6.1232, Disc: Chinese Etymology
The Linguist List
linguist at tam2000.tamu.edu
Mon Sep 11 05:54:10 UTC 1995
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-6-1232. Mon Sep 11 1995. ISSN: 1068-4875. Lines: 310
Subject: 6.1232, Disc: Chinese Etymology
Moderators: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar: Texas A&M U. <aristar at tam2000.tamu.edu>
Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at emunix.emich.edu>
Associate Editor: Ljuba Veselinova <lveselin at emunix.emich.edu>
Assistant Editors: Ron Reck <rreck at emunix.emich.edu>
Ann Dizdar <dizdar at tam2000.tamu.edu>
Annemarie Valdez <avaldez at emunix.emich.edu>
Software development: John H. Remmers <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
Editor for this issue: lveselin at emunix.emich.edu (Ljuba Veselinova)
---------------------------------Directory-----------------------------------
1)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 1995 13:56:06 CDT
From: goertzen at rrnet.com ("Stanley G. Goertzen")
Subject: Chinese etymology
---------------------------------Messages------------------------------------
1)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 1995 13:56:06 CDT
From: goertzen at rrnet.com ("Stanley G. Goertzen")
Subject: Chinese etymology
Chinese HISTORY ~{J7~} (Part 1)
[Note: This discussion originated on CHINA, the Chinese Studies list,
<listserv at PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU>. I am posting it here because I would
be grateful to receive any responses from the general linguistic
community. Hz coded Chinese text is enclosed between tildes and curly
brackets ~{ ~}. For those who don't have an Hz viewer or who don't
read Chinese, I hope this will not be an obstacle to following the
discussion. -S. Goertzen]
In an earlier discussion on the Shuowen dictionary (100 AD)
~{K5ND=bWV~}, Stephen Carlson raised the question of the semantic
development of the Chinese word for "history" ~{J7~}.
Here is the Shuowen definition and character analysis.
SW078.001 ~{J7#,<GJBU_R2!#~} Shi3, ji4 shi4 zhe3 ye3 :
Scribe, one who records affairs.
~{4SSV3VVP!#~} [the character is derived] from a "hand holding
[center" ... to be discussed]
~{VP#,U}R2!#~} "center" != "correct" [Is this something "correct"?]
At the outset, I will try to follow the translations in Bernhard
Karlgren's _Grammata Serica [Recensa]_; but it will soon become
apparent they are provisional and generally inadequate for
etymological research, and later we'll have to improvise.
The word shi3 ~{J7~}, "scribe, historian," is defined by Shuowen in
terms of the word shi4 ~{JB~}, "to serve, affair." The character for
shi3 ~{J7~}, "historian," is also (as Karlgren hints) an element in
the character for shi4 ~{JB~}, "to serve." Though the similarity is
less obvious in modern forms of the characters, the Seal forms reveal
that both characters contain essentially similar elements. The "hand
(~{SV~}) in shi3 is a variant of the "hand" (~{ef~}) in shi4. The
upper element ~{VP~} in shr4 ~{JB~} appears to represent the remaining
portion of shi3 ~{J7~}, less the horizontal line across the top. The
modern forms of the characters look like the following:
;;' ;;'
, ;; , ,,,,,,,,,,,;;,,,,,,,,;;,
;;''''''';;'''''';;; ;;
;; ;; ;; ;;''''';;''''';;'
;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;;
;;,,,,,,,;;,,,,,,;; ''''''';;'''''''
'' , ;; '' ,,,,,,,,,;;,,,,,,,;,
;, ;; ;; ;;
';,;' ''''''''''';;'''''';;'''
,;';,, ,,,,,,,,,;;,,,,,,;;
,,;' '';,,, ;; ''
,,,''' '';;;;' ''';;;'
shi3: historian, history shi4: serve; affair
The upper element has been variously interpreted as standing for a
writing instrument, a record, a vessel for keeping scores in archery,
and the like. It has also been interpreted to mean that historians
should "hold to a 'central' ('impartial') or 'correct' course"; but
the important facts are that these characters are almost identical in
structure and they are also used interchangeably in early texts.
