# Essays on the Chinese Language (1889)/2

CHAPTER II.
THE CULTIVATION OF THEIR LANGUAGE BY THE CHINESE.
From the judgments of foreigners on the Chinese language we pass to the consideration of the treatment which the language has had at the hands of natives. To tell this with any fullness would be a work needing a great knowledge of Chinese literature, and it would not, perhaps, repay the labour. It will be enough here to attempt a slight sketch of the course which the cultivation of the language by its speakers and writers has taken since the time when its records begin. Even such an outline, however, must needs be meagre and imperfect, and, at best, of little interest except to a very small number. For the early part of the history, moreover, materials are few and doubtful, while for the latter part they are too many to be properly made use of in a slight sketch like the present. In this sketch all works are passed over which are exclusively on the art of writing and the various kinds of characters, as also those treatises which were only designed to be commentaries on the Confucianist canonical scriptures. Only those books or parts of books are noticed which are specially devoted to philology, and which show us the progress made by the Chinese in the intelligent use and cultivation of their language, written and spoken. Of such treatises also, it need scarcely be added, the following sketch pretends to describe or mention only a very small number, and in several cases the accounts of the books have to be given at second-hand, the originals being out of reach. Still, it is to be hoped that the imperfect outline here presented will help to give a right idea of the way in which the Chinese have studied and cultivated their language, and will serve to correct some wrong impressions on the subject. Let us begin with the introduction of the art of writing into literature.
​We have, apparently, no means of learning at what time the Chinese first began to use writing for literary purposes. We know, however, that in matters of government it was employed from a very early period. One of the first occurrences in literature of the word shu (書) in the sense of "writing," so far as I know, is in a passage of the historical classic, "Shu-ching." The Emperor Shun (B.C. 2255 to 2205) is there represented as giving the following instructions with reference to the reprobates about his court. "Use archery to show what they are, flogging to make them remember their faults, and writing (shu) to serve as a record." In the reign of the same sovereign the Baron I (伯夷) seems to have drawn up a code of ceremonies, and also to have set forth the Penal Statutes of the realm for the information of the people. Another early mention of writing occurs in the historical record of the king Tai-chia (太甲), and it also is found in the "Shu-ching." In the passage referred to, we are told that in the year B.C. 1753 the high minister I-yin (伊尹) "made a writing" (作書 tso-shu) in which he gave excellent counsel to the new king. And about two years afterwards the same minister again makes a writing to congratulate the above king on his tardy return to virtue. The next mention, perhaps, is that which occurs in the "Charge to Yue" of the same treatise. It is there recorded of the king Wu Ting (武丁)—B.C. 1324 to 1265— that on a certain occasion he made a writing to convey his instructions to his ministers. But it is to be noted that the passages in the "Shu-ching," just referred to, have been condemned as spurious by some critics, and there is some doubt as to their geniuneness. We know, however, that the ceremonial codes of the Hsia and Yin dynasties were committed to writing, and that parts of them survived the fall of the latter. But records concerning the history and institutions of the country before the rise of the Chou dynasty (B.C. 1122 to 250) were even in Confucius' time very ​scanty. The tablets of wood and bamboo on which these were written were liable to be lost. They were also occasionally stolen or defaced by officials whose projects they were likely to thwart. Hence, when search was made among them, they were often found deficient.
Among the official class, writing seems to have been in common use under the early rulers of the Chou dynasty. They had a Secretary (司書 ssŭ-shu), who was in charge of the state archives, and had control of all public receipts and expenditures. Another official was appointed to keep foils, or duplicates, of all registers, census returns, and maps, and he had to examine and verify the public returns and accounts. There was also one whose duty was to record on wooden tablets the name, sex, age and birthplace of each individual in his jurisdiction. Tutors were appointed for the king's sons, and one of the subjects which they had to teach was the "Liu-shu," or Six Writings, that is, the characters in their six-fold classification. In this the Chou kings seem to have followed the custom of the dynasty they subverted.
Another institution which the Chou rulers seem to have taken from their predecessors was that of State Interpreters. These had not only to translate the messages of the barbarian chiefs into Chinese, and the commands of the king into the dialects of the strange visitors: they had also to teach these last how to perform their parts in the various state ceremonies in which they were required to act while at the royal court. Moreover, in the seventh year, after a royal progress, the State Interpreters were all summoned to court in order to have the various dialects compared and the king's orders harmonized. In the second year after this, the blind musicians and the annalists of the state were collected at the capital "to compare the written characters and hear the pronunciation" (諭書名聽聲音). Of the State Interpreters there were at first four classes. There were the Chi (寄) for the barbarians of the East, the Hsiang (象) for those of the South, the Tih-ti (狄鞮) for those of the West, and the I (譯) for those of the North. ​But in this period the general designation for all the official interpreters was Hsiang or Hsiang-hsü. It was the policy of the Chow rulers to extend their dominion towards the South, and it was with the tribes of that quarter that they had most intercourse. Hence the designation of the interpreters for the Southern peoples came to be given to all classes of state interpreters. In process of time the term Hsiang was in its turn supplanted by I, which came to mean: to translate generally from one language into another. It will be observed that this last is the only one of the four words which actually supposes the use of speech in the work of interpreting between the Chinese at the capital and their various neighbours.
In this period colleges existed at all official centres, and schools of various kinds were to be found generally throughout the country. Books were written and libraries formed, though, it must be presumed, only on a small scale. The written characters were few and insufficient, much time was wasted in the process of writing, and the materials used were rude and clumsy.
There is one treatise on the language which has at least a show of claim to be referred to this period. The "Urh-ya"—the first so-called Chinese dictionary—has been by vague tradition of no early origin referred to the very beginning of this dynasty, Chow Kung being supposed to have composed it for the use of his nephew Chêng Wang. And though the work as it has come down to us is evidently of a much later period than the twelfth century B.C., yet there is reason for believing in the early existence of a treatise with this name. Confucius is supposed to refer to such a work in a passage which occurs in the Ta Tai's "Li-chi." The Duke Ai asks him about "small distinctions," and Confucius says: "The 'Urh-ya,' in studying antiquity, is enough for the discrimination of language." But the context shows that this passage would at least admit of a different rendering. In an earlier work we find what is apparently a quotation from the beginning of the "Urh-ya," and we may with some reason treat the ​first part of the book as compiled during this period. We find Confucius and his disciple Tzŭ-Hsia credited with the composition or enlargement of the treatise. It was plainly not the work of one man or one time, and there may have been in early times a small beginning to which Confucius and others long afterwards made great additions.
This treatise is not, properly speaking, a dictionary, but rather a Thesaurus or vocabulary. It gives the terms and phrases used in the old classics and also those of common life, though it does not represent the store of words in existence at the time (or times) of its compilation. The subjects are classified under nineteen categories, to each of which there is a chapter. These are explanations of old terms, synonyms, buildings, music, heaven, earth, water, birds, plants, and other indefinite genera. From the study of the work we learn that at the time it was composed the language was rich in some departments, and that it contained many terms which were nearly or quite synonymous though different in origin. Many of the words in it have long ago fallen out of use, and some were, perhaps, only peculiar to dialects. The phrase Urh-ya means "approaching the perfect," that is, an attempt to give the correct or standard terms and phrases of the language. But the work is not in any degree critical. Its value lies chiefly in the view it gives of the vocabulary in existence at the time of its compilation, and in its being an early attempt to reduce the language to order. Wylie, however, who dignifies the title by the translation "Literary Expositor," says it "is a dictionary of terms used in the classical and other writings of the same period, and is of great importance in elucidating the meaning of such words." Its usefulness has been much increased by the labours of a series of learned commentators, some of whom will appear below. It was long ago made a Ching (經) or canonical work, and regarded as a sort of appendix to the classic on Filial Piety. Though not so highly prized now, it is still treated with respect and quoted as an authority by native scholars.
In the reign of king Hsüan (B.C. 827 to 782) the court ​annalist Chow (籀) invented a new system of writing. This became known as the Ta-chuan or Great Seal character. The term chuan (篆), however, is also said to mean "record," as if ch'uan (傳), because this kind of writing was to be capable of recording everything for ever. Chow, who is often called Shih-chow (史籀), is said to have written a treatise in fifteen chapters, sometimes called the "Ta-chuan" and sometimes "Shih-chow's Fifteen Chapters." This work survived the fires of Ch'in, but in the troubled period of Wang Mang's usurpation six chapters were lost. The remaining nine lived on for a few ages and gradually disappeared. A number of the characters, however, were preserved in other treatises and were used as specimens of Chow's system of writing. These characters are sometimes said to be merely altered forms of those called "tadpole;" they were in some respects like, and in others unlike, the old systems of writing (Ku-wên). And although Chow's system was an improvement on these, it did not supersede them. They continued to be used, at least for literary purposes, down to the end of this period. But Chow's invention had the effect of producing a considerable number of new characters, and of restricting to a small extent the applications of those already existing. Yet growth in number is said to have been followed by an increase in the misuse of characters. These were written in many very different manners throughout the kingdom, and the sounds given to them varied also. One state wrote and pronounced in one way, another in another way, and so, towards the end of this dynasty, the language, written and spoken, was in a state of great uncertainty and confusion.
When the Prince of Ch'in (秦) was settled on the throne of China (B.C. 221) he set himself to make reforms and bring in order and certainty. This proud, ambitious sovereign, Ch'in Shi Huang Ti, wished to make his reign the beginning of a new state ​of affairs for the whole country. He wanted the Chinese to bury their dead past and begin life again as one nation, to be one people, speaking the same language and using the same kind of writing. But to effect his purposes he used measures which were barbarous and in the end only partially successful. The check which he gave to the progress of learning did not last long, and it was followed by a reaction which more than undid what he had done. But in one thing, at least, he succeeded, for he put an end to the use of the old styles of writing — the Ku-wên, though the canonical writings were long afterwards reprinted in their original characters for scholars. In Shi Huang Ti's time eight kinds of writing, called the Pa-t'i (八體), were current. These were (1) the Ta-chuan(大篆) or Great Seal; (2) the Hsiao-chuan (小篆) or Small Seal; (3) the K'ê-fu (刻符), Carved Tallies; (4) the Chung-shu (蟲書), Insect Writing, from its resemblance to the traces of birds and insects; (5) Mu-yin (慕印), characters used for seals; (6) Shu-shu (署書), used for official notices, etc. ; (7) Shu-shu (殳書), used for inscriptions on weapons; (8) Li-shu (隸書), the square, clear writing for use in public offices. Of these, the first and second alone were used for the ordinary writing on tablets of wood and bamboo. But Shi Chow's writing had been found to be too complicated for common purposes. So a simplified form of it was devised by Li Ssŭ (李斯), a Minister of State to Shi Huang Ti. It was this minister who advised the Emperor to burn the books and kill the scholars. Hence he has come down to posterity with a bad name, though acknowledged as a man of learning and abilities. The style of writing which he introduced, called the Small (or Ch'in) Chuan, was developed in a book to which he gave the name "Ts'ang-chie" (蒼頡). About the same time another scholar wrote a work called the "Yuan-li" (爰歷), and a third composed the Po-hsio (博學). Chao Kao (趙高) was the author of the former treatise, and Hu Mu Ching (胡母敬) of the latter. These three works, which formed a treatise called the "San-ts'ang" (三蒼) or "Ts'ang-chie-pien," were all written in the Small Seal characters, to which they gave a temporary popularity.
​But these, though invented expressly to facilitate the transaction of public business, were still a cumbrous, inconvenient way of recording. A great improvement on them was made by the invention of the Li-shu, or Official Hand, the eighth of the Pa-t'i, which is the parent of the modern writing. The invention is usually attributed to Chêng Mao (程邈), who also was a distinguished official of Shi Huang Ti. Tradition represents him as working out his system while undergoing unjust imprisonment by the command of the Emperor. It is said that the latter, on perusing the two thousand characters in which the new system was taught, released the author and restored him to office.
It is from this period of Ch'in Shi Huang Ti that the use of the term tzŭ (子) or "character" dates, and the change in name from wên (文) or shu (書) is said to have been brought about by the modes of writing invented by Li Ssŭ and Ch'êng Mao. Hitherto, all inscriptions and engravings had been mainly pictorial or symbolic, expressing, as their chief office, only objects or ideas, but now sounds also began to receive attention. And it may be mentioned in passing that the introduction of hair-pencils, pih (筆), for writing purposes, is generally ascribed to Shi Huang Ti's general, Mêng T'ien (蒙恬). It seems probable, however, that, as some writers think, such pencils were known in various parts of China before Meng T'ien's time, and that he only made improvements and brought the pencils into use in his own native land, Ch'in, the modern Shensi. In support of this view the "Li-Chi" and "Urh-Ya" are quoted as showing an early use of the character pih. In the former we read that on a certain state occasion "the annalist has charge of the pencil," that is, writing (史載筆). The "Urh-Ya" simply tells us that pu-lüh is called pih (不律謂之筆). The term pu-lüh (or lih) is said to be only the sound pih resolved into its elements; but it is also described as the name which the pencil had in the Wu country, that is, the Soochow region. It is agreed, however, that after Mêng T'ien's time the ​name for the pencil in his State became the general one, and it has continued to be so down to the present.
To the reign of Shi Huang Ti is referred the compilation of a work called the "Small Urh-Ya" (小爾雅 or 小雅). This is a treatise in thirteen sections, and is generally ascribed to K'ung Fu (孔鮒), a descendant of Confucius. It is only a small outline vocabulary, perhaps intended to form a supplement to the large "Urh-ya." The use of the word Kuang (廣), "expanding," at the head of ten of the sections, seems to lend support to this view. It is also strengthened by the fact that the last sections, on weights and measures, supply information on subjects left out of the larger treatise.
But there does not seem to have been any thorough and methodical study of the language, any critical survey of its quantity and quality until the time of the Han dynasty. The period which bears the name of this dynasty, extending from B.C. 205 to A.D. 220, is regarded as the birth-time of China's literary greatness. The first impulse to the study of the language came from the awakened interest in the old books of song, history, social and political institutions, and philosophy. These having been hidden to escape the fires of Ch'in, were brought back into the light of day in the early part of this period. The writing on the tablets which constituted these books was now hard to make out, and there were many various readings. So at first the attention of students was given almost exclusively to the composition and meaning of the written characters. Hence arose the sayings of men in after times to the effect that the Han scholars knew the meaning but not the sounds of the characters. With them the great object was to settle a disputed reading, restore a genuine text, or give the original sense of a term or phrase in the old classics. And from their time down the study of the language in China has been intimately associated with that of the early canonical literature.
​The "Urh-ya," of which mention has been made above, is with good reason supposed to have been much enlarged and otherwise improved during this period. But little or nothing seems to be known with certainty about the fortunes of this book until we come to the Chin dynasty.
Among the writers on subjects connected with the language in the early part of this period was Ssŭ-ma Hsiang-ju (司馬相如), of the second century B.C. This man, more famed for his success with song and lyre than for his literary accomplishments, was a native of what is now Ch'êng-tu in Ssŭchuan. He composed a work called the "Fan-Chiang" (凡將), a short treatise which has been praised for not giving the same character twice for explanation. This work, published about B.C. 130, was based on the "Ts'ang-chie-pien," and in it Ssŭ-ma used the style of writing introduced in that work, but he also added new characters. Nearly ninety years afterwards there appeared the "Chi-chiu-chang" (急就章) by Shi Yu (史游), an official in the reign of Yuan Ti (B.C. 48 to 32). This was followed in the next reign by the "Yuan-shang-pien" (元尙篇) of Li Chang (李長). These also were written in the Small Seal character, and were also apparently based on the "Ts'ang-chie-pien." The "Chi-chiu," or Ready Finder, soon became popular among scholars, and was for a long time used as a text-book. It was often reprinted and edited with annotations by distinguished scholars, such as Ts'ao Shou (曹壽) and Yen Shi-ku (顏師古). It appears to have been written in an easy style, and to have abounded in old phrases, sounds, and characters. The above three treatises are of importance, however, mainly on account of the use made of them by the compilers of the "Fang-yen" and "Shuo-wên."
About this period, the first century B.C., we find that the characters in the "Ts'ang-chie-pien" had in some places become nearly obsolete, that is, few could read them correctly and understand their meaning. It was only among the men of Ch'i, part ​of Shantung, that the true pronunciation of the characters and their right interpretation remained. So the Emperor Hsüan Ti (B.C. 73 to 48) issued an order that the system of those scholars should be adopted. It was learned from these men by Chang Ch'ang (長敞), the famous official who at home penciled his wife's eyebrows, and abroad crushed all rebellion. He was Prefect of Ching-chao, in Shensi, B.C. 60, and ten years afterwards of Chi-chow (冀州), in Chihli. Chang Ch'ang communicated his learning to his children, from whom it passed to his daughter's son. This last taught it to his son, Tu Lin (杜林), who committed it to writing and composed two treatises on the "Ts'ang-chie-pien." Tu Lin was a native of Mou-ling (茂陵) in Shensi, and held office under Kuang Wu Ti, A.D. 25 to 58.
Nearly all the works just mentioned have ceased to exist, and some of them lived only a short time. But it has fared otherwise with a famous treatise supposed to have been composed about this time, the "Fang-yen," to wit. This work is ascribed to Yang Hsiung (楊 (or 揚) 雄), known also as Yang Tzŭ-yun (子雲), a native of Ch'êng-tu, in Ssŭchuan, who lived from B.C. 52 to A.D. 18. In childhood, Yang, who was a quiet, thoughtful boy, was troubled with an impediment in his speech. He had a strong love for learning and was specially fond of the writings of Ch'ü Yuan (屈原) and Ssŭ-ma Hsiang-ju. In addition to his better known works on philosophy he compiled a treatise usually cited by its short title "Hsün-tsuan;" in full, "Ts'ang-chie-hsüan-tsuan" (蒼頡訓纂). In this Yang made Li Ssŭ's work the basis, but he made many additions and corrections, the result of wide reading and of a comparison of terms culled from all parts of the empire. In A.D. 5, above a hundred scholars, under the presidency of Yuan Li (爰禮), were assembled in the Imperial palace at Ch'ang-an to "explain the symbolic and phonetic writings" (說文字). The results of their discussions were used by Yang, as were also the works of ​Tu Ye (杜業), father of Tu Lin, of Yuan Li — the chief among the students of the language, and of Ch'in Chin (秦近).
But the book which has given Yang Hsiung his chief fame in later times is the "Fang-yen." Native scholars have tried in vain to find out how and why the authorship of this treatise came to be ascribed to him. It is not mentioned in the list of books in the "Han-shu", nor in the life of Yang Hsiung in that work, nor, so far as is known, does Hsü Shên or any other of Yang's contemporaries refer to the book by name. As an appendix to the "Fang-yen" two letters are found, one from Liu Hsin (劉歆) to Yang, and the other the reply to this. From these two letters, and the facts above mentioned, we may safely adopt the opinion that the "Fang Yen" was not published in the life-time of Yang. The first writer to ascribe the authorship to him was apparently Ying Shao (應劭) who lived in the second century of our era. In the preface to his famous treatise, "Fêng-su-t'ung-i," Ying makes mention of Yang as the author of a treatise which is evidently the "Fang-yen." But though he even quotes from Yang's letter to Liu Hsin, he does not give the name of the treatise. From his time down to the end of the twelfth century there seems to have been no difference of opinion as to the authorship. The first to challenge the truth of the tradition was Hung Mai (洪邁), who lived A.D. 1123 to 1203. His arguments against the genuineness of the book are founded chiefly on the supposed irregular use of certain characters, and on the fact that no mention of Yang's authorship is made by himself or by others of the same period. But these arguments have been answered by later students, and they have not shaken the learned belief in the general tradition.
