Abstract: This paper holds a different idea from the one expressed in Questioning the Major Evidence of /Five Types of Social,Formations by Professor Duan Zhongqiao.The author points out that Duan’s paper regarded Grundrisse as the basis of /The Preface.This showed that Duan actually failed to make a distinction between Grundrisse and the officially published A Contribution to the Critique Political Economy(Book Ⅰ).Moreover,Duan’s interpretation of some arguments in Grundrisse is also questionable.Therefore,Duan’s refutation of /five types of social formations is not well justified.

Key words: five types of social formations, Preface of A Contribution to the Critique Political Economy(1857-1858), Grundrisse, pre-capitalist mode of production

摘要： 本文对段忠桥教授的《对“五种社会形态理论”一个主要依据的质疑》一文的主要观点提出了不同看法,指出:段文把“草稿”作为“序言”的基础,实际上是混淆了“草稿”与正式出版的《政治经济学批判。第一分册》一书,而其对“草稿”的有关论述的理解也很值得商榷,段文在此基础上对“五种社会形态理论”的否定是不能成立的。

关键词: 五种社会形态, 《〈政治经济学批判〉序言》, 《经济学手稿(1857—1858年)》, 前资本主义生产方式