Given the high degree of phonetic and graphic similarity between these
two words and their respective characters, we need to resolve the
question of their etymological kinship, if any.
Wang Guowei (1877-1927), in his essay "Explaining History"
~{Mu9zN3#,JMJ7~} (reprinted in SWKL ~{K5ND9EAV~} p. 1262), noted that
these two characters are not distinguished in the Book of Documents or
the classical Odes, but eventually came to be graphically
distinguished on semantic grounds around the time of the Qin (255 BC)
and Han dynasties. In his view, the original ~{J7~} "historian" was
essentially a "bookkeeper," whose earliest duties included score
keeping at gaming events as well. Wang believed that the character
initially depicted a hand holding a vessel or receptacle (for score
keeping at archery contests), but concludes the character could also
depict a "hand holding a book," (a bookkeeper), analogous to the
character for yin3 ~{R|~} which depicts a "hand holding a writing
instrument."
~{J7WV4SSV3VVPReN*3VJiV.HK#,SkR|V.4SSV3VX/U_M,RbRS!#~}
~{RsHK274G=TRTJ7N*JB#,JGIPN^JBWV!#V\3uV.FwHgC+9+6&7,Iz6X6~Fw#,~}
~{OgJBWwJB#,4sJ7WwJ7#,J<1pN*6~WV!#~}
Burton Watson, in his excellent general introduction to Chinese
historiography (_Ssu-Ma Ch'ien: Grand Historian of China_, Columbia
University Press, New York, 1958), wrote: "Even the original meaning
of the character for historian has long been misinterpreted because of
the mistaken explanation of it given by the Latter Han lexicographer
Hsu Shen" in the Shuowen dictionary. Watson says the Shuowen "defines
_shih_ as 'one who records affairs'," but he reads Shuowen's
explanation of the character as a hand holding "middle" (zhong), and
says that this "middle" is in turn defined by Shuowen to mean
"correct" (zheng). In a footnote he cites Wang Guowei's essay and
says Wang "reached the conclusion that it represents a hand holding a
vessel used to contain tallies at archery contests, and that the
official designated by this character in Shang times was originally
charged with the duty of keeping track of hits at these contests."
Watson concludes: "From this we may surmise, though concrete evidence
is lacking, that the _shih_ officials later enlarged their activities
to the keeping of records in general." (Watson, ibid., pp. 70 & 220.)
Watson's dismissal of the Shuowen explanation is premature and based
on the questionable interpretation of the meaning of zheng as
"correct."
The Shuowen commentator, Zhu Junsheng (1788-1858) ~{Vl?%Iy~}
identifies the basic meaning of zheng1 ~{U}~} as the "center of a
target" ~{:nVPR2~}. (Cp. GSR833j and Mathews' 351(i).) Ode 106, the
second stanza, reads ~{VUHUId:n~},~{2;3vU}Yb~}, "Shooting all day at
the target, And never lodging outside the bird-square" (James Legge,
_The Chinese Classics_). Legge notes that zheng1 "denotes the square
in the centre of the target, in the centre of which again was the
figure of a bird called Zheng." This "bird-square" may be equated
with "bulls-eye," but it was apparently square, or RECtangular (versus
Watson's corRECt), rather than circular. It seems very unlikely that
the author of the Shuowen, who dutifully cites the Odes in numerous
definitions, would have been unaware of this interpretation.
Zhu Junsheng (~{Vl?%Iy#,K5NDM(Q66(Iy~}) explains the original meaning
of "zheng" ~{U}~} as a target.
~{U}#,JGR2!#~} [The modern meaning of zheng is "correct"]
~{04#:4KWV1>Q551N*:nVPR2!#~} It was originally the center of a target.
~{Os7=PN!#~} It depicts a rectangular shape.
~{<4T;4SV9#,R`J8KyV9R2!#~}... it is a repository of the arrow.
~{J\J8U_T;U}#,~} The receptor of arrows is called zheng.
~{>\J8U_T;7&#,~} The deflector of arrows is called fa.