As we have it, the "Fang-yen" is in thirteen chapters and is said to contain 12,000 characters, but it is supposed to have been originally in fifteen chapters and to have had only 9,000 characters. The full title, here given in the foot-note, points to its sources. During the two dynasties which immediately preceded the Han, certain officials — the "light carriage envoys" ​—were sent periodically to visit the various states subject or tributary to China. Their duty was to observe and note the different ways of speech, and manners, and popular sayings, and ballads of the towns and districts through which they passed. When they returned to court they made reports which were put on record. At the time of the Han dynasty the practice had ceased, and in the first century B. C. most of the tablets containing the reports were lost: even the nature of the duties of the "light carriage envoys" was almost forgotten. But attention was recalled to them by the labours of a recluse of Ssŭchuan, by name Chuang (al. Yen 嚴) Chun-p'ing (莊君平). He compiled from the old records a vocabulary of more than 1,000 words, and Lin Lü (林閭) al. Wêng (or Kung 公) Ju (翁子需), also a native of Ssŭchuan, made a summary. While Yang was in Ssŭchuan he came into very close relations with Lin Lü, and, liking his mode of procedure, he adopted it for his work. Thus he not only used the extracts available from the reports of former "light carriage envoys," but he also instituted similar investigations himself. For twenty-seven years he went on collecting and arranging his materials, and died, as the book seems to show, with his work still unfinished.
The "Fang-yen" is mainly a comparative vocabulary of a large number of the terms and phrases used in different states and districts. It tells the areas within which certain names and forms of expression prevailed. To some extent also it is simply a dictionary, explaining the meaning of certain terms, and giving synonyms. It does not give the sounds of the characters or any attempt at an analysis of them. From it, however, we learn many of the dialectical varieties which existed in the first century B. C., and how certain words and phrases of that time have to be understood. Many of the words in it have long since become obsolete, or have continued to live only in the small circuit of a dialect. The text, as we have it now, is supposed to differ considerably from that left by Yang, and the work is said to have suffered otherwise in the course of transmission. ​But the zealous labours of Kuo P'o and other editors have made the "Fang-yen" a standard authority on the language in the time of the Former Han dynasty.
The next work to be noticed is the "Shuo-wên-chie-tsŭ" (說文解字), best known by its short title "Shuo-wên." The author of this was Hsü Shên (許慎), with the second name Shu-chung (叔重), who was a native of Shao-ling (劭陵) in the south of Honan. He lived about the end of the first and the beginning of the second century of our era, but the precise dates of his birth and death do not seem to be recorded. He held office for some time, but he had retired from public life and was living at home when his death took place, which was apparently about A.D. 121. The "Shuo-wên" was finished in A.D. 99, and in the next year Hsü composed the preface. But the work was not published until A.D. 121, when the author's son Ch'ung (沖) put it in order and presented it with a memorial to the Emperor An.
Hsü Shên was a devoted student of the orthodox literature of his country, and was famous among his contemporaries for his great learning. The old texts of the canonical books which had been brought from their graves in the early period of this dynasty had, as has been stated, given rise to much controversy. It was to help in settling doubts and difficulties about these that Hsü composed his first treatise, the "Discussions of Variations in the Five Ching" (五經異議), on which Chêng Hsüan animadverted. It was with a like end in view that Hsü prepared his "Shuo-wên," the long labour of his last years. For the making of this he studied, with the help of Chia K'uei (賈逵), one of the greatest of the Han scholars, all the accessible literature in the old characters and in those invented in later times. He compared the texts of the recovered tablets, collected inscriptions on ancient vases, and examined the writings of his predecessors, such as Shi Chow, Li Ssŭ, and Yang Hsiung.
​For the characters to be explained, the author of the "Shuo-wên" used the Small Seal kind of writing, and for the explanations he used the Li (隸) writing. The work is divided into fourteen chapters (or books), and there are 10,600 characters explained. These are arranged under 540 classifiers, called also Primitives and Radicals, beginning with one, the origin of all things. The subjects which the Dictionary embraces are, according to Hsü Ch'ung, the literature of the country, heaven and earth, demons and spirits, hills and streams, vegetable and animated nature, and all the affairs of men. The author seems to have meant his work to be mainly an authority for the true texts and right meanings of cerain treatises regarded as canonical. For these it was to shuo-wên, state or explain the symbolic writing, and chie-tsŭ, analyse the phonetic characters. Some of the explanations which it gives to characters seem to be mere trifling, and the work can scarcely be considered as one of great etymological value. Nor is it to be regarded as an index to all the characters in use at the time of its compiling. It leaves out through feelings of reverence those which entered into the names of Han emperors, and even in the author's own preface are characters which are not given in the dictionary. Nor does the work profess to solve all the difficulties which occur, for, as the author states, in some places he found doubts which he had to leave as he found. The "Shuo-wên" is of interest chiefly as the earliest Chinese dictionary extant which attempts to give an analysis of characters and a clue to their sounds. It is consequently a record of at least a part of the language as used for literary and other purposes before the end of the first century of our era. The analyses of characters which it gives are doubtless those which had most authority at the time of the compiler, and the indications of the sounds given to them are of value to the student of the language and literature. But it was with the writing of the characters and with their original or supposed original meaning that Hsü was chiefly concerned. It is for what he achieved in these matters that his work has been highly prized by native scholars. The preface also, which forms chuan 15 of the treatise as it was ​published, is of great value for the information it gives about the book and about the cultivation of the language up to the author's time. The "Shuo-wên" has always been in high esteem among native scholars, who regard it as necessary to the understanding of the books which were written before it, and as the standard for those which have been written since. While many of its successors have long ago died, the "Shuo-wên" still lives and has its old authority. It has served also as a text on which many later scholars, some of whose works will appear below, have discoursed with various learning.
Another treatise which illustrates the language of the Latter Han period is the "Shi-ming" (釋名) or Name Explainer. This was compiled by a man whose surname was Liu (劉). He gives his name as Hsi (熙), but others call him Chên (珍) apparently, or Hsi (喜), and his second name was Chêng-kuo (成國). He was, according to one account, a native of what is now Ch'ing-chow (青州), in Shantung, and he lived in the latter part of the second century of our era. He wrote a commentary on Mencius, and was apparently a good scholar.
The "Shi-ming" is a vocabulary and dictionary of words distributed under twenty-seven headings, and divided into four chuan. The first category is Heaven, and then we have Earth, Mountains, Water, Food, Clothing, and others, the last being Death and Mourning. The "names" given under these headings are mainly terms in common use, and the explanations were evidently intended, as the author tells us, for the unlearned. The analyses and meanings are not convincing, and sometimes they appear to be almost comical. But many of them are curious and give help to the student. The author explains fang (房), a house, by pang (旁), the side, because dwelling-houses are on each side of the court. A well is ching (井), that is, ch'ing (清), pure. An island is tao (島), because it is a place to which men go, tao (到), for shelter. A father, fu (父), is fu (甫), the beginning, because he starts the baby in life; and a mother, mu (母), is mao (冒) to cover, ​because she covers the baby in her womb. Su (俗), common, is yü (欲), to want, what the common people want. Such popular etymologies as these gave those for whom they were designed a clue to the sounds of the characters, and at the same time supplied a reason for the use or meaning of the words of daily life. The meaning is generally right, though the reason is wrong. Unscientific derivations of words are not often correct, and some of those in the "Shi-ming" remind us of like ones at home. The origin of the word anchoress, for example, as given by an old writer, would quite suit the author of this book. The anchoress is told — "for thi ancre is icleoped ancre and under chirche i-ancred, ase ancre under schipes borde." The "Shi-ming" does not seem to be indebted to any of its predecessors except perhaps the "Urh-ya," which is mentioned in it by name. It is often quoted by later writers, but apparently in the enlarged edition to be noticed presently.
In addition to those here noticed there were several other scholars of the Han period who made a study of the language. Such were Ma Yung (馬融) and his great disciple Chêng Hsüan (鄭玄) al. Chêng Kang-chêng (康成). These, however, devoted themselves mainly to the old canonical literature, and it was only with a view to the elucidation of the orthodox texts that they studied the language. From the writings of these and the many other scholars who gave its literary glory to this dynasty, the language acquired a considerable degree of exactness and polish. It became a medium of expressing with clearness and precision not only social and political facts and doctrines, but also the nice refinements of literary criticism. The characters already in existence had their meanings defined according to the uses of classical authorities, and many new characters were added.
Long before the time at which we have now arrived, however, Buddhist missionaries had come from India and settled down in China. In order to have their sacred books translated and their religion propagated in the country, they had to learn ​its language. This must have appeared to them, when compared with their own, barbarous and ungainly, and incapable of reproducing accurately either the sounds or the teachings of their books. They accordingly tried to introduce their own alphabet and have it brought into use in China, but in this they completely failed. They succeeded, however, in teaching the Chinese, or at least in giving popularity among them to an art of spelling, which, though rude and inaccurate, is better than none. This is the procedure known as Fan-ch'ie (反切), from fan, to turn back, and ch'ie, to rub, an appropriately hazy designation. By this method the sound of a character is given by two other characters, of which one forms the initial and the other the final; these two are manipulated in such a way as to yield the sound required, the tone being given by the final. The process was at first called fan (反), and when this character was taboo and unlucky, ch'ie was substituted: but this was in time replaced by the phrase now in use. It appears, also, that before any of the foreign missionaries came into China its scholars had to some extent a system of spelling like the fan-ch'ie. Many instances of this are given, and it is probable that many more might be added. One or two examples may be here presented. The word p'o (叵), cannot, was spelled pu-k'o (不可), as the character p'o in the old writing indicates, the character being self-spelling, and self-explaining. So also ho (盇) was spelled by ho-pu (何不); and chu (諸) by chĭ-hu (之乎). The first marking and describing of the four tones at a later date, and the classification of human sounds according to the physical organs employed in their production, are also generally attributed to Buddhist missionaries. The times at which the above steps were taken cannot be exactly determined, nor, apparently, is any one of the innovations uniformly associated with any particular individual. All that we learn is that they originated with Buddhist monks from India, or at least obtained currency through their teaching.
​We have now arrived at the period of Chinese history known as that of the Three Kingdoms, or San-Kuo (三國), when the country was divided into the Han, Wei, and Wu kingdoms. During this short but troubled period, extending from A.D. 220 to 265, the cultivation of the language steadily advanced. Up to this time, we are told, there had been little care given to the spoken words or the pronunciation of characters. But now these matters also began to be thought of importance. The first, apparently, to write on the sounds of characters, was Ts'ao Chih (曹植) al. Ts'ao Tzŭ-chien (子建), who lived from 192 to 232. He was a son of the famous Ts'ao Ts'ao, Prince of Wei, in the North of China. But Ts'ao Chih was a poet and a student, choosing the quite pleasures of learning rather than the bustling turmoil of public life, nor heeding the contempt with which he was treated by his warlike relatives. He was the author of a work called The Forty-two Documents (or Tallies), (四十二契), in which he treated of more than 3,000 Shêng (聲), or sounds for characters. About the same time Li Têng (李登), a public officer of the Wei kingdom, compiled the "Shêng-lei" (聲類) in ten chapters; and this is said to have been the first book to give a classification of characters according to their sounds. But it is to be noted that with these two writers the term Shêng is used generally, and not in the restricted sense of "tone."
In this period we have also the well-known treatise called "Kuang-ya" (廣雅) or "Po(博)-ya." This was compiled by Chang I (張揖), of the Wei kingdom, about the year 265. It is a supplement to the "Urh-ya," the authorship of which work Chang, in his Memorial to the Throne, ascribes to Chow Kung. The "Po-ya" is little more than a large classified vocabulary with occasional short comments or descriptions. As we have it now, the pronunciation of most of the characters is given, but this was the work of an editor in the Sui period, whose name was Ts'ao Hsien (曹憲). The pronunciation is sometimes given in the ​fan-ch'ie way, and often by one word. The pairs of characters thus represented as like in sound are occasionally interesting to observe. Thus, for example, the character now called wêng (翁) is given as like kung (公) in sound, and this helps us to understand why these two characters are found to be interchanged. It was this same editor who in the name of the book changed Kuang to Po in order to avoid using the name of the Emperor Yang of the Sui dynasty. In addition to the "Po-ya," Chang I wrote also the "P'i Ts'ang" (埤蒼), in three chuan; the "San-ts'ang-hsün-ku" (三蒼訓詁), in three chuan; and two other treatises, all on subjects connected with the language. He is said to have been a good scholar in this branch of knowledge, and he is often quoted, but most of his writings seem to have been lost long ago.
The period of the Three Kingdoms was succeeded by that of the Chin (晉) dynasty, which lasted from 265 to 419. In this period the first name to be mentioned is that of Wei Chao (韋昭), who was famous as a scholar and commentator. He edited the "Shi-ming," and greatly enlarged the original work, specially adding to it terms relating to government and state affairs generally.
Another distinguished student of the language about the same time was Sun Yen (孫炎). This scholar is better known by his other name, Shu-jan (叔然), which he had to use on the accession of Chin Wu-ti, who also had the name Yen. Sun was a native of Lê-an (樂安), in the present province of Shantung, and was born in the latter part of the Han period. Hence he is variously described as of the Han, Wei (San-Kuo) and Chin dynasties. He was a follower of the teachings of Chêng Kang-ch'êng, who spent the last years of his life at his native place, also in Shantung. Sun, who was celebrated among his contemporaries for his great learning, was the author of several treatises on the old classics. Among them was one on the "Urh-ya," in six chuan, and called "Urh-ya-yin-i" (爾雅音義). In this he seems to have used the fan-ch'ie spelling, and some ​writers assert that he was the first native author to adopt that method. This treatise was much used by subsequent editors of the "Urh-ya," but it cannot be said to have held a high place in native esteem.
The first addition to the "Shuo-wên" was made in this period by Lü Shên (呂忱), a native of Jen (任), a town in what is now the Prefecture of Yenchow, in Shantung. Lü Shên, who was a contemporary of Sun Yen, was an official and a scholar, but he is chiefly remembered as the compiler of the "Tzŭ-lin" (字林) or Grove of Characters. This is variously spoken of as in one, three, five, six, or seven chuan; or as in five chapters (pien). It was intended to be a supplement to the "Shuo-wên," and many characters were given in it which had been left out from the "Shuo-wên," either designedly or otherwise. These characters were derived from various sources, but mainly from the old tablets and those in the Great Seal writing, and they were new and unknown to the scholars of this time. The "Tzŭ-lin" soon came to take its place as an appendix to the "Shuo-wên," and to be regarded as a good authority. Some scholars have even maintained that the text of the modern editions of the "Shuo-wên," is indebted to this work. The first to enrich the "Tzŭ-lin" with notes and comments was a Buddhist monk, Yun Shêng (雲勝), but little is known of him or his work. The "Tzŭ-lin," however, has been often reprinted, and great additions have been made to the text, but it has long been hard to find.
A younger brother of Lü Shên, by name Ching (靜), was also a scholar and a writer on the language. He compiled the "Yun-chi" (韻集), called also "Chi-yun," or Collection of Finals, in five chuan. This book, which was founded on the "Shêng-lei" of Li Têng, had the characters arranged according to the five yin, or musical notes. It is in this work, according to some writers, that the expression Yun-shu (韻書), Book of Finals, first occurs; and the first use of yun in its restricted sense of final is ​also ascribed to its author. But others refer the first use of yun in this technical sense to Luh Chi or Luh Fa-yen. On this point the general statement is perhaps the correct one, to wit, that this use of the character yun began in the Chin Sung (or Chin Wei) period, or after the middle of the third century of our era.
Contemporary with the above was Luh Chi (陸機) al. Luh Shi-hêng (士衡), the ill-fated poet, soldier, and scholar. His life, which lasted only from 261 to 303, was one of worry and distress, yet he found time to write above 200 chuan, which were thought worthy to live. In one of his writings the word yun is found contrasted with wên, the spoken word with the written character. Some writers, as has been stated, regard Luh Chi as the first to use yun in its technical sense.
But the greatest among the students of the language at this period was Kuoh P'oh (郭璞) al. Kuo Ching-shun (景純). This man, who lived from 276 to 324, was a native of Wên-hsi (聞喜) in the present province of Shansi. He was the son of an official and scholar and followed his father's example. But it was more as an astrologer, and necromancer, and alchemist that he was celebrated during his lifetime than as an official or a scholar. He was from youth a lover of all curious learning, and a devoted student of early literature. He wrote several works on the ancient classics, but his fame now among native scholars rests mainly on his labours in connection with the "Urh-ya" and the "Fang-yen." He edited the text of the former and added an illustrative commentary giving the sounds and explanations of many of the characters. This commentary was afterwards incorporated in the edition of the "Urh-ya" produced by Hsing Ping of the Sung dynasty, and it is still an authority. The manuscript of the "Fang-yen" was put in order and published by Kuo, with notes which give the sounds and meanings of rare or difficult characters. Native students still regard this work as ​a text-book and as the only authoritative edition of the "Fan-yeng" The old treatise known as the "San-ts‘ang," noticed above, was also edited by Kuo and furnished with a commentary: and he composed other books on subjects connected with the language.
The extinction of the Chin dynasty in 420 was followed by that division of the empire known as the South and North Dynasties, which lasted to the year 588. Of this period, however, only the portion embraced by the Southern Dynasties Ch'i (齊) and Liang (粱), extending from 479 to 557, is of much importance in connection with our subject. It marks an epoch in the cultivation of the language, and is regarded as the period in which the study of etymology began to flourish.
The first name to mention is that of Chow Yü (周顒) al. Chow Yen-lun (彥倫) who lived in the second half of the fifth century. He was a native of Ju-nan, in the province of Honan, and held office, but he is remembered only as an author on the language. The treatise ascribed to him was the "Ssŭ-shêng-ch‘ie-yun" (四聲切韻), Words Pronounced According to the Four Tones. This is said to have been the first native work in which the four tones—P‘ing, Shang, Ch‘ü, Ju—were distinguished, and also one of the earliest treatises in which the fan-ch‘ie mode of giving the sounds was systematically adopted. The work was long since lost, and its contents are known only by the statements of subsequent writers. Of Chow Yen-lun the well-known story is told that when Liang Wu Ti refused to recognise the four tones, the courtly scholar convinced him of their existence by the expression T‘ien-tzŭ-shêng-choh (天子聖哲), Your Majesty is saintly wise. This story is told also of Shên Yo, and of his disciple Chow Shi (周捨).
