关于马歇尔体系特征的概括和评价，历来存在明显的歧异。大多数西方学者都采用“综合”一词予以肯定和颂扬。始终冠以“折衷主义”提法的是原苏联学者，不过他们并未全盘否定它。我国学者的有关论述则先后经历了三个阶段。必须强调，搞清“折衷主义”这种概括和评价的来龙去脉，对于准确把握马氏学说和重新审视经济学史研究的若干传统见解，具有重要的意义。 There has always been a clear discrepancy about the characterization and evaluation of the Marshallian system. Most Western scholars use the word “integrated” to be affirmed and praised. The former Soviet scholar, always labeled “eclecticism”, did not totally negate it. The expositions of Chinese scholars have gone through three stages successively. It must be emphasized that it is of great significance to find out the ins and outs of the “eclecticism” generalization and evaluation. This is of great significance for accurately grasping the Marxist theory and reexamining some traditional views on the history of economic studies.