空间错位，又暗写秦、晋二军不相统属——下文烛之武夜缒而出、直趋秦营，正是钻了这个空子。短短八字，既是地图，又是棋局，可见《左传》用笔之密。

Eight characters fix the camps and plant the seed of the stratagem. Hanling and the south of the Fan River lie on opposite borders of Zheng, the two armies closing pincers; yet the very fact that they camp apart, each on its own ground, hints that the alliance is not monolithic—and that fissure is what Zhu Zhiwu will exploit. The two armies are set against each other, the two place-names matched, the sentence as orderly as a battle line. The verb camp, a noun used as a verb, carries all the military grimness. The space between Hanling in the north and the Fan in the south also shows the two armies not under one command; it is precisely this gap that the roped-down Zhu Zhiwu will slip through to reach the Qin camp. Eight characters, a map and a chessboard at once.

佚之狐言于郑伯曰：国危矣，若使烛之武见秦君，师必退。

Yi Zhi Hu said to the Lord of Zheng: 'The state is in peril; if you send Zhu Zhiwu to see the ruler of Qin, the army will surely withdraw.'

佚之狐对郑伯说：国家危险了，如果派烛之武去拜见秦君，秦军一定会撤退。

Yi Zhihu said to the Earl of Zheng: The state is in danger. If you send Zhu Zhiwu to see the ruler of Qin, their armies will surely withdraw.

这一句是全篇叙事的枢纽：危局已明，如何破局？佚之狐一言定策。「国危矣」三字先以叹词般短句点醒郑伯，斩截警切，如当头棒喝；「若使烛之武见秦君，师必退」则以一个假设句立下军令状般的预言——「师必退」三字说得斩钉截铁，毫无犹疑，既显出佚之狐对烛之武才能的深信，也反衬出烛之武身份之微（仅一「佚之狐」口中人物，尚未登场）而能量之大。句法上，「言于郑伯曰」是先秦史传中进言的固定句式，郑重而有分寸；「若使」一词把举荐化作献策，委婉而有力。此句的另一妙处在于「藏人」：主角烛之武此时只活在别人的荐语里，读者未见其人、先闻其能，悬念至此已经吊足；而佚之狐的识人之明、当机立断，也在此一句中立体起来。下文「公从之」三字，郑伯的从善如流与决策之快，正与此句的果断互为呼应，君臣相得，破局之机已现。

The sentence is the hinge of the tale. The danger is clear; how to break it? Yi Zhihu's one word decides. The state is in danger bursts out without ornament, a short, alarming blow. The prediction follows: if you send Zhu Zhiwu to see the ruler of Qin, the armies will surely withdraw. The word surely is a signed blank check—it measures Yi Zhihu's absolute faith in Zhu Zhiwu and, at the same stroke, the gulf between the hero's obscurity (as yet only a name in another man's mouth) and his coming power. The recommendation is hidden as much as declared: the protagonist has not appeared, we have only heard his ability, and the suspense is already wound tight. Below, the Earl's instant agreement will match this resolve.

公从之。

The duke followed his counsel.

郑伯认为佚之狐说得有理，当即听从了他的建议，决定派烛之武前往秦营一试。

The Earl agreed.

「公从之」三字极短，却是全段叙事链条上不可或缺的收束环，也是一处耐人寻味的史笔。「从」字写郑伯的果断纳谏——国难当头，不迟疑、不推诿，一言即从，可见其君亦有明主气象；此与下文中烛之武起初「辞曰：臣之壮也，犹不如人」的牢骚，形成有趣的呼应：君主当初不用其才，今日临危方起用，君臣之间这一段微妙的隔阂与谅解，正是后文戏剧张力的来源。从句法节奏看，此句如快板收煞，与前文「国危矣」的急促、「师必退」的笃定一气贯通，三处短句连环相扣，叙事节奏骤然加快，把「荐贤—纳谏—决断」的过程压缩成电光石火的一瞬，令读者屏息以待下文。若将此段视为一篇完整的微型小说，则「公从之」正是第一幕的落幕之锤：形势、人物、悬念俱已备齐，只待烛之武登场，便有大戏上演。史家惜墨如金，而叙事之钩沉、节奏之张弛，全在这一字之简中见出功力。