Next to Chow Yen-lun comes Shên Yo (沈約), al. Shên Hsiu-wên (休文). The native place of Shên was Wu-hsing (吳興) in the present prefecture of Hu-chow, near the T‘ai-hu ​in Chekiang. He lived from 441 to 513 and held various offices, but all his love through life was for learning and the society of scholars. Several historical and other works were composed by him, but his fame rests chiefly on his contributions to the study of the language. These were made in a treatise called "Ssŭ-shêng-yun-pu" (四聲譜韻) or Record of Finals (or words) according to the Four Tones. This treatise did not survive very long, apparently, but it did not perish until it had been greatly used and had gained a high reputation. It was based on the treatise above mentioned by Chow Yen-lun, and as the two men were contemporary, Shên may have derived from Chow his learning on the "four tones." But some think that Shên was the first to discover these and make them known. He is represented as saying that though men had written poetry for thousands of years they had not noticed the distinction which he alone discovered by silent thought. Others tell us that Shên was the first to present in a tabulated form a system of initials and finals according to the four tones. He is said to have adopted Chow's system of giving the pronunciation, and to have illustrated it by the rhymes in the "Shi-ching," adding the results of his own thought and reading. The following description of the four tones is sometimes ascribed to Shên Yo, but it is perhaps due to a later writer. The p‘ing shêng is said to be sad and even, the shang fierce and raised, the c'hü clear and receding, and the ju direct and shortened. It is interesting to compare this description with those given in other places, for example with the one given in the Introduction to Kang-hsi's Dictionary. One critical objection that has been made to Shên Yo's etymological teachings is that he wished to made the sounds of his native place the standard for the empire, to regard the dialect of Wu as the language of China.
That Shên Yo was not the first to discover the existence of the "four tones" and mark their differences scarcely admits of doubt, notwithstanding the assertion to the contrary made by ​him or his biographer. The distinction was most probably first observed by the Indian missionaries, and it was known to native scholars at least in the reign of Ch‘i Wu Ti, A.D. 483 to 494. But the discovery was not fully recognized and adopted until the time of Liang Wu Ti, A.D. 502 to 550. About this time several other scholars also wrote on the subject of the "four tones" and it soon became a popular one, though not without protests. It does not seem to have been well known, however, to another contemporary of Shên Yo who also became famous in literature. This was Liu Hsie (劉勰) al. Liu Yen-ho (彥和), a native of Tung-kuan (東莞) in Shantung, in the time of Liang Wu Ti. He was a great reader and a good writer, and some of his works have been preserved. Among these is one called by its author "Wên-hsin-tiao-lung," (文心雕龍), The Carved Dragon of the Heart of Literature, that is, the finest ornaments of the best writing. This treatise is divided into ten chuan containing fifty chapters, the last of which gives some account of the work and the origin of the title, and from it the explanation here given has been derived. The work is a series of essays on various literary and other subjects, and is written in a loose, easy style. It touches on nearly every subject known at the time connected with the origin and development of language and literature. Its notices of the first rise and meaning of new expressions are specially interesting, though not always correct, and it abounds in references to old authors.
The next writer on the language to come under notice is Chiang Shi (江式) al. Chiang Fa-an (法安), a native of Chi-yang (濟陽) in Honan. He was the author of the "Ku-chin-wên-tzŭ" (古今文字) in forty chuan, published in the year 514. Chiang was a man of inherited literary tastes and of great learning. In the above treatise he made the "Shuo-wên" his standard of authority (主), and he seems to have read with care all the good literature bearing on the characters. It was to these rather than to the spoken sounds that he devoted his thoughts and reading.
​A much more famous author, however, was Ku Ye-wang (顧野王) al. Ku Hsi-fêng (希馮). This man was a native of K'un-shan (崑山), in the Soochow Prefecture of Kiangsu, and lived from 519 to 581. He rose to high office under the Ch'ên dynasty, but his reputation as an official was eclipsed by his fame as a great scholar and an author. The work with which his name is most associated is the dictionary called "Yü-pien" (玉篇), in thirty chuan. This was finished and published in 543, but no copy of that edition has been in existence for a long time, the earliest known edition being that published in 675 by Sun Ch'iang (孫强). The "Yü-pien" was based on the "Shuo-wên" and followed the arrangement of that dictionary, adding and omitting characters. The current style of writing—the chiai (楷)—was substituted in it for the now obsolete characters used by Hsü Shên. It makes use of 542 classifiers (radicals), and gives throughout the fan-ch'ie way of spelling. Whether, however, this latter was the work of the original compiler may at least be doubted. As left by him the "Yü-pien" is said to have been very imperfect, omitting many characters, faulty in arrangement, and abounding in errors. Native scholars who may be disposed to regret the loss of the first edition may console themselves with the reflection that it was not so good as the one to which they now have access.
To the latter part of this period belongs another distinguished man, Yen Chih-t'ui (顔之推) al. Yen Tzŭ-fên (子分). He was born in 531 and lived to the end of the period. As he held office for a considerable time under the North Ch'i rulers he is generally spoken of as belonging to that dynasty. But he has come down to posterity only as an author, and specially as the author of the "Chia-hsün" (家訓), or Family Teaching. This treatise, as we have it now, is in two chuan, divided into twenty chapters; and it treats of many subjects connected with the good conduct and education of a family in a style easy and pleasant. Several chapters are devoted to subjects connected with the language, and these are among the most interesting. The whole of ​the eighteenth chapter, for example, is devoted to language and philology, and it will repay a reading. From this book we learn that the "Shuo-wên" was at this period regarded as the ultimate standard of appeal; its readings of the canonical works were taken against those of the current texts. Yen Chih-t‘ui was also author of two works specially devoted to matters relating to etymology. These were the "Chêng-su-yin-tsŭ" (證俗音字), and the "Tzŭ-shi" (字始). Yen was a native of Lang-ye (瑯琊), the modern Yi-chow in Shantung.
About this time the son of one of the North Ch‘i Emperors introduced to native scholars an expedient which, though it did not meet with much popularity, deserves some notice. It is known as Tzŭ-ch‘ie (自切) or Tzŭ-fan (自反) and among Buddhist writers as Ch‘ie-shên (切身), all expressions having the meaning of self-spelling. By this expedient the sound of a character is given in the composition of the character. Thus the sound te is expressed by 丁也, that is, ting 丁 and ye 也; to make tsi, the initial tsu 足 is placed at the side of i 亦. Properly, the character which gives the initial is placed at the left side of that which yields the final, but the rule was not generally observed. This mode of representing sounds is expressly stated to have been derived from the Buddhists, but it was apparently used before the Indians came into the country. The translators of the Buddhist sacred books, however, used this method to some extent in transcribing Sanskrit sounds, and so made it popularly known. It is not improbable that a closer study of Chinese would show that the apparently meaningless composition of many characters is the result of an attempt to make them self-pronouncing.
During the short-lived Sui dynasty, from 589 to 618, the study of the language continued to flourish. Much attention was now paid to the tones and the sounds of characters generally, rather to the neglect of other matters relating to the history of the language. We find mention of a book written about this time ​on the finals, called "Yen-tsuan" (韻纂), by Tsün, Prince of Ch‘in (秦王俊). This work, we are told, made the sounds of characters the chief thing, and so differed from the "Shuo-wên" and "Tzŭ-lin." Butlittle notice is found of the book, and it was apparently not of much importance. It was added to the "Ch‘ie-yun" of Luh Fa-yen, as a sort of appendix, by Kuo Chih-hsüan.
This Luh Fa-yen (陸法言), called also Luh Tzŭ-pei (詞輩), has an important place in the history of the cultivation of the language. With the co-operation of Liu Chin (劉臻) and seven others, including Yen Chih-t‘ui, some from the south and some from the north, Luh made the phonetic dictionary with which his name is associated. This treatise was begun in 581 and first published in 601, but no copy of that edition seems to have survived very long. The earliest edition which became generally known was that of 677. In this year the work was edited by Kuo Chih-hsüan (郭知玄) and published with the title "Ssŭ-shêng-ch‘ie-yun" (四聲切韻) in five chuan. It cannot be known what the original text of Luh contained, for we are told that Kuoh and others made many additions and corrections. The "Ch‘ie-yun," to use the short title of the work, as Kuo left it, had the characters arranged under 206 finals according to the four tones. It was the first dictionary apparently to do so, and from it latter works derived the system. Luh and his associates, who were all scholars well learned in the language, took the works of Chow Yen-lun and Shên Yo as their basis, and the "Ch‘ie-yun" is described by some as the lineal successor or continuation of Shên Yo's treatise. The aim of Luh and his fellow-workers was to correct the mistakes which had been made by their predecessors, and to reform abuses in the employment of characters generally, adding the correct pronunciation of these according to classical authorities. They wished to make and transmit a uniform language, to establish a criterion for ancient times and a standard for the modern. It is not known how much of the "Ch‘ie-yun" was due to Luh himself. Some think that he only arranged and edited the materials which Liu Chin and the seven others had collected. ​These men seem to have taken a very extensive course of reading, and to have otherwise gone to work very earnestly. The employment of the 206 finals is by some attributed to the T‘ang editor Kuo Chih-hsüan, and no one seems to know who first invented the system or when it arose. The "Ch‘ie-yun," however, is generally spoken of as Luh's work, and is described as having been a treatise of great research and careful execution. It came to be largely used by later writers in the compilation of dictionaries and other works on the language.
To the Sui succeeded the T‘ang dynasty, which is counted as lasting from 618 to 906. In this period learning of various kinds was favoured and encouraged, and several of the Emperors were patrons and cultivators of learning and literature. Not only were the old native classics, especially the "Shi-ching," now studied with renewed enthusiasm, but the sacred and other books of the Indian Buddhists also became well known through translations. The native language also was now studied with great learning and ability, and increased attention was now paid to the tones and the sounds of characters generally. Both Chinese and foreigners now wrote on these subjects, and acquaintance with them was required from the competitors for the state degrees or literary titles by which official employment was obtained.
At the beginning of this period we find Luh Yan-lang (陸元朗), better known by his other name Luh Te-ming (德明), one of the greatest scholars of the T'ang dynasty. He was a native of Soochow and lived at the end of the sixth and the beginning of the seventh century. Among native scholars he is well known for his writings on the "Yi-ching," and for his treatise on the old language. This is called "Ching-tien-shi-wên" (經典釋文), An Explanation of the Terms and Phrases in the Classics. Dr. Legge says of it, "This is more a dissection of the classics, excluding Mencius, and including "Laou-tsze" and "Chwang-tsze," giving the sounds of characters, and the meaning ​of them single and in combination, than a dictionary. It is valuable as a repertory of ancient views." A separate chuan on the old vocabulary, the "Urh-ya," is also given as having been compiled by Luh Tê-ming. It is the 30th and last in the edition I possess, which is a good modern reprint. Another scholar who was already famous when the T‘ang dynasty succeeded was Ts‘ao Hsien (曹憲). The native place of Ts‘ao was Chiang-tu (江都), Yangchow, in Kiangsu, and he lived in the sixth century and the early part of the seventh. During the Sui period he had composed several treatises which had made his name famous. One of these was a new edition, with revised text and a commentary, of the "Kuei-yuan-chu-tsung" (桂苑珠叢), which was made by command of Sui Yang Ti. For the "Urh-ya" and "Kuang-ya," also, Ts‘ao wrote commentaries, giving the sounds and meanings of characters, and these he added to texts which he carefully edited. Another treatise by him was the "Wên-tzŭ-chih-kuei" (文字指歸) or Guide to the Restoration of Characters, on the correct forms of the old writing. By these works Ts‘ao had made himself an authority on all matters relating to the antiquities of the language, and his fame for learning in these matters was over the empire. The T‘ang rulers offered him high office of a congenial nature, but as he had served the Sui dynasty, etiquette forbade him to accept preferment from the new rulers. T‘ai Tsung, however, esteemed him none the less, and was wont to refer to him when in difficulty about a word or phrase. It is for his services in reviving a knowledge of the language as it was before the Han period that Ts‘ao is best remembered. The new learning of tones, and finals, and fan-ch‘ie, had put out of fashion the old learning taught by Tu Lin and his fellows. But by the books which he published, and the great popularity of his teaching, Ts‘ao Hsien brought the attention of students back to the structure and derivation of characters.
Another scholar of great learning and genius who adorned the reign of T‘ai Tsung was Yen Chou-ch‘i (顏籕其), known only by his other name Yen Shi-ku (師古). He was a native of ​Lin-yi (臨沂) in Shantung, and his life extended from 581 to 645. The notes which he added to his edition of the "Han-shu" are very useful to the student of the early language apart from their value otherwise. To him also native scholars are indebted for a good edition of the old "Chih-chiu-chang" (急就章), to which he contributed a valuable commentary.
In 675, as has been stated, Sun Ch‘iang, another great student of the language, produced his edition of the "Yü-pien." This is the earliest one known at present, and the only edition which has authority. The full title of the work as we have it now is "Ta-kuang-i-hui-yü-pien" (大廣益會玉篇), but this is seldom used.
A commentary on the "Ch‘ie-yun" of Luh Fa-yen was composed in 677 by Ch‘ang-sun Noh-yen (長孫訥言); and in the same year Kuo Chih-hsüan, as stated above, brought out his edition of the "Ch‘ie-yun." This was republished in 751 by Sun Mien (孫愐) and others, with the title "T‘ang-yun." The new editors added to the original work and corrected its errors, but they do not seem to have made any great changes. The pronunciations of the characters were retained, and all the arrangements of the "Ch‘ie-yun." This last, however, had received many additions and undergone many modifications since the date of its first publication, and the "T‘ang-yun" apparently reduced these to order. Sun Mien and his associates used a large number of books—classics, histories, and travels—beside the writings of their predecessors on sounds and characters, in the preparation of their work, which occupied them several years. It has been said that this dictionary was the first treatise in which attention was directed to the differences between modern and ancient sounds, that is, perhaps, the first in which this was done systematically. The book itself, however, became extinct long ago, and it is known only by notices of it in other treatises. It has been added that not only the "T‘ang-yun" but also all other treatises on rhymes or finals produced before the end of this dynasty have long ago perished.
​The old learning, also, about this time received attention from a faithful adherent, Li Yang-ping (李陽冰) al. Shao-wên (少温), who lived in the second half of the eighth century. Li was a relative of the celebrated poet of the same surname, and held office under the Emperors Su Tsung and Tai Tsung (756 to 780). In philology he claimed to be a reviver of the study of the old language before the time of the "Shuo-wên." To this book he devoted himself with great zeal, and he published an edition of it in thirty chuan. At this time the text of the "Shuo-wên" was full of errors, and much had been left or had fallen out, and Li wished to restore it to the state in which he supposed Hsü Shên had left it. So he introduced many characters from the old "Seal" and earlier writings, and altered the forms of others, and thus made what he considered improvements to the "Shuo-wên." But the critics who came after him thought differently and regarded his innovations as a cause of confusion. They were wroth with him for finding fault with the venerated classic. It was owned, however, that few could equal Li Yang-ping in a knowledge of the "Seal" characters, a knowledge in which he was said to be not inferior to Li Ssŭ. Li Yang-ping compiled a treatise on these characters and another one on unauthorized or forbidden characters. His learned work on the "Shuo-wên," however, was his chief contribution to the cultivation of the language, and yet it was destined to have only a short-lived popularity.
Among those who about the time of the T‘ang dynasty contributed to the study and improvement of the Chinese language we must not omit the Buddhist monks. It is not possible to do more here than simply mention a few individuals. Of these and their philological works few particulars are given in books now accessible, and it is in some cases hard to find when and where they lived. Some of the missionaries from India, and a few of the Chinese monks who had studied in that country, wrote books on the Sanskrit grammar and alphabet. The knowledge ​thus communicated was afterwards turned to account by native authors in the study of Chinese. We now read for the first time of tzŭ-mu (字母), letters, alphabet, or, in the narrowest use of the term, characters employed as initials. We are told that the first occurrence of the term is in the translation of a sutra, the "Wên-chu-wên-ching" (文殊問經) that is, the Mañjusri Pariprichchhā Sūtra, by Pu-k‘ung (不空), Amoghavajra. This celebrated monk, originally a Brahman of North India, lived in the eighth century and spent many years at Ch‘ang-an in China. But the use of certain Chinese characters to serve for the transcription of the Sanskrit alphabet seems to have been known some centuries before his time.
In this period, also, Shên-kung (神珙), an Indian monk of great learning, taught the use of the tones and the art of analysing and compounding the sounds of human speech. His diagrams illustrating his teachings are to be found as an appendix to the "Yü pien." Shên-kung is also said to have selected thirty characters, kien (見), etc., to represent the Sanskrit consonants and serve as initials. This achievement, however, is also ascribed to Shê-li (舍利) another Indian missionary, if these two names do not indicate only one individual. To the thirty characters thus selected six more were added by Shou-wên (守温), a learned monk of China or Corea and the author of a small treatise on the finals. The system of thirty-six initials which this Buddhist introduced is known in literature as the Chung-yin-tzŭ-mu (中音字母) or Standard Alphabet, Initials for the Sounds of Correct Chinese. These characters, sometimes with slight changes, are in use at present as initials, and they are to be found so employed in Kanghsi's Dictionary and in many other treatises.
We must needs also reckon the "I-ch‘ie-ching-yin-i" (一切經音義), or Sounds and Meanings of all the Buddhist Sacred Books, as a contribution to the cultivation of the language. This great work was founded on others of the same kind which have ​long been lost. It was originally in twenty-five chuan and was compiled about the middle of the sixth century by Yuan-ying (元應), called also Hsüan-ying (玄應), a monk who lived at Chang-an. The work is a glossary to the foreign, technical, and difficult words and phrases in the Buddhist canon. It gives the sounds and meanings of the Sanskrit proper names and terms of religion, and the different transcriptions which had been used. Important Chinese phrases are also explained and the pronunciation of characters given and illustrated. The compiler generally bases his statement or interpretation of Chinese expressions on standard native authorities. Thus he often quotes such works as the "Ts‘ang-chie-pien," the "Shuo-wên," the "Yü-pien," the "Kuang-ya," and the commentaries on the Confucian classics. Though native scholars quote this treatise freely it is not easy to consult, owing to the absence of an index and the want of a good arrangement. It is also pronounced to be faulty in the use which it makes of the Han writers and in the sounds which it assigns to characters. Two chapters were added some time afterwards by a subsequent editor. These were the work of Hui-yuan (慧苑), another Buddhist monk who lived some time after Yuan-ying, and they may be regarded as a sort of supplement to the first part of the latter's work. But they do not show the great learning and industry of the author of the "I-ch‘ie-ching-yin-yi."
To these may be added the names of a few other works composed by Buddhist monks of this period. The "Hsiang-wên" (像文) a treatise on the "Yü-pien," was compiled by Hui-li (慧力); the "Wên-tzŭ-shi-hsün" (文字釋訓) was by Pao-chih (寶誌); the "Yun-ying" (韻英) by Ching-hung (靜洪); and a useful supplement to the "Ch‘ie-yun" was contributed by Yu-chih (猷智).
In several respects the period of the T‘ang dynasty forms an era of great importance in the history of the cultivation of the language. It was the time in which China first began to have a popular literature, and the classical works of antiquity were now published in a form which made them accessible to all. In the ​year 744 an Imperial order was given to the Chi-hsien (集賢) College to have the "Shu-ching" transcribed in the characters in common use at the time. The Emperor, Ming Huang, disliked the li characters in which the "Shu" and other classics continued to be written. Moreover, these characters had become obsolete, hard to learn, and liable to confusion, and only professional scholars could read the canonical books. The Emperor's order was carried out by Wei Pao (衛包) and his fellow-collegians, and the editions of the classics in the vulgar writing soon superseded the others. Plays also now began to be written and performed and romances to be composed in a style often but little removed from that of everyday conversation. These, however, tended to make the dialect in which they were composed fashionable and permanent. Hence we find it stated that with them arose the Kuan-hua or standard language of the country; that which thus became the language of the empire having been previously only the dialect of Kiangnan.
The invention of printing in China dates from the T‘ang dynasty, though it is generally ascribed to Fêng Tao (馮道) who lived in the succeeding period, that of the Wu Tai or five short dynasties. It was apparently Fêng, however, who introduced the art of printing by cutting characters in wooden blocks, and the first books to be thus printed were the authoritative texts of the canonical works of antiquity. It was not, however, until the next dynasty that the invention led to great results.
