page_title: Neolithic signs in China
section_title: Nature of the symbols
hierarchical_section_title: Neolithic signs in China / Nature of the symbols
caption_attribution_description: English: A relief map of the North China Plain and surrounding areas. Equirectangular projection, N/S stretching 122%. Geographic limits of the map: N: 42.0° N S: 28.0° N W: 103.0° E E: 123.0° E Section of Natural Earth Cross Blended Hypso with Shaded Relief, Water, and Drainages from naturalearthdata.com (public domain)
context_page_description: Since the second half of the 20th century, inscriptions have been found on pottery in a variety of locations in China, such as Banpo near Xi'an, as well as on bone and bone marrows at Hualouzi, Chang'an County near Xi'an. These simple, often geometric, marks have been frequently compared to some of the earliest known Chinese characters appearing on the oracle bones, and some have taken them to mean that the history of Chinese writing extends back over six millennia. However, only isolated instances of these symbols have been found, and they show no indication of representing speech or of the non-pictorial processes that a writing system requires.
context_section_description: At a range of Neolithic sites in China, small numbers of symbols of either pictorial or simple geometric nature have been unearthed which were incised into or drawn or painted on artifacts, mostly on pottery but in some instances on turtle shells, animal bones or artifacts made from bone or jade. These sites include those pertaining to the cultures of Yangshao, Liangzhu, Majiayao and Longshan.
  The question of whether such symbols are writing, primitive or proto-writing, or merely non-writing symbols or signs for other purposes such as identification is a highly controversial one, and the debate still continues today. Proponents of the view that they are early Chinese writing tend to see evidence in comparisons of individual signs with individual oracle bone script characters. Others believe that Neolithic signs are part of an incipient semiotic system that eventually led to the development of mature Chinese writing.
  William G. Boltz of the University of Washington's Department of Asian Languages and Literature points out that such comparisons are "notoriously risky and inconclusive" when based on such primitive scratch marks rather than on similarity in function (2003, p. 38). Boltz adds:
  "There does not seem to be any meaningful order of repetition or concatenation that would lead us to suspect anything more than that these are random and largely unorganized, unsystematic markings."
  — p.35
  In general, the Neolithic symbols which have been unearthed to date are found in isolated use (as would be expected with ownership marks or clan symbols) rather than in sequences consistent with representation of the spoken language, and there is no evidence of processes fundamental to the beginnings of a true, useful writing system such as phonetic loan usage. As Qiu (2000, p. 39) explains:
  Only when symbols...are consciously used to record words used to form sentences is there a true sign that the development of script has begun.
  Furthermore, the evidence is still extremely scanty, even when the early Shang period evidence is added to the picture:
  While these materials are very valuable, they are unfortunately few in number and most of them are rather fragmentary so that they are far from being able to provide an ample basis for solving the problem of the formation of Chinese writing.
  — Qiu 2000, pp.29–30
  It is still safe to conclude that the earliest known undisputed examples of true writing in China (that is, symbols used to fully record language rather than isolated meanings) are the oracle bones of the late Shang dynasty, c. 1250 BCE.
caption: Neolithic sites yielding inscribed symbols
exif: {}