The Earl agreed is a bare three characters, yet an indispensable closing link. The word agreed shows a ruler who in a national crisis does not hesitate or shift blame—an able sovereign. It will echo, a little uncomfortably, against Zhu Zhiwu's opening grievance that in his prime the Duke never used him: only now, at the crisis, is the old man called up, and that small friction between ruler and subject is the drama's hidden charge. Rhythmically, the short clause snaps shut after the urgent the state is in danger and the confident they will surely withdraw; recommendation, consent, decision are compressed into a single spark, and the reader holds his breath for Zhu Zhiwu's entrance. A historian's economy, with all the timing of stagecraft.

Study

Word focus

贰 'Disloyal / to harbor divided allegiance'—used verbally, it means Zheng leaned toward Chu while nominally bound to Jin; the single character condemns a small state's wavering diplomacy and supplies the immediate pretext for war, a classic Zuo Zhuan economy of condemnation. 「且贰于楚也」之「贰」字，是本段揭示郑国罪状的关键词，也是理解全文外交逻辑的字眼。「贰」本义为副贰、不专一，引申为「怀有二心、离心离德」，此处作动词用，指郑国对晋国存有二心而亲近楚国。这个字的分量在于：它不是一般的「叛」，而是「贰」——即两属、摇摆、脚踏两船，恰是城濮之战后郑国在两强之间求生存的真实写照。以一字写尽小国外交的尴尬与晋国兴兵的正当性，正是《左传》炼字之精。后世「贰臣」一词即由此义引申，指仕二朝而不忠的人；而「贰于楚」也成了史书中描写诸侯离心离德的习用语。训诂上，《说文》释「贰」为「副益也」，段玉裁注引申为「两属」，正合此处之意。一个「贰」字，既见春秋诸侯关系的脆弱，也见史家下字的精准，是先秦散文「一字见史」的典型例证。

军 'Army' as a noun, here used verbally to mean 'to camp / station' (read with departing tone); this part-of-speech shift condenses 'the Jin army stationed at Hanling' into four characters, a quintessential classical Chinese compression and a model of concise military narration. 「晋军函陵，秦军氾南」之「军」字，是古汉语词类活用的经典案例：本为名词（军队、军事），此处活用作动词，作「驻扎、驻军」解，读音亦随之由平声读为去声。这一活用使全句凝练到极致——「晋军函陵」四字，等于「晋国的军队驻扎在函陵」这一整句，一字抵四字，正是文言尚简的极致。从表达效果看，名词动用使静态的驻军带上动作的进行意味，仿佛看到晋军安营扎寨、旌旗插遍函陵的实景；且「晋军」与「秦军」对举、「函陵」与「氾南」相对，句式整齐而兵气森然，仿佛两军阵图铺展在读者眼前。这种以动词点活全句的手法，在《左传》中屡见不鲜（如「王师败绩于茅戎」之「败绩」），而「军」字之动用，因位置在句首、气势夺人，尤其见出先秦散文「炼字如炼金」的语言艺术。

若使 'If (one) were to send'—the conjunction 若 and causative 使 together frame a hypothetical recommendation; the phrasing is deferential yet decisive, packaging the proposal as counsel rather than command and prefiguring the later triumph of persuasion over arms. 「若使烛之武见秦君」之「若使」，是假设连词「若」与使令动词「使」的连用，字面义为「如果派……」，在佚之狐的荐语中起着「立策」的关键作用。其妙有三：其一，「若使」把举荐包裹在假设句里，措辞委婉——佚之狐并非越俎代庖地发号施令，而是以「如果这样做会如何」的方式献计，既不失臣礼，又显谋士的机敏。其二，「若使」引出主语「烛之武」，将一位此前完全未出场的人物推上叙事前台，句子的重心全部落在这三个字上，荐才的分量因之加重。其三，「若使……师必退」构成假设与结果的严整对应：假设轻（只是「派一个人去」），结果重（「师必退」），以极小的成本承诺极大的收益，这正是游说之辞的典型结构，也预先揭示了下文烛之武将以一席话退两军之师的奇局。后世公文奏议中「若使」「倘使」之辞层出不穷，其语源正在于此。