The next dynasty was the Sung, which gives its name to the period from 960 to 1280. This was, according to general native opinion, the time of China's best literary and philosophical activity, the time of her greatest thinkers, her most thorough scholars, and her most accomplished statesmen. It was also the time in which the language is supposed to have reached its acme, to have become complete in all its formal and material equipment, having everything needful to make it an effective instrument for expressing the national mind. The invention of printing now led to a ​great activity in the production of books, and a general diffusion of learning. In the department of philology we find mention of many new treatises, some of which were of great and permanent value. Old works half-forgotten or rendered obscure by corrupt readings—the growth of centuries—were restored to something like their original state. New works of a critical or historical nature, and some of a speculative character on subjects connected with the language, were also published.
The first writers in this department to fall under our notice are the two brothers Hsü. These men, who flourished in the middle and latter half of the tenth century, were natives of Kuang-ling in the modern Prefecture of Yang-chow, Kiangsu. The younger brother was Ch‘ie (徐鍇) al. Ch‘u-chin (楚金), and he came to be known also as the Hsiao, or young Hsü, to distinguish him from his brother. He was a great lover of learning, but specially devoted to an enthusiastic study of the "Shuo-wên." In order to facilitate the use of that dictionary he produced the "Shuo-wên-yun-pu" (說文韻譜). In this treatise, which soon fell into unmerited neglect, a phonetic arrangement of the "Shuo-wên" was attempted, the head words being disposed according to the finals and the four tones. The editor curtailed, however, and otherwise tampered with the text of his author, and the treatise by which Hsü Ch‘ie is best known is the "Shuo-wên Hsi-chuan" (繫傅), or Appendix to the "Shuo-wên." In this we have what its author regarded as a restored text of the "Shuo-wên," with notes critical and illustrative, and the sounds of the head characters given according to the spelling of Hsü's time by a scholar named Chu Ao (朱翱). This part of the work extends over thirty chapters, and they are followed by two other chapters to show that the classifiers of the "Shuo-wên" proceed in a natural order. To these succeed three chapters explanatory of certain categories; one of criticisms specially on the innovations of Li Yang-ping, one in which the classifiers are arranged in groups or ​classes; one in which the raveled uses of characters are brought into order; one in which the doubts about certain words are discussed; and a last one in which the contents of the thirty-nine preceding chapters are summarized. The work is one of great learning and genius, but its theories and criticisms are too subtle and fanciful. Hsü Ch‘ie, it has been said, reverenced the "Shuo-wên" as a canonical book, and no one up to his time equalled him in the zeal and learning devoted to that work. His great treatise, as it has come down to us, has many errors and mistakes, partly due to copyists or printers and partly to the want of revision. A learned and critical examination of it has been made by a late scholar, who has pointed out and corrected the mistakes of Hsü Ch‘ie and his brother. This reviewer is Ch‘i Shun-fu (祁淳甫 al. 父), and his work in three chuan is now published as an appendix to the reprint of Hsü's "Shuo-wên Hsi-chuan."
This last had, soon after it was originally published, been put out of fashion by the edition of the "Shuo-wen" which bears the name of the elder brother. This brother Hsüan (鉉) al. Ting-ch‘ên, (鼎臣), is known also as Ta (or Elder) Hsü, and he is quoted in literature as I-t‘ung (儀同) from the name of a public office which he held. He was born in the year 916, four years before Ch‘ie, and he lived until 991, surviving his younger brother seventeen years. These two brothers had like tastes and pursuits, and it was at the request of the elder that the younger compiled his phonetic edition of the "Shuo-wên," to which, when ready for publication, the elder brother contributed an introduction. They both entered the state service, but the elder, more fortunate than the younger, lived to enjoy public life at the capital, though the end of his career was clouded by official disgrace. His fame also rests entirely on his labours in connection with the "Shuo-wên." These were undertaken in obedience to the commands of the celebrated Emperor Tai Tsung, who appointed a commission to make a new and correct edition of the text of that work. At the head of this was Hsü Hsüan, and he had the co-operation of several distinguished scholars. The result of their labours was the treatise known as the "Hsü ​Hsüan Shuo-wên-chu," which was finished in the year 986. In the preparation of this treatise Li Yang-ping's edition was taken as a basis, but the fanciful corrections and innovations of that editor were rejected. The new editors, however, also introduced many corrections and made many additions. The latter are marked by the words hsin-fu (新附), "newly added," prefixed to them. The pronunciation of the head characters is given according to the teaching of Sun Mien in his dictionary of the language published in the T‘ang period. Criticisms and illustrations by the editors are distinguished as theirs, and they often quote from the work of the younger Hsü. Neither of these brothers gave much study to the phonetics of the language, and later scholars object to them that they overlooked the changes which had passed over the sounds of characters between the Han and T‘ang dynasties.
Some also have found fault with Hsü Hsüan for the additions which he made to the "Shuo-wên," and specially for the introduction of non-classical characters. Yet his edition remains to this day popular with students, and it may be regarded as giving the authoritative text. Thus in the Kanghi Dictionary Hsü's "additions" are treated as part of the genuine text, and so in other works of authority. One of the many reprints of the work is that published in 1809, carefully revised and edited by Sun Hsing-yen (孫星衍).
About the same time that the "Shuo-wên" was receiving new life from the brothers Hsü, another old classic, the "Urh-ya," also was revived. In the year 999 a revised and corrected edition of this thesaurus was prepared by a commission of learned men appointed by the Emperor. At the head of this commission was Hsing Ping (邢昺) al. Hsing Shu-ming (叔明), who lived from 932 to 1010. Hsing was a good official, a learned scholar, and the author of several treatises. At present he is perhaps best known by his labours on the Canon of Filial Piety and the ​"Urh-ya." For his edition of the latter treatise he studied the various texts and commentaries in existence. These, and specially the works of Liu Hsin, Sun Yen, and Kao Lien he used as his foundation; but he adopted as his text that of Kuo Po's edition and retained all Kuo Po's comments. Classic and commentary, however, were subjected to a careful examination before being incorporated in the new work. The short title of this is "Urh-ya-chu-su," that is, the "Urh-ya" with Kuo Po's explanations and the commentary of Hsing Ping and his colleagues. This edition was for a time popular among students, but it fell into disrepute even during the Sung period. It has been condemned by later critics as superficial and unclassical, and as careless and dishonest. Still it has been often reprinted, and it is one of the Thirteen Canonical Treatises in Yuan-yuan's edition of these. But in the last century it has been superseded apparently by the better work of Shao Chin-han, to be noticed shortly.
Of other writers on the language during the tenth century only two or three need be here mentioned. One of Hsü Hsüan's fellow-workers was Kou Chung-chêng (句中正 al. Tan-jen 坦然), a native of Ch‘êng-tu in Ssŭchuan, who lived from 929 to 1002. Kou was celebrated in life for his great learning and specially for his thorough acquaintance with the antiquities of the language. In addition to his contributions to Hsü's "Shuo-wên" he assisted in the compilation of the "Yung-hsi Kuang-yun," that is, the edition of the "Kuang-yun" which was published in the Yung-hsi period (984 to 988) of T‘ai Tsung's reign. A Buddhist monk of the Khitan country, by name Hsing-chün (行均) published in 997 a treatise to which he gave the title "Lung-k‘an-shou-ching" (龍龕手鏡). This was a sort of dictionary explaining about 26,400 characters. It soon obtained popularity in the country of the author, but it was not admitted openly into China for several years after its publication. Another of the Buddhist monks who contributed to a knowledge of the language at this period was Mêng-ying (夢英). He was far seen in the old writings and ​composed the "Tzŭ-yuan" (字源) in one chuan. The meaning of the title is "Source of Characters," that is, of those in the "Shuo-wên," the book being an attempt to explain the classifiers of that dictionary. The mention of Mêng-ying suggests his critic Kuo Chung-shu (郭忠恕 al. Shu-hsien 恕先). This learned and eccentric genius wrote several treatises, to one of which he gave the name "P‘ei-hsi" (佩觽). This means "Portable Piercer" and the book was intended to be an "unraveler" of the knots of confusion into which the written language had been forced.
About the end of the tenth century was compiled the first edition of the celebrated dictionary "Kuang-yun," the Yung-hsi edition mentioned above. We read indeed of a "Kuang-yun" published during the T‘ang period, but nothing seems to be known of that work; nor, indeed, is much known of the "Yung-hsi Kuang-yun." The edition which has come down to us is the revised and enlarged edition of 1008. The full title of this is "Ta Sung Ch‘ung-hsiu-kuang-yun" (大宋重修廣韻), that is The second revised "Kuang-yun" of the Great Sung Dynasty. This title was given to the treatise by the Emperor Chên Tsung, who had ordered it to be compiled. For this purpose he had appointed a commission, the chief members of which were Ch‘ên Pêng-nien (陳彭年), a native of Nan-ch‘êng in Kiangsi, and Ch‘iu Yung (丘雍), men of learning and repute. The names of these men, however, were not given in the published work. It is acknowledged that the "Kuang-yun" is based on the "T‘ang-yun" and "Yü-pien," and some have not hesitated to assert that it is a combination of these two books, or merely a reprint of the "T‘ang-yun" or the "Ch‘ie-yun." One writer states that in his time the "T‘ang-yun," "Ch‘ie-yun," and "Kuang-yun" were simply one book under different names. This is perhaps overstated and incorrect, but as the last is the only one of the three which has survived, it is not possible to decide from a comparison. The "Kuang-yun" is a phonetic dictionary arranged according to the 206 finals beginning with tung (東). In this arrangement the characters to be described are distributed under the four ​tones—P‘ing, Shang, Ch‘ü, and Ju. The pronunciation of the first of a group of characters is given by the fan-ch‘ie or syllabic spelling. But the sounds thus given are not those of the eleventh century, but of a period at least two or three centuries before. The meanings which it gives are few and unsatisfactory, often putting one off with such stuff as "name of a place," or "name of a person." The number of characters of which the "Kuang-yun" gives explanations is 26,194, but many of these were, even in the eleventh century, obsolete or archaic. This dictionary has a value as the earliest one extant in which the sounds of characters are given systematically. But it has never stood high with native scholars, some of whom do not hesitate to speak of it as a Dodder-garden Book, a treatise dealing with the petty affairs of low occupations. It has, however, been often re-edited and republished, and it is still occasionally reprinted.
About the same time that Ch‘ên Pêng-nien was engaged in the compilation of the "Kuang-yun" he was also busy with a new edition of the "Yü-pien." In this work he was assisted by Ch‘iu Yung and Wu Jui (吳銳). The additions and alterations which had been made by previous editors were carefully examined, and those which were approved were retained. But substantially the new edition was only a corrected reprint of that by Sun Chiang in 674, with a few additions. It bears the title "Ta-kuang-i-hui Yü-pien," and is still the received text of the "Yü-pien."
The "Kuang-yun" was quickly followed by the "Chi-yun" (集韻), another treatise of the same kind. This work was begun apparently in 1034 and finished in 1039. It also was undertaken by Imperial orders and on the petition of certain scholars who found the "Kuang-yun" faulty and untrustworthy, and the object with which it was compiled was to correct the faults and supply the defects of its predecessor. Like it, the "Chi-yun" also was to a large extent a reproduction of the "Ch‘ie-yun," and for the meanings of words it was chiefly indebted to the "Shuo-wen." ​The number of characters of which the meanings and sounds are given is 53,525, or above 27,000 more than the "Kuang-yun" had. Several distinguished scholars were engaged in its compilation and revision, chief among them being Sung Ch‘i (宋祁), Chêng Ch‘ien (鄭戩), Chia Chang-ch‘ao (賈昌朝), Ting Tu (丁度), and Li Shu (李淑), all men of famous learning. Their work, the "Chi-yun," was taken at the time of its publication as an authority for the sounds of characters, and it was several times republished with additions and corrections. By some it was ranked above and by others below the "Kuang-yun." The original edition, however, seems to have soon gone out of print, and the earliest which has survived is perhaps that brought out under the revision of Ssŭ-ma-kuang in 1067.
While the "Kuang-yun" was being prepared another new work of the same kind was being compiled. This also was produced under orders from the Throne, and was published at the same time with the "Kuang-yun." The name which it bore at first was simply "Yun-liao" (韻略), and it was compiled by Ch‘i Lun (戚綸) and others. The authors took the "Ch‘ie-yun" as basis, and by liberal pruning and careful selection produced a treatise which at once found favour. Their work was adopted as the authority on the subject of rhyming words by the Li Pu (Board of Ceremonies) for the State Literary Examinations. In 1038 there appeared a new edition revised by Ting Tu, mentioned above, and issued by the Imperial Academy. This edition received the title "Li Pu Yun-liao," and the work through all its changes has ever since borne that title. The careful and scholarly way in which this dictionary was compiled made it popular with students generally, and even during the Sung period it was several times republished, usually with additions and alterations. Originally it gave the sounds and meanings of only 9,590 characters, being thso of most frequent occurrence, but this number was not adhered to in the various editions. At first also the book was merely a compendium (liao), containing only those head-characters the ​sounds and meanings of which were essential for one competing at the state examinations to know. In a comparatively short time, however, it supplanted all the previous pronouncing dictionaries, being much preferred to the "Kuang-yun" and "Chi-yun." About 1090 a new edition of the "Li Pu Yun-liao" was brought out by Sun O (孫諤) and the poet Su Shi. In this, as in other editions, not a few additions and corrections were made, but it had not any great success. A much more important edition is that which bears the name of the two Mao, father and son. This work, which is commonly quoted by the short title "Tsêng-yun" (增韻), was finished before 1160 but not published until about thirty years later. It was begun by Mao Huang (毛晃) and finished by his son Chü-chêng (居正), natives of Chü-chow (衢州) in Chekiang. In the "Tsêng-yun" above 2,650 characters were added to those given by Ting Tu, but the original number of finals, 206, was retained. This edition of the "Li Pu Yun-liao" had for a time great popularity, especially among the literary men who were candidates for state appointments. Yet it has been severely censured by Liu Yuan and later critics. These have found fault with it for substituting vulgar and incorrect ways of writing characters for those taught by the "Shuo-wên" and other standards. Instances of this reprehensible proceeding are given in the use of 谥 (properly i) for the old and correct 諡, and of 袞 for 衮 kun. In these two cases it will be seen that by the changes in the way of writing, sense and sound are alike liable to be confounded. The misuse here indicated still continues, though educated men prefer to use the forms of the characters taught by the old authorities.
Turning back to the eleventh century we have to note an interesting work, the "Yun-tsung" (韻總), by Chien-yü (鑑聿), a Buddhist monk of Lo-yang. The aim of this treatise, which was in five chuan, with a preface by Ou-yang-hsiu, was to guide to the proper use of the Sanskrit initials, and to give the true and correct sounds of characters. The compiler was well read in the ​curious learning of China and in the literature of his own religion. Another Buddhist monk, Hsiang Ching (相淨), with the help of other men of learning, in the year 1034 compiled the "T‘ien-chu-tzŭ-yuan" (天竺字源). The meaning of this title is Origin of the Indian Letters (or characters), and in the book, which was in seven chuan, the author gave the 12 vowels and 30 consonants of the Sanskrit alphabet in Chinese characters, and instituted a comparison between the languages of India and China.
To this century belongs also Wang An-shi (born 1021, died 1086), poet, scholar, and statesman, but doomed to a bad fame for doing what was new. He was the author of a philological treatise of considerable merit and celebrity. This work, which was in twenty chuan, bore the modest title "Tzŭ-shuo" (字說) or Descriptions of Characters. It was composed when Wang was old and broken, living in obscurity at Nanking. The characters given in it are explained mainly from the point of view of the hui-i, combination-meanings, and the author, according to his critics, makes too much of this class of characters. But the great offence of the "Tzŭ-shuo" is that it dares to censure the "Shuo-wên." It has also been blamed for refinements and hyper-criticism, and it was indexed as unsound. Still its intrinsic merits kept it from utter extinction, and up to the present it is often quoted. By its bold criticism it roused orthodox scholars to take up the "Shuo-wên" and study it with renewed earnestness. Thus a fresh impetus was given to philoligical investigations, and several treatises were called forth in reply to Wang's teachings. These works were generally inferior in knowledge of the language which they displayed to the "Tzŭ-shuo," which was vanquished by an author to be noticed below. Wang's son, P‘ang (雱 al. Yuan-tsê 元澤), also studied and wrote on the language. With the help of his father he compiled an edition of the "Urh-ya " which has been praised for the thorough and methodical manner in which the work was done. He was the author also of the "Tzŭ-shu-wu-tu" (字書誤讀), Faulty Reading of Written Characters.
​Contemporary with Wang An-shi and his disciple in philosophy but not in politics was Luh T'ien (陸佃) al. Nung-shi (農師) of Shao-hsing Foo in Chekiang (born 1042, died 1102). Luh T‘ien devoted his studies largely to the "Urh-ya," and produced a treatise to which he gave the name "Urh-ya Hsin-i" (爾雅新義), New Meanings of the "Urh-ya." This book has received great praise for the careful and thorough manner in which the author treats his subject. He compiled also the "P‘i-ya" (埤雅), a work which he designed to be a sort of supplement to the "Urh-ya," giving the names for common objects. Dr. Legge says that in the "P‘i-ya," Luh is "less careful in describing the appearance of his subjects than in discussing the meaning of their names." The "Shuo-wên" also attracted Luh's attention, and he assisted in the preparation of a new and revised edition of that dictionary.
Another contemporary of Wang An-shi and one of his greatest opponents was the historian Ssŭ-ma-kuang (born 1019, died 1086). This latter also devoted much of his leisure to the study and cultivation of the language. His contribution to the "Chi-yun" has been already mentioned. As companion and supplement to that work Ting Tu suggested and began a treatise, to which when finished the name "Lei-pien" (類篇) was given. This work had to pass through several hands before it was finished and published by Ssŭ-ma-kuang, whose name alone it bears. The "Lei-pien" is a dictionary in which, as in the "Shuo-wên," on which it is founded, the characters are arranged according to classifiers. Of these there are 544 and the number of distinct characters analysed and explained is 31,319. The treatise is in 49 chapters, and thirty years (1038 to 1068) passed while it was being elaborated. To Ssŭ-ma-kuang we owe also the "Ming-yuan" (名苑). In this Garden of Names the author, taking the "Chi-yun" as basis, arranged a large number of characters according to their tones, giving also their composition according to the "Shuo-wên," and adding definitions and illustrations from the classical authors. Another help which ​Ssŭ-ma contributed to an accurate knowledge and proper use of the language is the "Ch‘ie-yun-chih-chang-t‘u," Pronunciation made easy in Tables. In this we have twenty tables representing as many groups of sounds which serve as finals. Each table gives the 36 Sanskrit initials at the head, and under these above 3,000 characters in all are arranged according to the four tones and other technicalities of utterance.