~{9JND74U}N*7&!#~} Hence the anagram (reverse) of zheng is fa.
The Shuowen entry immediately following "zheng" (SW031) is its anagram
(zheng reversed) and antonym.
SW031.004 ~{7&#,4:Go4+T;74U}N*7&!#~}
Duan: ~{Ws4+P{J.NeDjND!#~} ~{@qJ\J8U_T;U}#,>\J8U_T;7&!#~}
Duan Yucai (1735-1815) ~{6NSq2C#,K5ND=bWVW"~} cites the Zhou Li,
~{V\@q#,4:9Y#,35FM~} noting that the "receptor (target) for arrows is
called zheng," and the "contraceptor (shield) for arrows is called
fa2." Again, it is clear that the author of the Shuowen must have
understood this interpretation of "zheng" as "target," specifically
the rectangular "center" portion of the target.
Zhu Junsheng also explains the meaning of "zhong" as target.
~{VP#,:MR2!#~} Zhong means moderate, harmonious.
~{9EQ5VPN*:MU_DKVPWVV.W*W"!#~} This meaning is zhuanzhu (a trope).
~{Fd1>Q551N*J8sgU}R2!#~} It was originally a target for arrows.
~{Vx:nV.U}N*VP#,9JVP<4Q5U}!#~} Therefore zhong is defined by zheng.
"Zhong" ~{VP~} and "zheng" ~{U}~} denote the same thing, both
referring to a target (receptacle for arrows). Shuowen's definition
is therefore redundant, reinforcing the meaning of zhong in the sense
of "target."
However, the issues raised by Burton Watson and Wang Guowei do not go
to the heart of the etymology of "history." Wang sheds some light on
the nature of the some of the earliest official duties of the
historian, and Watson attempts to show that the original character
must have signified these duties in some way. Shuowen's explanation
is not, after all, inconsistent with Watson's interpretation. Yet,
even if both of these scholars are correct about the duties of the
office and the structure of the character for "historian," these facts
are at best only coincidentally relevant to the etymological meaning
of the word. The denotations (real-world referents) of words can be
shifty things, but the connotations of etymologically related words
usually continue to resonate a common meaning which often cannot be
reduced to the denotation or referent of a single member word. A
"doctor", for example, may denote a medical practitioner, but the
connotations of its etymologically related words (doctrine,
indoctrinate, dogma, etc.) indicate its original meaning as a
"teacher" rather than a medicine man.
Of considerably more etymological interest is Shuowen's explanation of
the character for "history" as ~{4SSV3VVP~} a "hand _holding_ zhong (a
target)." This is not the typical formula for ~{;aRb~}, "semantic
compounds," cong X, [cong] Y. I will propose that chi2 ~{3V~}, "to
hold," is actually a key etymonic expression here. It is the act of
"holding" that dominates the sense of this and related words, as I
hope to demonstrate. (In this connection, it may be of interest to
note that the English word "target" is itself the derivative of a
root, *dergh-, with a very similar meaning, "to grasp.")
An important consideration in the investigation of these characters
(and Chinese characters in general) is the sequence of the Shuowen
bushou ~{2?JW~}, "Section Headings" (misnamed "radicals"). The
Shuowen sequence has been destroyed beyond recognition by modern
radical dictionary makers, presumably in the interest of reader
convenience. The character for shi3 ~{J7~}, "historian," is now
misclassified under the "mouth" radical, which has nothing whatever to
do with the meaning or structure of this character, except for a
deceptive superficial resemblance to a part of it. Moreover, the
character for shi4 ~{JB~}, "service, office," is also misclassified
under a modern radical (the "hooked down stroke"), which again shares
only a deceptive superficial resemblance to a part of it. In the
original Shuowen sequence, the character for shr4 ~{JB~}, "service,
office," (SW078.002) immediately follows the character for shi3
~{J7~}, "historian," (SW078.001), and what is more, "historian" is
the real radical in "service"!
SW078.002
~{JB#,V0R2!#~}
~{4SJ7#,V.J!Iy!#~}
In view of the Shuowen analysis, Karlgren's remarks (GSR 971, 975)
about the "fundamental" similarity of the earliest inscriptions for
these characters are rather gratuitous and superfluous; but Karlgren
also dismantled the SW sequence in favor of a phonetic arrangement.