Other writers of distinction on the language in this century were Sung Hsiang (宋庠) and Chang Yu (張有). To the latter the Chinese owe a book for which the orthodox student retains great admiration and almost affection. This is the "Fu-ku-pien" (復古編), a Book which Restores the Ancient, that is, the old writing of characters and their meanings. Chang Yu, whose other names were Ch‘ien-chung (謙中) and Chên-ching (真靜) was a native of what is now Hu-chow in Kiangsu, and lived in the latter half of the eleventh century. His "Fu-ku-pien," which occupied him many years, was not published until the beginning of the next century. The chief part of this treatise is a collection of characters in the "small seal" mode of writing. These are given according to the four tones and the ordinary finals; then the modern form of each is given; the meaning, wrong ways of writing, and the spelling are added. The book contains also collections of compounds and of pairs of characters similar in sound or form or both, but these refer rather to the mere writing. Chang Yu was a strong opponent of Wang An-shi's theories about the "combination meaning," and it was chiefly to combat these that he composed the "Fu-ku-pien" which takes those characters which are made up of two elements, one significant and one phonetic. The "Fu-ku-pien" has been many times edited and republished, and it is still consulted. Its author wrote another treatise on the language, but it does not seem to have survived.
The next author to be mentioned is Chêng Ch‘iao (鄭樵) styled Yü-chung (漁仲) "one of the most erudite and renowned ​men of letters of the Sung dynasty; distinguished by almost universal knowledge." He was born at P‘u-t‘ien in the Hsing-hua Prefecture of Fuhkeen, and his life extended from 1104 to 1162. The sobriquet by which he is known in literature is Mr. Chia-chi (夾漈先生), from the name of the mountain in which he had a lonely retreat. In the monumental work of this scholar—the "T‘ung-chih"—we find two sections devoted to our subject. One in five chuan is the "Liu-shu-liao" (六書略) and the other is headed "Ch‘i-yin-liao" (七音略). The former treats in a clear and copious manner of the six divisions of characters, giving numerous examples and illustrations. It also discusses many points of interest in connection with the development of the language and the changes which words had undergone in the long tract of time. The "Ch‘i-yin-liao" gives 43 Tables of Characters, in which is shown the position which each character has under the thirty-six Sanskrit initials, the native finals, the four tones, and the "Ch‘i-yin" or seven musical tones. It is in these two essays that Cheng compares the sounds and writing of his own language with those of Sanskrit. He has been blamed for carrying his theories of analysis to excess, and for making too many distinctions. But few are competent to judge his teachings and decide on their merits. It is hard even to estimate the amount of patient useful labour spent on the above two works, and yet they are not all that he wrote on subjects connected with the language. He produced also a book in three chuan, "Shi-ku-wên" (石鼓文), in which he argued against the supreme antiquity of the "Stone Drums." From the resemblance of the characters on these to characters found on objects of the Ch‘in dynasty (B.C. 255 to 206) he concluded that the Drums also belong to that period. Cheng composed also a commentary on the "Urh-ya," but this does not seem to have had a long life. Some of his early works on the language were incorporated in those mentioned above and it is not necessary to refer to them farther. The matchless learning and the great analytical powers which Chêng Ch‘iao brought to his labours on the language have made his writings of peculiar importance. They are in an eminent ​degree books for the genuine lover of learning, but unfortunately they are not easy of access for the poor student.
About this time the "Yun-shu" or Pronouncing Dictionaries had cast into the shade the old classic "Shuo-wên." But there now appeared a treatise which brought the latter again into some popularity. This treatise is generally quoted by its short title, "Wu-yin-yun-pu" (五音韻譜), the words "Shuo-wên" being understood to be prefixed. Its compiler was Li Tao (李燾), whose other names are Jen-fu (仁甫) and "Wên-chien" (文簡), a celebrated scholar, historian, and statesman. He was a native of Tan-leng in Ssuchuan, and lived from 1115 to 1184. In compiling the above work his object was to render the "Shuo-wên" easy of reference and so make it popular. He arranged the characters given under each of the 540 classifiers of that dictionary according to "Luh Fa-yen's" system of finals in the "Ch‘ie-yun." This edition of the "Shuo-wên" found favour with students and put Hsü Hsüan's work out of fashion with them for a time. Being easy to consult, it also took the place of all the old editions and maintained its popularity for a considerable period.
Another important treatise of this century is the "Pan-ma-tzŭ-lei" (班馬字類). This was the work of Lu Chi (婁機) al. Yen-fa (彥發) who lived from 1133 to 1211. In this work the old and peculiar characters in the historical writings of Pan-ku and Ssŭ-ma Ch‘ien are brought together. They are arranged according to what the author regarded as their proper classes in the current phonetic system. Lu Chi was a diligent student of the archæology of the language, and specially of the changes which the written characters had undergone. In addition to the treatise above mentioned he compiled two others. One of these was the "Kuang-kan-lu-tzŭ-shu" (廣干祿字書), a revised and ​enlarged edition of the "Kan-lu-tzŭ-shu" of Yen Yuan-sun (彥元孫) of the T‘ang period. The other was the "Han li-tzŭ-yuan" (漢隸字源), Sources of the Li characters in the Han literature. This is regarded as a trustworthy guide to the Li writing found in books and inscriptions of the Han dynasty and the Three Kingdoms. It gives the modern forms of the characters, their Li equivalents, adding the history and explanation of them.
Another student of the language about this time was Lo Yuan (羅厚) al. Tuan-liang (端良) who was born in 1136 and died in 1184. He compiled a treatise to which he gave the name "Urh-ya-i" (爾雅翼) Wings, that is, useful additions to the "Urh-ya." This is a supplement to the original thesaurus, and Dr. Legge considers it superior to the "P‘i-ya" of Luh T'ien.
In the year 1150 appeared the first edition of a dictionary which soon became famous and to some extent a standard authority. This was the "Wu-yin-chi-yun" (五音集韻); which was originally compiled by Ching P‘o (荆璞) al. Yen-pao (彥寶) of Chao-chow (趙州) in Chih-li. Soon after publication it was taken in hand by several members of the Han family of Chang-li in the Chên-ting district of Chih-li. Hence the actual compiling of the work is sometimes ascribed to one of these Hans, by name Hsiao-yen (孝彥), who has in consequence received much praise for the merits of the treatise. Then about 1212 a son of Hsiao-yen, by name Tao-chao (韓道昭) al. Po-hui (伯暉) published a new and improved edition, and the "Wu-yin-yun-chi" is often quoted as his work. He prefixed the words "Kai-ping" (改併) to the title in order to show that he had altered and condensed the original treatise. It is this edition by Han Tao-chao which is best known, and it is a peculiar and interesting work. The basis of the "Wu-yin-chi-yun" was the "Chi-yun," but other treatises, and specially the "Lei-pien" of Ssŭ-ma-kuang were also used in its compilation. In its present form it combines the tonic and syllabic analyses of words with their arrangement under like ​finals, the "Yü-pien" being woven into a phonetic dictionary. The characters are distributed according to the five musical notes, the four tones, the Sanskrit initials and a peculiar system of finals. The number of these last is reduced from 206 to 160, by omission of duplicates chiefly. There are 53,525 characters given, being about 27,000 more than were given in the "T'ang-yun."
Another book on the sounds of characters which attained some popularity and is still often quoted is the "Wu-yin-pien-hai" (五音篇海). This treatise, which is generally quoted by its short title "Pien-hai," was compiled by Wang Yü-pi (王與秘), a native of Hou-yang, then subject to the Kin Tartars. It was first published in the year 1184 but it has been often reprinted. The "Yü-pien" formed the basis of the "Pien-hai," but Wang rejected some of the classifiers of that work and made a new arrangement of the characters, introducing the combined phonetic and structural system.
A much more famous book of this century was the "Yun-pu" (韻補), Rhyme Restorer (lit. Repairer). This was the work of Wu Yü (吳棫) al. Wu Ts'ai-lao (才老), a native of the Bohea district in the Province of Fuhkeen. Wu Yü held office for a time under the Kao Tsung Emperor, and he was a distinguished scholar and a careful, methodical writer. In addition to the "Yun-pu" he composed a commentary on one of the classics and the "Mao-shi-pu-yin" (毛詩補音), a treatise in which he gives what he thought were the correct sounds and characters for the "Shi-ching." In compiling the "Yun-pu," also, Wu's chief aim was to restore to the characters in the old classic poetry their original sounds, and to the texts those readings which the rhymes required. The work was at first apparently only an appendix to the "Chi-ku" (集古) of a writer named Hsia (夏), but it attained fame as a separate publication. Wu argued that the political ballads and other poems of early times were at first sung, or chanted, or recited, and that they were not committed to writing but preserved in memory. He held that the minstrels ​and poets used the sounds current in their several districts at the time, and that words of different tones in the "Shi" were interchanged and rhymed together. In order to restore the original rhymes of the ancient odes and ballads, and the correct pronunciations of words generally, he thought a provincial dialect such as that of the Soochow region at his time should be taken as guide and standard. The characters given in the "Yun-pu" are arranged under the finals in the order of the Sanskrit initials, and some say Wu Yü was the first to adopt this order. He has been severely censured for his teachings about the use of forced rhymes, for needless changes in texts, and for wrong bracketing of finals. But there is considerable difference of opinion on these subjects among later writers, some approving and some condemning Wu's facts and theories. He is recognized, however, as having been the first to distinguish in a methodical manner between the old and the modern pronunciations of characters. The former he called the "Ku-yin" (古音) and the latter the "Chin-yin" (今音). To support and establish his doctrines Wu marshalled a great array of illustrations and examples. He had the distinction of being adopted by Chu Foo-tzŭ as guide to the sounds of rhyming characters in the latter's editions of the "Shi-ching" and "Li-sao," though Chu did not always accept Wu's violent changes of text, as, for example, that which he proposed for the well-known passage in the last poem of the "Shi-ching."
To Wu Yü succeeded Chêng Hsiang (鄭庠) of less fame but more desert, according to late critics. He was the author of the "Ku-yin-pien" (古音辨) in which he reduced the "Ku-yun" or old rhyming finals to six classes. Chêng Hsiang's teachings on the differences between the old and the modern sounds of characters are said to be free from most of the errors which are found in the writings of Wu Yü. They have, however, mistakes of their own, and they have never had much success, being, indeed, little known.
​In the first half of the thirteenth century Wang Poh (王柏), a celebrated scholar and philosopher who lived from 1197 to 1274, compiled the "Chêng-shi-chĭ-yin" (正始之音). This little treatise, published in 1236, was made up of materials taken from the works of Hsü Hsüan, Chia Ch'ang-chao, and Chêng Ch'iao. It has no claim to literary merit, but it is valuable for the information it gives about changes in the forms, sounds, and meanings of characters.
Contemporary with Wang Poh (or Pai) was Wang Tsung-tao )王宗道) al. Yü-wên (與文). The latter was a native of Fêng-hu in the Prefecture of Ningpo, and he held office under the Emperor Li Tsung (1225 to 1265). His claim to mention here rests on two works which he composed to teach the proper use of the Sanskrit initials with the rhyming finals. These were the "Ch'ie-yun-chĭ-hsüan-lun" (切韻指玄論), quoted usually by the short title "Chĭ-hsüan" (or yuan 元), and the "Ssŭ-shêng-têng-ti-t'u" (四聲等第圖), in one chuan.
One of the most noteworthy books on the language in the 13th century is that known as the "Wu-yin-lei-chü" (五音類聚), which also was the work of the Han family of Chang-li. This book in its late editions has a long title, given at the foot of the page, which gives some clue to its history and composition. It was first published in or about 1208, and it has been several times republished in the North. The basis of this dictionary was the "Yü-pien" as enlarged and re-arranged by Wang Yü-pi, mentioned above. The work of compilation seems to have been begun by Ching P'o, already noticed, and it was continued by Han Hsiao-yen and finished by Han Tao-chao with the help of other members of the Han family and of certain disciples. The arrangement of the book is peculiar. The characters are grouped under classifiers, of which there are 444, being 421 selected from those of the "Yü-pien" with 23 added. These classifiers are taken according to their position under the thirty-six initials ​derived from the Sanskrit alphabet, arranged under the four tones and the physical organs employed in utterance. Thus the first classifier is Kin (chin 金) which comes under the K initial (kien 見), the p'ing tone, and is a Ya-yin or sound due to the molar teeth. Under each classifier the characters are arranged according to the number of strokes as in the Kanghsi dictionary, and the pronunciation and usually a few meanings are added.
In the year 1252 there appeared a work which soon became famous and exercised a great influence on the study of the language. This was the celebrated treatise of Liu Yuan (劉淵), a native of P'ing-shui (平水) in Ssŭchuan. The name which he gave to his treatise was in full "Jen-tzü Hsin-k'an Li Pu Yun-liao" (壬子新刊禮部韻略), that is, The "Li Pu Yun-liao" reprinted in 1252, the Jen-tzŭ year in the cycle. It seems that this book, to which Liu Yuan is indebted for the perpetuation of his name, was actually composed and published by a scholar named Wang Wên-yü (王文郁). This man also was a native of P'ing-shui, and his book bore the cyclic characters for 1229, the year in which it was published. Liu Yuan seems to have merely altered these characters to those for 1252 and then to have published the work as his own. The treatise itself is largely indebted to the labours of the two Mao noticed above, though the compiler criticises these severely. He is famous for reducing the 206 yun or rhyme-classifiers to 107, by omitting or putting together duplicates. By doing this he began, according to some, the confusion of the true sounds of characters. Liu also added 436 characters to the number given in the "Li Pu Yun-liao." His treatise cast its predecessors, and specially the "Kuang-yun," into the shade for a considerable period. Up to the present, indeed, the P'ing-shui system may be said to prevail, and it is in force and fashion now with some slight modifications. Old-fashioned scholars mourn over this and complain that Liu Yuan's system passes in the world as that of Shên Yo or as that of the "T'ang-yun."
​In the year 1276 appeared a work generally cited by its short title "Ch'ie-yun-chĭ-nan" (切韻指南), a Guide to the correct spelling and pronunciation of characters in classical literature. This was composed by Liu Chien (劉鑑) al. Shi-ming (士明), native of An-hsi, in Kansuh. It was founded on the "Wu-yin-chi-yun" of Han Tao-chao, and was regarded by its author as in a manner a supplement to that work. The book is first a series of tables showing the position of certain characters under the Sanskrit initials, the finals of the "Wu-yin-chi-yun," the four tones, and the physical organs concerned in pronunciation. To the tables is appended a small work of later date in thirteen sections. This shows the practical application of the tables, and the author gave it the modest name Jade-key Expedients, "Yü-yao-shi-mên-fa" (玉鑰匙門法), always quoted simply as the "Jade-key." To this part succeed various notes on distinctions in the sounds of characters. The most useful of these is the one on the characters which in classical literature are used in two tones with a separate meaning for each tone. Thus wang in the even tone is a king, and in the third (ch'ü) tone is "to be king of a kingdom." Such characters the author denominates "moving and quiescent" (動靜), marking the former use of the word by a red circle. He also distinguishes between aspirated and non-aspirated sounds, calling the former hu (呼), as sending out breath, and the latter chi (吸), as not sending it out.
To the latter half of this (the thirteenth) century belongs by composition a treatise of no little merit, the "Liu-shu-ku" (六書故), Accounts of written characters in their six classes. The author was Tai T'ung (戴侗) al. Chung-ta (仲達), of Yung-chia in the Wên-chow Prefecture of Chekiang. After obtaining the Metropolitan Degree he was appointed to an office in the Imperial Academy, and thence transferred as Archivist to T'ai-chow in his native province. Then the Mongols prevailed and Tai T'ung, unwilling to serve them, pleaded ill health and went home into seclusion. Here he occupied himself with the composition of the ​"Liu-shu-ku, the beginning of which was due to his father's teaching. This work, which was not published until 1320, is in thirty-three chapters (chuan) with an introductory one called "Liu-shu-t'ung-shi" (六書通釋) or General explanations of the six classes of characters. To the western student this is the best and most interesting part of the treatise. In it we have the author's theories as to the origin and development of writing, the connection between it and speech, and various matters of detail relating to the language. Some of its statements have been found to be erroneous and some of its theories have been declared faulty or absurd. But the essay is written in a liberal, philosophical manner, and Mr. Hopkins has done us a kindness by rendering it into English. In the book itself the characters are arranged under 479 classifiers, of which some are primitives yielding derivatives, and others derivatives which again yield further derivatives. These proceed according to the order of the six classes. Pictorial or Symbolic, Indicative, and so on, and they are marshalled under eight titles designating as many categories of mental or material objects. Following the "Shuo-wên," as he says (契以本文), he places yi (一) as the first of numbers at the beginning and makes his first group that of objects related to Number. To this succeed the words which belong to the categories of Heaven, Earth, Man, the Animal and Vegetable kingdoms, manual industries, and miscellaneous. The author gives the spelling of the character, the varieties of writing where such exist, the meanings apparently in what he considered the order of their development, and the derivatives formed from existing or conjectured primitives, generally supporting or illustrating his teaching by reference to classical authorities.
To the early part of the Mongol dynasty belongs the rhyme-dictionary commonly known as the "Yun-hui." This was published near the end of the 13th century, with the title "Ku-chin-yun-hui" (古今韻會) and was, according to some, the work of Hsiung Chung (熊中 or 忠), a friend of Liu Chien. In ​the year 1292 appeared the "Ku-chin-yun-hui-chü-yao" (舉姚), which was apparently a new edition of the above. The "Yun-hui-chü-yao" has been ascribed to Huang Kung-shao (黃公紹), of Shao-wu in Fuhkeen. This man, however, is more frequently quoted as the author of the "Yun-hui" simply, the "Yun-hui-chü-yao" being assigned to Hsiung Chung. In the "Yun-hui" the 107 rhyme-classes of Liu Yuan are adopted, and the characters are arranged under them according to the Sanskrit initials. But in thus giving the orthography of characters the book is said to abound in errors, and the confusion in this respect which has since existed is traced by some to the "Yun-hui." This dictionary was based on Liu Yuan's edition of the "Li-pu-yun-liao," but it gives 12,652 characters, being many more than any previous edition of the "Li-pu-yun-liao" had given. For some time the "Yun-hui" had a show of popularity among the professional students, but it afterwards fell into utter disuse. It has been condemned as a faulty, slovenly work, much inferior to its predecessors.
In the early part of the 14th century appeared a notable treatise, the "Yun-fu-ch'un-yü" (韻府羣玉), Jewels from the Treasury of Words. This was the joint work of two brothers surnamed Yin (陰), natives of Hsin-wu in Kiangsi. Their names were Shi-fu (時夫) al. Ching-hsien (勁弦) al. Shi-yü(時遇), and Chung-fu (中夫) al. Fu-ch'un (復春) al. Yu-ta (幼達). They belonged to a family distinguished for devotion to literary pursuits, and they inherited a considerable amount of etymological learning. The first edition of the "Yun-fu," finished in 1307, appeared about 1314, but as there was a great gap in the work, and as it was in other respects very defective, it had not much success. It was not until 1590 that a new and complete edition was brought out by another great scholar, Wang Yuan-chen (王元貞) al. Mêng-ch'i (孟起). He added words omitted in the original edition, and gave the spelling according to the "Li-pu-yun-liao." As thus published, the " Yun-fu" is a copious dictionary of terms ​and phrases in use among literary men or derived from early classical writings. The compilers adopted the "P'ing-shui" rhyme-finals, with the exception of one which they regarded as a duplicate. In addition to the phrases from the orthodox literature, the "Yun-fu" gives also huo-t'ao (活套), that is, quotations in common use but of unknown origin; it has also proper names and phrases derived from Buddhist writings. The work was intended to be of practical utility to students, and its continued popularity with them testifies to the success of the intention. This popularity it has maintained notwithstanding the severe criticisms which have been passed on it by succeeding authors. According to one of these the compilers of the "Yun-fu" so ill-treated the "Shuo-wên" and the "Yun-liao" of Liu Yuan, that the latter and Hsü Shên must be crying for vengeance in Hades. The criticisms of these writers are apparently directed chiefly against the treatise in its early form when published in 1314. The Ming editor supplied many of the defects and corrected the errors which detracted from the value of that edition.
Another etymological treatise of the 14th century is the Chung-yuan-yin-yun (中原音韻), a Vocabulary of the Mandarin or standard language. The authorship of this book is ascribed to Chou Tê-ch'ing (周德清), a native of Kao-an (高安) in Kiangsi. There seems, however, to have been an early form of the work, with the title "Chung-yuan-ya-yin" (中原雅音), the Elegant words of China, that is, the Court language. In order to distinguish Chou's edition from this, the term "Kao-an" was prefixed to the former. As the work is now found in shops and libraries it is a small treatise in two chuan, and edited by two scholars of the Ming period. It gives a number of characters arranged under nineteen pairs of finals and four tones. The latter are Yin-p'ing, yang-p'ing, shang, and ch'ü. This distinction of a yin and a yang p'ing was not in the first form of the book. It was due to a scholar named Hsiao (蕭), and was not published until 1324, after Hsiao's death. This distinction is often said to ​corrrespond to that of the p'ing tone into upper and lower (上 and 下), but one can easily see for himself that such is not the case, at least not always. The "Chung-yuan-yin-yun" further distributes the ju or short-tone words, of which there are seventeen groups, among the four other tones, adding them at the end of the section to which they belong. It also distinguishes what it calls pi-k'ou-yun (閉口韻)or "shut-mouth finals," of which there are three groups. The words of these classes in Mandarin at present all end in n, and cannot be distinguished as to ending from others which in this work are in different classes. But at the time of the compiler the "shut-mouth finals" were probably for him, as Dr. Edkins says, words ending in m. It must be remembered, however, that the "Chung-yuan-yin-yun" is not to be taken as a perfect authority for the spoken Mandarin of any part of China in the 14th century. It was compiled as a help to the makers and singers of plays and ballads in North China; and it was for these and similar persons that the proper distribution of the short tone words was taught. In the common speech of the people the short tone words were used as such.
To this period belongs also the "Lei-yun" (類韻), a work in thirty chuan, which was published in 1321. It is generally ascribed to Li Poh-ying (李伯英), but he was only to a certain extent the compiler. His father, Mei-hsien (梅軒), began and a brother continued the compilation. Poh-ying himself spent ten years in preparing the book but died before it was printed. The aim of the "Lei-yun" was to correct errors in the popular use of words by supplying the true forms, sounds, and meanings from old authorities. But the book itself contained many serious errors, and it does not seem to be much known.
A nephew of Poh-ying, by name Wên-chung (文仲), in order to soothe the mind of his uncle "under the nine hills," published a book which he called the " Tzǔ-chien " (字鑑) or Mirror of Characters. In this small treatise we have a large ​number of characters grouped under the usual four tones and 201 finals. It gives the spelling of each, the original meaning, and a short analysis. For the two last it generally follows the "Shuo-wên," but other works, such as those of Hsü Hsüan, Kuo Chung-shu, and Ssŭ-ma-kuang, are also quoted as authorities. Native students have a liking for the "Tzŭ-chien," which is a useful little book and is often reprinted.
One of the great scholars who adorned the reign of the Mongols was Chou Poh-ch'i (周伯琦) al. Poh-wên (伯温), of P'o-yang in Kiangsi. He was author of the "Liu-shu-chêng-o" (六書正譌), The Six Classes of Characters Right and Wrong. This book gives a selection of above 2,000 characters, under the tones and according to initials and finals. Of each character an old form is given, and the modern way of writing is added below. Then we have the spelling and an explanation of the character, its meaning and right and wrong variants. Chou Poh-ch'i was also the author of the "Shuo-wên-tzŭ-yuan," Sources of the Characters in the "Shuo-wên." This was an earlier and more ambitious work than the "Liu-shu-chêng-o," which owed its existence to the earlier treatises. The later work is still occasionally reprinted and consulted by students and others as a good authority.
The founder of the Ming dynasty was a patron of all kinds of learning and promoted efforts to recover and preserve the valuable treatises which had been lost or become very rare. He also in various ways encouraged the study of the written language. In his reign (1368 to 1399) and by his orders a new and revised edition of the "Yun-hui" was prepared and published, but that treatise still remained unacceptable. In the meantime the Emperor appointed a commission of learned men to make a new pronouncing dictionary. The principal members of this commission were Sung Lien (宋濂) al. Ching-lien (景濂), of Chin-hua (金華) in Chekiang, and Yo Shao-fêng (樂韶鳳), officials and scholars of great learning and abilities. They produced a ​dictionary which, from the style of the Emperor's reign, was called "Hung-wu-chêng-yun" (洪武正韻), Sung Lien's preface being dated 1375. In this work the meanings and pronunciations of more than 12,000 characters are given, and these characters are arranged according to a new set of finals, only seventy-six in number. In fixing on these the compilers seem to have mainly followed the "Chung-yuan-ya-yin," which was a standard of reference for them. The explanations and illustrations are chiefly derived from the work of Mao Huang and his son. A few courtly writers who lived about the time of its appearance have praised the "Chêng-yun," but it has never had favour with the literati. It contains much learning and criticism, but still, as the Emperor Kanghsi says, it never could get into vogue. Sung Lien seems to have blindly followed the doctrines of Wu Yü. He also criticizes as teaching of Shên Yo what was actually that of Liu Yuan, and he made the dialect of his native district in Chekiang the basis of criticism. In the reign of the last Emperor of the Ming dynasty there appeared the "Chêng-yun-chien" (正韻牋), that is, the "Hung-wu-chêng-yun" with supplementary notes. These notes were contributed by Yang Shi-wei (陽時偉) a distinguished Confucianist of the seventeenth century. They are of three kinds: the Chien (牋) give sounds, meanings, and illustrations for the characters in the original "Chêng-yun" but supplementary to those already there; the "Ku-yin" (古音) notes give at the end of each yun (section) a number of characters with their archaic sounds; and the "I-tzŭ" (逸字) are omitted characters which Yang Shi-wei ventured to introduce.
Among the learned men who helped Sung Lien in compiling the "Chêng-yun," was Chao Ch'ien (趙謙) better known as Chao Hui-ch'ien (撝謙). This man, a native of Yü-yao in Chekiang, lived in the second half of the fourteenth century. He was noted during his short lifetime of forty-four years, for his great learning and philological attainments. In addition to his labours on the "Chêng-yun" he compiled also the ​"Liu-shu-pên-i" (六書本義). This is a sort of dictionary in which the characters are given under 360 classifiers, an arrangement which was not adopted by others. The work, however, has been highly praised by subsequent writers, specially for its treatment of the "Chuan-chu" or "deflected" words. Chao, who has the further designation "Ku-tsê" (古則), was the author of two other treatises on the language, one of them being an extensive work in one hundred chuan.
The modern etymology of the language is discussed by Chang Fu (章黼) al. Tao-ch'ang (道常), a native of Chia-ting (Kading) in Kiangsu. He compiled the "Yun-hsio-chi-ch'êng" (韻學集成), in which he made a careful revision of the distribution of characters in the four-tone classes. In this book we have twenty-one chief yun or finals, being the nineteen of Chou Tê-ch'ing with changes and additions. For example, Chang adds shan (山) and hui (灰), separates mu (模) from yü (魚), and omits chiang (江). Under the above twenty-one finals are subordinate classes which are said to be according to the finals in the "Chêng-yun." The short-tone words are distributed in these classes in a methodical manner, and in what is supposed to be a natural order. The "Yun-hsio-chi-ch'êng" has been much praised for the correct account it gives of the relations of characters under their phonetic categories. Its compiler was also the author of another etymological treatise, the "Chĭ-yin-pien" (直音篇), but this latter work does not seem to be much used or known.
The fan-ch'ie method of denoting the pronunciation of characters had now been made practically as nearly perfect as possible, but it was still found inadequate to represent sounds precisely. An attempt to introduce an improved method was made during this period by a scholar named Shên Ch'ung-sui (沈寵綏). His plan required the use of three characters instead of two. Thus he represented the spelling of kiai (chie 皆) by ki (幾), ai (哀), and i (噫). Shên was evidently in advance of his time, for his method was not adopted in any dictionary, and it ​was even said to be nearly like giving legs to a serpent. But in recent times the attempt has been made to represent foreign sounds by a tri-syllabic spelling.
We may here notice some of the labours in philology of certain Buddhist monks in the Ming period. In the fifteenth century one of these monks, by name Chie-hsüan (戒璿), with the help of several brethren compiled the "Wu-yin-chi-yun," the second treatise with that name. This is said to be a work of great research, the result of much study and investigation. Another monk, Chên-k'ung (真空), of a monastery in the capital, compiled the "Pien-yun-kuan-chu-chi" (篇韻貫珠集), better known by its short title "Kuan-chu-chi." This is a collection of eight short treatises on subjects connected with the language. It was published in 1498 with a preface from the pen of a metropolitan graduate named Liu. In the preface the work is praised for its great and varied learning and for its usefulness not only to the Buddhists but also to the orthodox student. The praise seems to be rather excessive and the whole work cannot be said to rank high. In the short treatises, however, of which it is composed, the curious reader will find information which he will scarcely find in other treatises. The "Ta-t'zŭ-jen" (大慈仁) monastery, in which Chên-k'ung lived, produced another monk who was noted for his great and varied learning. This was No-an (訥菴) who published a new and enlarged edition of Liu Chien's "Yü-yao-shi." The original edition had only thirteen "keys," and No-an added seven. The new work was edited by Chên-k'ung and published with a laudatory preface in 1513.
In the first half of the sixteenth century lived Yang Shên (楊慎) al. Shêng-an (升菴) al. Yung-hsiu (用修), born in 1488 and surviving to 1559. He was a native of Hsin-tu in Ssŭchuan, and one of the most remarkable men of the Ming dynasty. In addition to the poetry, political writings, books on philosophy and natural history which he produced during his unhappy life, ​he composed also several treatises on subjects connected with the oral and written language. Yang was a great explorer of antiquity, and studied specially the relation of the language of his own time to that of the early periods. One of the best known of his philological treatises is the "Chuan-chu-ku-yin-liao" (轉注古音略), a compendium on the old words of the class "deflected." Yang uses the term chuan-chu or "deflected" to denote the characters which came to acquire new pronunciation and new meanings. To some extent he was a follower of Wu Yü, and this treatise is by some regarded as an enlarged and improved "Yun-pu." Like Wu, he gave the name "Old rhyme-sounds" (古韻) to sounds found in the miscellaneous literature of comparatively late times. The treatise here mentioned is said to show great learning but little criticism, and to be marred by a love of display. Yet students of the language and literature continue to regard Wu Yü and Yang Shên as sources of authentic information about the phonetics of the old language.
About the year 1570 appeared the "Shi-yun-chi-liao" (詩韻輯略), a methodical compendium of the rhymes in the "Shi." The author of this treatise was P'an Ên (潘恩) a native of the Shanghai district and a distinguished scholar in the reigns of Shi Tsung and Mu Tsung (1522 to 1573). P'an adopted the "P'ing-shui" 107 finals, and his book, which is in five chuan, gives 8,800 characters. His etymology of these is largely based on the work of the brothers Yin and on the "Yun-hui" of Huang Kung-chao. The "Shi-yun-chi-liao" was popular for a time and it is still used, but it has not a high place as an authority on the old language. It is condemned as learned but inaccurate and unmarked by critical discrimination. Yet it had the fortune to be appropriated by a man named Liang, who had it printed word for word as his own production about sixty years after it was first published. Liang's son continued the fraud, and P'an's work was long sold—is perhaps still sold—as that of Liang. ​The treatise had a better fortune in being largely used by Shao Chang-hêng in the preparation of his work, which will soon fall to be noticed.
Contemporary with P'an Ên was another scholar also distinguished for his learning in the antiquities of the language. This was Ch'ên Ti (陳第) al. Chi-li (季立), a native of Foochow. He was the author of several etymological treatises, of which two are still well known. One of these is the "Ch'ü-sung-ku-yin-i" (屈宋古音義) which treats of the words found in the poetry of Ch'ü Yuan (屈原) and Sung Yü (宋玉), that is, with the language of the latter part of the fourth century B.C. The second work is the "Mao-shi-ku-yin-k'ao" (毛詩古印烤), generally quoted by its short title "Ku-yin-k'ao," an examination of old sounds in the "Shi-ching," in four chuan, with an appendix. This was published about 1606 with one preface by the author's friend Chiao Hung (焦竑) al. Jo Hou (弱侯), and a second by the author himself. In it Ch'ên takes 500 characters in succession, and of each he gives what he finds to have been its old sound, supporting his view first by proofs taken from the "Shi-ching," and next by collateral evidence drawn from subsequent writings. Ch'ên Ti was the first to teach in a thorough methodical way that the rhymes of the "Shi" represent the sounds which the characters had at the time the poems were composed, and that characters have from age to age undergone changes of sound. These doctrines he learned from Chiao Hung, mentioned above, who also was a good scholar in the language and a writer on it seeking to preserve its purity and historical correctness. The merit of the "Ku-yin-k'ao" is lessened by the neglect its author shows for local variations and the modern sounds of characters. He went too far also with his theory that Ku-wu-hsie-yin (古無叶音), the ancients did not alter the sound of a character for a special occasion. He held, for example, that when yü (羽) at the end of one line has the character 野 at the end of the next as a rhyme, we are to infer that the actual sound of this latter character at the time was something like yü, say hu. In after ​times men ignorant of the true sound of the character represented it as ya and ye.
In the year 1633 was published the first edition of a small but important treatise, the "Tzŭ-hui" (字彙). This was compiled by Mei Ying-tsu (梅膺祚) al. Tan-shêng (誕生), a native of Ning-kuo Foo in the Southern part of the present Anhui. It is a dictionary in which the characters explained are given according to the number of strokes, under 214 classifiers. These classifiers are the "Radicals" which were afterwards adopted by the compilers of the Kanghsi dictionary and other similar treatises. The "Tzŭ-hui" in its original form did not give any syllabic spelling, but merely stated under a character that its pronunciation (yin) was so and so. In later editions, however, the syllabic spelling is added and the variations of sounds carefully noted. For many years it was very popular among students and it has been often reprinted, revised and improved. But it is considered inferior to later dictionaries as it has wrong ways of writing characters and makes mistakes as to the classifiers. Moreover, the meanings and illustrations which are given even in the enlarged editions are very few, and, as the Emperor Kanghsi says, the work errs by being too brief and concise. It was reprinted in an abbreviated form in 1676, in the complete form in 1681 and again in 1688, and there are still to be found different editions of it in use, varying in the quantity of the original work which they retain. In its fullest form the book is very useful and gives much valuable information about the changes of sound and form which the characters have undergone. It is to be noted that the pronunciation which it gives for a character often differs from that found in the ordinary dictionaries. Thus it gives ch'i as the sound of 一 (i), k'ü as that of 口 (k'ou), and ngü as that of 女 (nü).
​We now come to one of the great writers on the language, a teacher who has exercised great influence on nearly all who have followed him. This author, often quoted simply as Mr. Ku (顧氏), belongs to the period in which the Ming dynasty fell and was succeeded by that now reigning. He was born in 1613 at K'un-shan (崑山), in the Prefecture of Soochow, and died in 1682. His given name was Yen-wu (炎武), and he had the additional names Ning-jen (寧人), and T'ing-lin (亭林). In the department of philology Ku composed five books, which were published together in 1643 with a short preface by a friend. This is followed by a very interesting essay or letter addressed to one Li Tzŭ-tê (李子德) which is entirely devoted to the archæology of the language. The first of the five books is entitled "Yin-lun" (音論). Discussions on vocal sounds, and it may be regarded as introductory to the others. In this we have extracts from many authors and much interesting information on the origin and development of the Chinese language. It describes the technical terms used in etymological treatises, criticises previous authors, and gives Ku's own views on the use of characters in early poetry. The second book is called "Shi-pên-yin" (詩本音) and is an attempt to reproduce the sounds of the characters as used in the "Shi-ching." The third is the "Yi-pên" (易本) which does the same for the rhymes in the "Yi-ching." The fourth is the "T'ang-yun-chêng" (唐韻正) in which the finals of the T'ang writers have their ancient sounds given, these being substantiated by a collection of evidence from old authorities. The fifth book, which is devoted to the old sounds of words, is called "Ku-yin-piao" (古音表). The author of these works was a man of vast learning, but he was also a thoughtful reader who reasoned and criticised. He was at the same time an enthusiast, specially in matters connected with the antiquities of the language, and carried his opinions to excess. Ch'ên Ti and Lu Tê-ming were the masters whose views as to the proper treatment of the characters in the early classical poetry he in the main adopted. He held that words rhymed in the old ballads merely because of similarity of sound and without distinction of tone. This and ​other doctrines of Ku have been disputed by later authors, and he has been rather severely criticised for some of his statements by men who were under great obligations to his labours.
Another great writer on the language in the seventeenth century was Shao Chang-hêng (卲長蘅) al. Tzŭ-hsiang (子相), a native of Wu-chin (武進) in Kiangsu. His principal work on this subject is the "Ku-chin-yun-liao" (古今韻略) a phonetic thesaurus of ancient and modern words. This treatise was completed about 1660 but not published until thirty years afterwards. In the introduction the author gives a good historical and critical account of the chief among his predecessors. Then follows the work proper, in which the characters selected are arranged under four tone's according to the 106 finals, beginning with tung. At the end of each class are added (1st) the old words which were commonly regarded as of like ending, and (2nd) those characters which, according to Wu Yü and Yang Shên, in old times took the same ending for rhyme purposes though their proper sounds were different. So the book is, as the title indicates, a compendium of old and modern rhyming words. As has been stated above, the "Ku-chin-yun-liao" is based on P‘an Ên's treatise, but Shao made changes and important additions. The latter are generally taken from the "Kuang-yun" or one of the editions of "Li-pu-yun-liao." Those which he made himself are given at the end of each section, and they have not received universal approbation.
Contemporary with Shao Tzŭ-hsiang was Mao Ch‘i-ling (毛奇齡) al. Ta-k‘o (大可) al. Hsi-ho (西河). This latter lived from 1623 to 1713 and was one of the most illustrious scholars of the seventeenth century. He was a man of great learning, of original views and independent research, and he had a clear and direct way of expressing himself in writing. Of his many contributions to learning and philology the only one we notice here is that known generally by its short title "Ku-chin-​t‘ung-yun" (古今通韻), which was published at the Imperial Press in 1684. The full title (given in a note below) is explained by the author thus: The words "Kang-hsi-chia-tzŭ" indicate the reign and the year of the reign in which the book is published; "Shi-kuan-hsin-k‘an" means newly corrected by Imperial Archivists; and "Ku-chin-t‘ung-yun" shows that the work is concerned with a comparison of the words sanctioned as rhymes now, with those so used in old literature. In the introduction there is a critical review of the current theories on the origin and history of the modes of representing the sounds of characters. The treatise of Liu Yuan was the basis of the "Ku-chin-t‘ung-yun," which adopts the 106 finals of the period. Mao teaches that in the old classical poetry there was no separation of the p‘ing, shang, and ch‘ü tones, but that words in the ju tone formed a class by themselves. His criticisms on Wu Yü and others are often severe, and he writes generally in a dogmatic, dictatorial manner. His book is read by students, but it is not sanctioned as an authority on the subject of "interchangeable finals."