In addition Karlgren was extremely skeptical about Shuowen's
definitions and generally ignored Shuowen's character analyses
altogether. It was his position that the phonetic reconstruction of
the earliest stage ("archaic" = "old") of Chinese together with the
study of Chinese etymology ("word families") would lead to
significantly new advances in our understanding of Chinese linguistics
and literature. However, it has yet to be demonstrated that his
methods of inquiry are really superior to the methods of traditional
Chinese lexicography and phonology in this regard.
The character for shi4 ~{JB~}, "service, office," is not only derived
from the character for shi3 ~{4SJ7~}, "historian," but the two words
are etymologically related! This is the view of Zhang Binglin and
Akiyasu Todo (and perhaps others I haven't consulted yet).
Zhang Binglin (1877-1927) ~{UB1~AZ#,NDJ<~} in _Wenshi_, Part 8A,
writes:
~{<GV>V.Ref\HiSVN*J7#,<GJBU_R2!#~}
~{J784f\HiN*JB#,V0R2!#~}
~{9YV0V.Ref\HiSVN*@t#,VNHKU_R2!#~}
~{J7 at t=Tf\HiN*J9#,AnR2!#~}
Akiyasu Todo (_Kanji Gogen Jiten_, Tokyo, 1965, No. 13) proposes an
etymological kinship between "history" and "service" with the basic
meaning, TATSU, TATERU, "to stand, set up, erect, establish," with
some interesting semantic implications which I hope to discuss later.
Finally, the abbreviated phonetic in shi4 ~{JB~}, "service, office,"
is zhi1 ~{V.~}, "to go; it; genitive and attributive" marker. In a
future post I will attempt to explain, in semantically consistent
terms, how this abbreviated phonetic is the ultimate phonetic in chi2
~{3V~}, "to hold, support," the key etymonic term in the present
series. Furthermore, I will propose to show how zhi1 ~{V.~} is yet
again the ultimate phonetic and etymonic element in shi1 ~{J+~},
"poetry." If I succeed in this, then Burton Watson's statement that
"Ssu-ma Ch'ien's concept of history was essentially poetic" may be
prophetic; for it may be that in prehistoric China, before the advent
of the scribe-historians, when history was still an oral tradition,
HISTORY and POETRY were still undifferentiated words and were
essentially one and the same genre!
We can learn a great deal about the graphics, phonology and semantics
~{PN#,Rt#,Re~} and etymology of Chinese words from the Shuowen
dictionary, especially Duan Yucai's edition. While Duan did indeed
credit many of his linguistic insights to his knowledge of phonology,
he did not find it necessary to devise a separate phonological
notation for that purpose. For his purposes, it was sufficient to
cite the Middle Chinese fanqie ~{74GP~} spellings from the Guangyun
~{9cTO~} rhyme dictionary along with the Old Chinese rhyme classes
~{9ETO2?~} . I am more than willing to cite the more modern phonetic
and phonological notations of Karlgren, Pulleyblank, Baxter, and
others, but I would rather to do so only if and when it seems
necessary in order to gain some important new insight beyond that
which we could otherwise gain simply by following Duan. So far I have
found very few cases in which the newer phonologies significantly
advance our understanding of Chinese etymology.
My research is very much ongoing and comments will be most gratefully
appreciated.
A convenient guide to the Middle Chinese fanqie spelling system and
William Baxter's Middle Chinese notation can be found at the URLs
listed below.
Stan Goertzen
goertzen at rrnet.com
- ------------------------------------------------------
*** A Middle Chinese Spelling Construction Kit ***
http://www.rrnet.com/users/goertzen/mcb5.html (in Big5)
http://www.rrnet.com/users/goertzen/mcgb.html (in GB)
email: listserv at mail.w3.org (no subject required)
source http://www.rrnet.com/users/goertzen/mcb5.html
- -------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-6-1232.
More information about the LINGUIST
mailing list