In 1705 appeared the first edition of the "Chêng-tzŭ-t‘ung" (正字通) compiled in the last years of the seventeenth century. This dictionary is merely an enlarged and improved edition of the original "Tzŭ-wei." It was compiled from the latter by Liao Wên-ying (廖文英) al. Pai-tzŭ (百子), but the current editions bear the names of Mei Ying-tsu, the compiler of the "Tzŭ-wei," and Han T‘an (韓菼) the editor of that work. The last named is also sometimes referred to as the author of the "Chêng-tzŭ-t‘ung." This work has been blamed for carelessness and inaccuracy, and the compilers of the Kanghsi Lexicon are severe on its demerits. Fault has been found with it specially for its mistakes as to the assignment of characters to their classifiers or radicals. In its latest editions, however, it is a valuable work and gives useful information on the sounds and structure of characters, not only in the body of the treatise but also in the parts which are supplementary. A comparison of the "Chêng-tzŭ-t‘ung" with the Kanghsi Dictionary will shew ​that the latter followed the lines of its predecessor and took from it freely.
The "Tzŭ-wei" and the "Chêng-tzŭ-t‘ung" are still occasionally reprinted, but they may be said to have been quite superseded by the "Kang-hsi Tzŭ-tien." This dictionary was first published in 1717 and soon became the standard authority. Other works of a like character have appeared since, but it has not been displaced by any of them. The Emperor by whose orders it was made also caused a book on the phonetics of the language to be compiled. This was the "Yin-yun-ch‘an-wei" (音韻闡微), which became the standard authority on the use of the thirty-six Sanskrit initials. The same Emperor also engaged a college of scholars to make under his supervision the treatise to which the name "Pei-wên-yun-fu" was given. This is one of the largest dictionaries and cyclopedias of reference ever published, but its usefulness is impaired by slovenly, inaccurate quotations. It should always be used with caution and its statements verified where possible. Ten years after it appeared a supplement was found necessary. This was compiled by the Emperor's orders and published with the title "Yun-fu-shi-i" (韻府拾遺), Yun-fu gleanings. As an index to the "Pei-wên-yun-fu" a very compendious little dictionary was compiled and published in 1821 by Chêng Chang-kêng (鄭長庚) al. Hsüe-t‘ing (雪亭). This is the "Ssŭ-yin-shi-i" (四音釋義), a work which gives the characters of the "Pei-wên-yun-fu" according to the 214 classifiers with their spelling and the chief meanings. The "Ssŭ-yin" are the "four tones," and for each character explained a reference is added to the tone and final under which it is to be found in the "P‘ei-wên-yun-fu." This little dictionary is very popular with native students and it seems to be much needed. Another index to the great thesaurus is the tonic vocabulary named "Yun-hsio-chĭ-nan," A guide to the learning of the pronunciation of words. This work has a systematic arrangement of the characters under the four tones, and according to the Sanskrit initials and the finals of the "P‘ei-​wen." The compiler was Wang Chên (王溱) a native of Ch‘ang-lo in Fuhkien, and the work was published in 1848. It has been reprinted several times and is very popular with the numerous students of that province.
In the year 1700 a small but important work was published, the "Wu-fang-yuan-yin," the genuine words of the Empire. This thesaurus was compiled by Fan T‘êng-fêng (樊騰鳳) al. Ling-hsü (凌虛) of T‘ang-shan in the south of Chihli. In 1710 there appeared a revised and improved edition with a preface by Nien Hsi-yao (年希堯) al. Yun-kung (允恭), its editor. The work was further enlarged and published in a new form in 1780, and there have been several reprints of the 1710 edition. In this dictionary the characters are arranged according to a new system. There are twelve finals and twenty initials, the former being in two classes, each of six finals. The first six are called "light and clear" and they do not admit any ju-shêng words. These last are all lodged in the second class, the words of which are "heavy and indistinct." There are five tones, the p‘ing being divided into upper and lower, corresponding to the yin-p‘ing and yang-p‘ing of Chou Tê-ch‘ing. It is acknowledged by native students that the system of the "Wu-fang-yuan-yin" is not a good one, and the work is not regarded as an authority. The 1710 edition, however, forms a convenient book of reference and is largely consulted by provincial students learning Mandarin. It has also been used by Dr. Williams in compiling his Dictionary, and an account of it will be found in the introduction to that work. Dr. Williams has there given what he calls a translation of Yao's preface, and it is about as bad a specimen of translation as could be produced.
We next notice the contributions to the study of the language made by Chiang Yung (江永) al. Shên-hsiu (愼修). Chiang (Kiang) was a native of Wu-yuan in Anhui and lived from 1681 to 1762. He was a man of great learning and ability, ​archaeologist, astronomer, musician, and philologist. In this last capacity he was the author of the 'Yin-hsio-pien-wei" (音學辨微), the "Ssŭ-shêng-ch'ie-yun-piao" (四星切韻表) and the "Ku-yun-piao-chun" (古韻標準). The last is the most important and the only one of the three which is well known at present. It was composed in order to correct and supplement the teachings of Ku Yen-wu, though the latter was evidently Chiang's master. The date of its first publication is 1771, and it was carefully edited by Lo Yu-kao (羅有高). The work is devoted entirely to the discussion of the ancient sounds of certain characters. It gives only thirteen classes of finals, under the three tones p'ing, shang, ch'ü, and eight under the ju tone, and the author regarded this as the proper system for the sounds of words in the old poetry. He held that in the "Shi-ching" the distinction of tones was not observed in the rhymes, a shang word rhyming with a p'ing word if the two approximated in sound. The old rhymes, he thought, represented the speech of the people at the time and in the places of their original composition, and an important matter was to keep old and new pronunciations quite distinct. The forms of characters have changed in the course of time, and so also have the sounds attached to them. The "Ssŭ-shêng-ch'ie-yun-piao," which was published at the same time as the above and by the same editor, is a very short treatise. Chiang left it unrevised and so it has not the full authority of a finished work. It presents a series of tables in which a large number of characters are arranged under the 36 Sanskrit initials and the orthodox finals according to the four tones; the fan-ch'ie spelling is given, and the physical characters of the sounds, as dental, lingual, etc., are indicated.
To the eighteenth century belongs also the "Chung-chou-ch'uan-yun," the complete rhyme-words of China. This work was compiled by Chou Ang (周昻) al. Shao-hsia {少霞), of Soochow, who lived in the second half of the century. It was based on the treatise by Chou Tê-ch'ing noticed above. But the nineteen finals of that work are rearranged and their number ​increased by three. The introduction gives a considerable amount of information about the sounds of words classified by the organs concerned in their formation, and about previous writers. The author specially criticises some of the teachings of P'an Lei (藩耒), who lived from 1646 to 1708 and wrote the "Lei-yin" (類音). Chou divides the p'ing tone into yin and yang p'ing, and in his treatment of these he follows Chou Te-ch'ing. After these come the shang and ch'ü, the ju tone words being appended to the other classes according to their natural affinities. A characteristic of this work is the attention paid to the physical processes by which words are uttered, and a minute description of these is attempted. The work has been revised and reprinted, but it cannot be said to be popular.
A peculiar feature of the course of modern learning on our subject falls to be noticed here. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries we find a revived interest in the philological works of antiquity. This is shewn in various ways, but chiefly by the desire to obtain old copies and to reproduce these accurately with needful additions and suitable commentaries. There was a "return to antiquity" which some took up moderately and discreetly while others carried it out to excess. It may be of use to notice a few of the more important revivals which occurred during the above period.
The old-fashioned little treatise the "Shi-ming" was taken in hand by the illustrious scholar Chiang Shêng (江聲),famed for his labours on the "Shi-ching," who lived in the second half of the eighteenth century. Chiang composed three treatises on the "Shi-ming," supplementing the deficiencies and verifying the statements of that work. A few years after his death the "Kuang-shi-ming," edited by Chang Chin-wu (張金吾) was published (1814). In this work we find several additions made to the old book and references given for the original explanations.
The learned Tai Chên (戴震) took up the old "Fang-yen" and produced a new edition with proofs and illustrations. He ​was also one of the three scholars who prepared the Imperial reprint of the "Fang-yen" with the commentary of Kuo Po which appeared in 1779.
Then the "Urh-ya" was edited carefully by Lu Wên-chao (盧文弨), who devoted to it two treatises. This old thesaurus was studied also by P‘u T‘ang (浦鏜), who published an edition with many changes in the text. His treatise did not find much favour and his corrections of the current readings are not generally accepted. A better edition is that by Shao Chin-han (卲晉涵), a very learned official who lived in the second half of the eighteenth century. Shao gave to his treatise, which was published in 1775, the title "Urh-ya-chêng-i." In preparing it he adopted the text which he thought the best, and Kuo Po's commentary. To the latter he added illustrations and references drawn from other commentaries and from classical literature generally. It is stated that this edition of the "Urh-ya" has superseded all others with students. Further, in 1815 appeared the edition brought out by Yuan Yuan in his thirteen Ching, which gives the commentaries of Kuo Po and Hsing Chi with comparisons of texts and other useful information. As a sort of supplement to the "Urh-ya," Hung Liang-chi (洪亮吉), who lived from 1746 to 1809, compiled the "Pi-ya" (比雅), a work which follows the divisions of the "Urh-ya." But most of the terms and phrases which it gives and for which it supplies references are not in the "Urh-ya."
The "Yü-pien" and the "Kuang-yun" were reprinted and published together in 1704. Great care was taken in the editing of these works, and the veteran philologist Chu I-tsun (朱彝尊) contributed prefaces. It is this edition of the "Yü-pien" and "Kuang-yen" which seems to be the popular one among students of the present time. The "Chi-yun" also found an editor and was reprinted in 1814.
But none of the other ancient treatises on the language has received so much attention as the "Shuo-wên." This book had ​almost gone out of fashion and fallen into neglect during the period of the Ming dynasty. But in the seventeenth century scholars turned to it again, and the interest then awakened in it produced several reprints and commentaries. One of the first of these was an edition with notes by Chiang Yung, mentioned above. Another edition with a learned introduction was published about 1772, the author of which was Chu Yun (朱筠). He reproduced the text of Pao Hsi-lu (包希魯) which had been published in 1420, and followed the arrangement introduced by Li Tao. A few years later Kuei Fu (桂馥) al. Wei-ku (未谷) finished his labours on the "Shuo-wên," though his treatise was not published until long afterwards. Kuei, who was a native of Chü-fu (曲阜) in Shantung, and lived from 1736 to 1806, was a scholar of wide reading and a true lover of learning. He put out all his talents in the production of a new edition of the "Shuo-wên," a labour on which he was employed for thirty years. The name which he gave to his work, "Shuo-wên-chie-tzŭ-i-chêng," or verification of the meanings of the "Shuo-wên," indicates its scope. The text of the original treatise is given in separate columns and in large characters. The commentary is full and gives the student nearly everything that could be desired to substantiate and illustrate the short paragraphs of Hsü's text. With this last as commonly received he did not interfere, for he had a genuine reverence for the words of the "Shuo-wên." The doubts he had on the subject and his views as to the purity of the texts in use were put in writing, but he did not live to publish them. It is probable, however, that many of them are embodied in his commentary as his views of readings found in various previous editions. His "Shuo-wên" was not published for more than fifty years after it was finished, and it was not until 1870 that it became generally accessible. In that year it was edited by Ting Kên-shan (丁艮善) and published under the auspices of the distinguished living scholar and official Chang Chĭ-t‘ung.
In the meantime two other editions of the "Shuo-wên" had ​appeared. One of these was by Tuan Yü-tsai (段玉裁) al.Jo-ying (若膺) who lived from 1735 to 1815 and was an enthusiast in the study of the old language and literature. He produced an edition of the "Shuo-wên" which is regarded as supplementary to that by Kuei Fu. Tuan devotes himself to the sounds rather than to the meanings of the characters, and his notes are few but generally good and useful. He gives the syllabic spelling of the characters, and refers these to their places under his seventeen classes of finals for old poetry. In some parts of China students prefer Tuan's edition of the "Shuo-wên" to all others, though there are who say that he published it rather to glorify himself than to instruct others.
The other edition, which is in many respects better than Tuan's, is that by Chu Tsun-shêng (朱駿聲) al. Yun-ch‘ien (允倩). This was finished in 1833 and published in 1852. Its title, "Shuo-wên-t‘ung-hsün-ting-shêng," explains the aim of the compiler, which was to give a historical account of the meanings and sounds of the characters in the "Shuo-wên." But instead of the old arrangement of the characters, these are given according to their sounds, which are grouped under eighteen phonetics. The final according to the current system is also given for each character, the old form is appended, and to the original explanations of the "Shuo-wên" the editor adds instances from various authors of early times. The introductory chapters by Chu are also valuable, and he has done good service by collecting numerous examples of characters omitted by Hsü Shên whether by chance or design.
In addition to the above, Hsü Hsüan's edition of the "Shuo-wên" has been several times reprinted within these two centuries; and in 1839 all the extant writings of his brother on the old dictionary were collected and published in one treatise.
Turning back to the eighteenth century we find, in addition to those already mentioned, several treatises worthy of mention on ​subjects connected with the language. Of these one of the most important is the "Liu-shu-yin-chün-piao." The author of this was Tuan Yü-tsai, noticed above, a native of Chinkiang Foo in Kiangsu. The work, which is now often published as an appendix to the author's "Shuo-wên," is a series of five essays on the relations of the ancient to the modern language. It gives the author's seventeen classes of finals, under which he groups all the rhymes of the "Shi-ching" and the old poetry generally. Tuan maintains that the rhymes in the "Shi" are generally correct, that at the time of its composition there were three tones, the p‘ing, shang, and ju. These three he finds to be kept quite distinct. The ch‘ü-shêng he considers to have arisen about the fourth or fifth century of our era. But words, he thinks, have been all along changing their sounds and passing from one tone to another. The "Liu-shu-yin-chün-piao" is prefaced by contributions from the author's literary friends Tai Tung-yuan, Ch‘ien Ta-hsin, Ch‘in Ch‘ung (欽沖) al. Chǐ-fu (之甫), all scholars of repute in this department of study.
Tai Chên (戴震) al. Tung-yuan (東原) al. Shên-hsiu (愼修) has been already noticed for his labours on the Fang-yen. He was a native of the Hui-chow Prefecture of Anhui and lived from 1723 to 1777. In addition to many other works on various subjects he composed the "Shêng-yun-k‘ao" (聲韻考) in four chuan, the "Shêng-lei-piao" (聲類表) in ten chuan, and the "Hsü-yen" (諸言). Tai's studies in the language embraced the forms and sounds of characters and also their uses and history. He had great natural abilities, which he improved by a wide range of reading. Of a sceptical disposition he always wanted to know the how and the why of the statements he was taught to accept. This spirit gives a value to his writings and makes them of more than common interest. Thus the "Hsü-yen" examines the different uses made of such words as tao (道), li (理), hsing (性) by various writers and various schools of religion and philosophy.
​Ch‘ien Ta-hsin (錢大昕) al. Chu-ting (竹汀), who lived from 1728 to 1804, was the author of the "Shêng-lei." This useful little manual was edited by Ch‘ien's friend Wang Ên (汪恩) and first published in 1825. It deals with the written language and gives the peculiar meanings of words and phrases in the old literature. It also corrects mistakes in early treatises in the use of characters, and shows how words are used for other words because of a likeness to them in sound or way of writing. The philological information which this little book gives is of much interest to the student of the language. Ch‘ien was a giant in learning, well read not only in all the literature of his own country but also in Western learning as taught by Ricci, Schall, and Verbiest. The "Shêng-lei" was composed very gradually, the materials for it being collected while the author was engaged in preparing his historical and other treatises. It was intended for the use of students and accordingly it was made easy to consult and of a practical character.
One of the best and most comprehensive works on the language is that by Li Ju-chên (李汝珍) al. Sung-shi (松石). This treatise, named "Li-shi-yin-chien" or Li's mirror of words, was first published about 1806 and it has passed through several editions. Li Sung-shi was a scholar who loved learning for its own sake, not using it as a means for worldly preferment. He had the command of a large library and enjoyed the society of pleasant friends who had similar tastes. The Mirror of Words is mainly in the form of question and answer, contained in thirty-three sections. In these the origin and history of the written characters, of the tones, finals, initials, modes of spelling, and other subjects, are treated in a pleasant but learned and scholarly manner. Dr. Edkins in his Grammars has quoted from and given some account of this book, and it is not necessary to dwell on it further in this place.
Another recent work on the language quoted from and ​described by Dr. Edkins is the "Yen-hsü-ts‘ao-t‘ang-pi-chi" (衍緒草堂筆記) by Pi Hua-chên (畢華珍). This author is one of the very few native writers who have treated of "the parts of speech and construction of sentences." The book seems to be rare, and the present writer knows of it only through Dr. Edkins' Grammars.
A recent treatise which deserves to be better known than it is at present is the "Ku-chin-wên-tzŭ t‘ung-shi." The meaning of this title, to be gathered from the book itself, is Historical explanations of written characters from ancient to modern times. It was compiled by Lü Shi-i (呂世宜) of Hsi-tsun in the same Prefecture as Amoy. The work was finished in 1853 but it was not published apparently until 1879, long after the author's death. It was then printed at a private press with an introduction by Lin Wei-yuan, the great landlord of North Formosa, who had been a pupil of Lü. This latter was noted, at least in his native province, for his great learning, and specially for his knowledge of the language. He was a follower of Tuan Yü-tsai, and took the "Shuo-wên" as edited by Tuan for the basis of his work. The characters given in the "Shuo-wên" are printed at the head of the page in large type. The spelling of each is given after Tuan; next comes a short account of the meanings and uses of the character, and then the old forms of writing. The author intended his treatise, which is in fourteen chuan, to be as it were a supplement to Tuan's "Shuo-wên," correcting the mistakes and supplying the deficiencies of that great work. It does not display much originality, but it gives in a terse, methodical manner important information about the characters treated of in the "Shuo-wên."
The natives of parts of Kuangtung and Fuhkien speak dialects which are very different from Mandarin. These dialects are from certain points of view distinct languages, and they have their own phonetic dictionaries, which are often re-edited and republished. Two at least of these dictionaries have been ​compiled with care and are much used. But since the time of Kanghsi, efforts have been made to substitute the standard language for the local dialects. That Emperor issued an edict commanding the institution of schools in Fuhkien and Kuang-tung for the teaching of Mandarin, and he repeated his commands afterwards. These instructions led to the establishment of certain schools, and in course of time books were published to aid scholars in acquiring the national language. Thus, for the natives of Fuhkien a work named "Kuan-yin-hui-chie-shi-i" was published in 1748. Its compiler was Ts'ai Shi (蔡奭), a native of Chang-p'u in the Chang-chow Prefecture of that province. Ts'ai had travelled to Peking and other cities, and he had made it his business to observe the peculiarities of speech at the capital and the other places he visited, having first learned Mandarin. When old, he retired and compiled this book, which he published in the eighty-fifth year of his life. It is a classified vocabulary of simple terms and phrases such as are in common use. The sounds of characters are sometimes given, and occasionally a short note of comment or explanation is added. The book was intended chiefly for the use of those natives of Fuhkien who had to travel as mandarins or merchants. It has evidently been found by these to be of some use, for it has been often reprinted, and it is cheap and portable.
Several treatises have been published at Canton also with the view of teaching the people of that city and the surrounding districts the standard language. In 1785 was published a book the short title of which is "Chêng-yin-hui-pien." This was composed by Chang Yü-ch'êng (張玉成) al. Ch'ang-ch'i (鬯期) of Pao-an in the Prefecture of Canton. The aim of the author was to provide a guide to the use of Mandarin—the chêng-yin—for the people of his own province specially. The book is a classified collection of Mandarin terms in common use, with the vulgar or provincial equivalent often added. In a short introduction the author gives the general characters of the four Tones. He next explains the five yin, which correspond to the five ​Elements. Then he gives a five-fold classification of characters according to the five Regions and five physical organs. Thus under the categories of South and Tongue he gives the characters for ting, ti, ning. There is also another classification of words according to the physical acts required in uttering them. This yields sixteen classes, which are distinguished by names such as "opening the lips," "closing the mouth."
A more popular work of this kind is the "Chêng-yin-tso-yao" by Kao Ching-t‘ing (高靜亭). This book was originally published in 1810, and it has been often reprinted. It is much used by the Cantonese and by the Hoklos and Hakkas of the Canton province in acquiring a knowledge of Mandarin. Western students know the work through Bazin, who made use of it in the preparation of his Chinese Grammar, and Thom, who used it in making his Chinese Speaker. The compiler was a native of Canton, but he left that city in early life and lived first at Peking and afterwards at other places where Mandarin was the language of the people. His little work is very useful but it is not considered so good as the books composed by So I-tsun.
This man So I-tsun (沙彝尊) was a Manchoo resident at Canton. For the people of that city he composed the "Chêng-yin-pien-wei" and the "Chêng-yin-tsü-hua." The former was published in 1837 and the latter a few years afterwards, and both have been several times reprinted. They also are largely used by the inhabitants of Canton who desire to learn the standard language. These books give excellent vocabularies of Mandarin terms in common use, rules for the standard pronunciation of characters, the Thousand Character Classic with the correct sound of each character, and minute instructions as to the physical acts to be performed in making the various utterances. The "Chêng-yin-tsü (or chü) hua" is perhaps the best of all these works and of the most practical utility. It not only ​distinguishes between Cantonese and Mandarin but also between the latter and the Court dialect.
A later treatise than the above is a small one named "Chêng-yin-t‘ung-su-piao," published first in 1872. The author was P‘an Fêng-hsi (潘逢禧), of Anhui extraction but born at Foochow. He also aimed at ascertaining and diffusing the chêng-yin or Mandarin language, so that it might displace the local dialects and become the one language of all the Empire.
A review of the sketch here given of the cultivation of their language by Chinese scholars shows that generally they confined themselves to the sounds, meanings, composition, and history of their written characters. The sketch, however, is necessarily very imperfect, and a more thorough examination of the native literature would perhaps reveal many works bearing on other departments of Chinese philology. But it must be admitted that the investigation of the language is seldom pursued by native scholars as an independent study. It is always an "inferior science," and gains importance only as a help to the understanding of the orthodox canonical literature. From the "Shuo-wên" down to the latest dictionary, all etymological treatises have been composed with the expressed design of aiding in the settling of texts, clearing up the meaning, or ascertaining the sounds of characters in the old Confucian writings or in the works composed to teach, illustrate or continue those writings. One of the best of the late treatises on etymology is that by Wang Yin-chĭ (王引之) published in 1798. This is devoted to the particles found in the ancient orthodox classics, and in some degree it performs the part of a grammar. But there probably is not any native treatise, at least of authority, which can properly be called a grammar. The language, indeed, wants what we understand by that term. Or perhaps we should say of it what Sir Philip Sidney says of our own language in reply to those who object that it "wanteth grammar"—"Nay, truly, it hath that prayse, ​that it wanteth not grammar: for Grammar it might have, but it needes it not: beeing so easie of itself, and so voyd of those cumbersome differences of Cases, Genders, Moodes, and Tenses, which I think was a peece of the Tower of Babilon's curse, that a man should be put to schoole to learne his mother-tongue." The primæval Chinese, as we know from several excellent authorities, left their original seat in Mesopotamia before the "second general curse" passed on the human race, and so their descendants have not to "reintegrate" themselves in the divine benediction.
* ↑ Legge, Chinese Classics, Vol. III., p. 82; "Shu-ching," chap. v. (十三經 Ed. by Yuan Yuan).
* ↑ Legge, C. C. III., pp. 47, 595; "Shu-ching," chaps. iii., xix.
* ↑ Large, C. C. III., pp. 199, 205; "Shu-ching," chap. viii.
* ↑ Legge, C. C. III., pp. 250; "Shu-ching," chap. x.
* ↑ Biot's "Le Tcheou-Li," T. I., pp. 129, 132, 296; 周禮, chaps. vi., vii., xiv.; 字金監, Introduction.
* ↑ Biot, "Le Tcheou Li," T. II., pp. 407, 435; "Chow-li," chaps. xxxiv., xxxvii., xxxviii.; 禮記 , chap. iii. (王制).
* ↑ "Han-Shu," chap. xxx.; 說文 chap. xv. Chu Fu-tzŭ writes to a friend that the "Urh-ya" was a compilation of the explanations and definitions given by the scholars of former and contemporary times made into a book, but that it has inaccuracies and cannot be regarded as old (爾雅乃是纂集古今諸儒訓話以成書其閒蓋亦不能無誤不足据以爲古)—朱子全書 chap. lii.
* ↑ "Shuo-Wên," Pref. ; 字鑑, Pref.; 文房肆攷, chap. iii.; Edkins, Int. to Ch. Chars., p. 142: "Yuan-chien-lei-han," chap. cciv. ; 日知錄, chap. xxi.; "Li-chi," 曲禮上; "Urh-ya," chap. v.; " Wên-hsien-t'ung-k'ao," chap. clxxxix.
* ↑ The 小爾雅 in the "Han-wei-tsung-shu."
* ↑ "Han-shu," chap. xxx.; "Wên-hsin-t'ung-k'ao," chap. clxxxix.; " Shuo-wên," Pref.; 日知錄, chap. xxi.; 續博物志, chap. iv.
* ↑ "Han-shu," chap. xxx.; " Wên-hsien-t'ung-k'ao," chap. clxxxix.; "Shuo-wên," Pref. Some take the "Ch'i-jen" (齊人) as referring to an unknown individual — see Tuan Yü-tsai's Commentary in S. W., chap. xv.; 尚友錄, chap. xv.
* ↑ 太玄法言
* ↑ 輶軒使者絕代語釋別國方言 ("wu-ying-tien" edition); 風俗通義, Preface; "Han-shu," chaps. xxx., lxxxvii.; "Wen-hsien-t'ung-k'ao," chap. clxxxix.; Edkins, Int. Ch. Characters, Appendix; "Shuo-wên," Preface.
* ↑ 說文解字, ed. by Kuei Fu-hsio and Tuan Yü-tsai; Mayers' Ch. R. M., No. 202; Chalmers in Ch. Rev., V., p. 296, IX., p. 297; Edkins' Int. Ch. Chars., p. 151 ; "Hou-han-shu," chap. lxxix.
* ↑ 釋名 (in "Han-Wei-tsung-chu"); "Hou-han-shu," chap. lxxx., 上; 家訓, chap. xviii.
* ↑ 試筞箋註, chap, iii.; 顧氐學, "Yin-lun" 下; "Kanghsi's Dictionary," Preface.
* ↑ "Li-shi-yin-chien" (李氏音鑑), chaps. i. and ii.; "Yun-hsio" (韻學); "Ku-shi," etc. "Yin-lun" 上.
* ↑ 博雅 (in "Han-Wei-tsung-shu"); "Wên-hsien-t'ung-k'ao," chap. clxxxix.
* ↑ Appendix to "Shi-ming."
* ↑ "Li-shi-yin-chien," chap. ii.; 顏氏家訓, chap. 下, where 言 is used for 然 in Sun's name; "Shang-yu-lu," chap. iv.
* ↑ "Wên-hsien-t'ung-k'ao," chap. clxxxix.; 桂馥學's "Shuo-wên," chap. 1.; 韻學, chap. i.
* ↑ "Yun-hsio," chap. i.; " Li-shi-yin-chien," chap. ii.; "Ku-shi," etc., 音論上.
* ↑ "Ku-shi, etc., Yin-lun;" Mayers' Ch. R. M., No. 436; "Chin-shu," chap. liv.
* ↑ "Chin-shu," chap. lxxii.; Mayers' Ch. R. M., No. 304; 爾雅註疏 (in 十三經), Int.; 方言註 Pref.; 文中子, chap. vi.
* ↑ "Ku-shi, etc., Yin-lun," 中 chap.; "Li-shi-yin-chien," chap. ii.; "Yun-hsio"; Ma T. L., chap. clxxxix.
* ↑ "Ku-shi, etc., Yin-lun," 中 chap.; "Li-shi-yin-chien," chap. ii.; "Shang-yu-lu," chap. xvii.; 神珙九弄圖; Edkins' Shanghai Gr., p. 10., and Chinese Buddhism, p. 112.
* ↑ 文心雕龍(in "Han-Wei" Collection); Wylie, Notes on Ch. Lit., p. 197.
* ↑ Kuei Fu-hsio's "Shuo-wên," chap. 1.
* ↑ "Yü-pien" with Chu I-tsun's Preface (Ed. 1704); 程氏讀書分年日程 chap. iii.; Edkins' Mand. Gr., p 73.
* ↑ 顏氏家訓(in Han-Wei Collection).
* ↑ "Ku-shi, &c., Yin-lun" 下; "Li-shi," &c., chap, ii.; 貫珠集, Vol. I., p. 36.
* ↑ Kuei's "Shuo-wên," chap. 1.; "Yun-hsiao."
* ↑ "Ku-shi, etc., Yin-lun," 上;古今韻略, Int.; "Yun-hsio."
* ↑ "T‘ang-shu," chap. cxcviii.; "Wên-hsien," etc., chap. clxxxix.; Legge, Ch. Cl., Vol. IV. Prolog. p. 205; 經典釋文, ed. by 盧文弨 and others (1791).
* ↑ "T‘ang-shu," chaps. lvii., cxcviii.
* ↑ "T‘ang-shu," chap. cxcviii.
* ↑ Preface to reprint of "Yü-pien."
* ↑ Preface to reprint of "Kuang-yun"; Ku-shi, etc., Yin-lun" 上.
* ↑ 程氏讀書, etc., chap. iii.; Kuei's "Shuo-wên," chap. l.; Ma T. L., chap. cxc.
* ↑ "Li-shi-yin-chien," chap. ii.; 同文韻統, chap. vi.; Catalogue of Bud. Trip. by Bunyiu Nanjio, Col. 444.; "Yü-pien," vol. iii. Appx.
* ↑ 一切經音義 ed. 1869.
* ↑ "T‘ang-shu," chap. lvii.; 六書故 Int.; Ma. T. L., chap. clxxvii.; Legge, Ch. Cl., III., Prolog., p. 31.
* ↑ It is possible, however, that they are right who say this work is erroneously ascribed to Hsü, and that "Shuo-wên-yun-pu" stands for "Wu-yin-yun-pu," a work of Li Tao to be mentioned presently.
* ↑ 說文解字徐氏繫傳, ed. 1839, by 姚覲元 (Rept.); 徐鉉說文註, by Sun Hsing-yen (1864 Rept.); "M. T. L.," chap, clxxxix.; "Sung-shi," chap. ccccxli.; 貫珠集, Pref.
* ↑ 爾雅註疏 (13th ed.); "Ma T. L.," chap. clxxxix.; "Sung-shi," chap. ccccxxxi.
* ↑ "Ma T. L.," chap. cxc.; "Sung-shi," chaps. ccccxli. and ccccxlii.
* ↑ "Kuang-yun," (Reprint of Chu I-tsun's ed.); "Ku.shi," etc., 音論上; "Li-shi," etc., chaps. i. ii.; "Ku-chin-yun-liao," Int. ; Phon. S. W. Int.
* ↑ "Yü-pien," (Reprint Chu I-tsun's ed.); "Ma T. L.," chap. clxxxix.
* ↑ "Yun-hsio."; Phon. S. W.; 定聲; "Ku-chin-yun-liao," Int.; "Ku-shi, etc., Yin-lun," 上; "Ma T. L.," chap. clxxxix.
* ↑ "Wylie's Notes," p. 9; Phon. S. W. Ting-shêng; "Ku-chin-t'‘ng-yun," chap. i; "Ku-shi, etc., Yin-lun," 上; "Tsŭ-chien" (字鑑), Pref.; "Ma T. L.," chap. cxc.
* ↑ "Sung-shi," chap. cccxliii.; L. C. C. iv., Prolog., p. 179.
* ↑ "Ma T. L.," chap. clxxxix.; Supt. "Ma T. L.," chap. xxv.; 切韻指掌圖 (Reprint of 1203 ed.)
* ↑ 復古編 (Reprint of 1781); "Ma T. L.," chap. cxc.
* ↑ "T‘ung-chih" (通志), chaps. xxxi. to xxxvii.; Mayer's Ch. R. M., No. 61; Bushell in N. C. B. R. A. S. Journal, Vol. VIII., p. 133; "Sung-shi," chap. ccccxxxvi.; Phon. S. W. Int. The Liao may be found as a separate book. They were published with the title 通志略 in 1550, and since that several new editions have appeared.
* ↑ "Sung-shi," chap. ccclxxxviii.; 汲古閣設文訂 Pref.; "Shuo-wên," chap. 1.
* ↑ "Ma T. L.," chap. cxc.; "Sung-shi," chap. ccccx.; "Liu-shu-ka," Pref.
* ↑ L. C. C., iv., Prolog., p. 181.
* ↑ 改併五音集韻 (Reprint of 1589); Wylie's Notes, p. 9.
* ↑ 貫珠集 (Reprint) Pref.; 五音類聚 (Ming Rep.) Pref.
* ↑ 古韻標準, Int.; 古今通韻, Int.; 韻經, Pref.; "Ku-shï-yin-lun,"; L. Ch. C, iv., Proleg., p. 103.
* ↑ "Ku-chin-t'ung-yun," the 論例; 六書音均表, chap. i.
* ↑ 程氏家塾讀書分年日程, chap. iii.
* ↑ 試策箋註, chap. iii.; "Ma T. L.," chap. cxc.
* ↑ 改併五音類聚四聲篇, (Ming Reprint).
* ↑ "Li-shi-yin-chien," chap. ii. ; "Yun-hsio"; "Ku-chin-yun-liao," Int.; "Ku-chin-t'ung-yun," Int.; Phon. S. W., Int.
* ↑ 經史正音切韻指南 (Reprint of 1577).
* ↑ The 六書故, ed. 1784; "China Review," Vol. II., p. 175; Ditto, IX., p. 297; Ditto, X., p. 143; The "Six Scripts," by L. C. Hopkins, Esq.
* ↑ "Yun-hsio"; "Ku-chin-yun-liao," Int.; "Ku-shi-yin-lun," chap. 上; Phon. S. W. Ting-shêng.
* ↑ 新增說文韻府羣玉 (ed. 1590); "Ku-chin-yun-liao," Pref.; "Yun. hsio; Phon. S. W. Ting-shêng.
* ↑ 中原音韻 (Rept. of Ming ed.); "Yun-hsio;" 中州全韻 chap. vi.; Ed. Man. Gr., pp. 40 and 79; "Ku-chin-t'ung-yun," chap. i.; "Li-shi-yin-chien," chap. i.
* ↑ 字鑑 (Reprint of 1685, ed. by 朱彝尊).
* ↑ 六書正譌 ed. by 胡正言 of Ming dynasty.
* ↑ 正韻牋 ed. 1632; "Ku-yun-piao-chun,"; Ed. Man. Gr., p. 82; "Ku-chin- t'ung-yun," preface, et al.; "Ku-chin-yun-liao," Int.
* ↑ "Ku-chin-yun-liao," Int.; "Yun-hsio."
* ↑ "Li-shi-yin-chien," chap. ii.
* ↑ 貫珠集 (Ming reprint).
* ↑ "Ku-chin-yun-liao," Int.; "Ku-yun-piao-chun," Int.; "Ming-Shi," chaps. xcvi.; cxcii.; Wylie's Notes, p. 130.
* ↑ 毛詩古音靠, ed. 1606; Ed. Man. Gr., p. 267 ; Phon. S. W., Pref.; "Ku-yun-piao-chun," Int.; "Liu-shu-yin-yun-piao," Pref. Some late native authors quote Ch'ên Ti simply by his name Chi-li (季立) in citing his teachings, as though these and their author were familiar to everybody.
* ↑ 字彙, ed. 1676 and 1688; Kanghsi Dict., Preface; Ed. Man. Gr., p. 82; " Wu-fang-yin-yun," Pref. by Nien Hsi-yao.
* ↑ 顧氏音學五書; "Ku-yan-piao-chun," Int.; 國朝漢學師承記, chap. viii.
* ↑ 古今韻略, ed. 1696.
* ↑ 康熙甲子史館新刋古今通韻
* ↑ 正字通, reprint of Liao's edition.
* ↑ 四音釋義 (ed. 1843) 韻學指南. My copy of the "Pei-wên-yun-fu" is a recent reprint, and is perhaps an unusually bad one.
* ↑ 增補五方元音 (reprint); Williams' Dictionary, Int., p. xiv.; Ed. Man. Gr., p. 38.
* ↑ 古韻標準：四聲切韻表
* ↑ 新訂中州全韻; Ed. Man. Gr., p. 39.
* ↑ 廣釋名 (reprint).
* ↑ 國朝經師經義 Yuan Yuan's "Urh-ya" (13 ed.); 比雅 (reprint 1857).
* ↑ "Yü-pien" and "Kuang-yun," ed. 1701.
* ↑ 說文解字義證 ed. 1870.
* ↑ 說文解字注, ed. 1808.
* ↑ 說文通訓定聲; Chalmers in "Ch. Rev.," vol. ix. p. 297, and Lockhart in "Ch. Rev.," xii. p. 63. Chu Tsun-shêng's work is known as the "Phonetic Shuo-wên" and it is referred to by that name in the present work.
* ↑ 六書音均表 (reprint).
* ↑ 國朝漢學師承記, chap, v.; 諸言 (reprint).
* ↑ 聲類 ed. 1852; "Kuo-ch‘ao-han-hsio," etc., chap. iii.
* ↑ 李氏音鑑 ed. 1808; Ed. Shanghai Gr. (2nd ed.) p. 51, etc.; Ed. Man. Gr. (2nd ed.) p. 38, etc.
* ↑ Ed. Sh. Gr., p. 58.
* ↑ 古今文字通釋 ("Ku-chin-wên-tzŭ t‘ung-shi").
* ↑ 官音彙解釋義 (a poor reprint).
* ↑ 正音彙編 (ed. 1863). There seem to be several editions of this book with slight variations of detail or arrangement.
* ↑ 正音撮要 (Chêng-yin-tso-yao), a reprint.
* ↑ 正音辨微; 正音咀華; Ed. Man. Gr., p. 277.
* ↑ "Chêng-yin-t‘ung-su-piao" (正音通俗表).
* ↑ The title of the book is "Ching-chuan-shi-ssŭ" (經傳釋詞), see L. C. C., vol. iv., Proleg. p. 178; Julien Synr. Nouvelle, etc., T. i. p. 153.
* ↑ An Apologie for Poetrie, p. 70 (Arbeir's reprint).