Old Chinese

In Pulleyblank’s remarkable article “The Consonantal System of Old Chinese”, he suggested that Chinese nasal final –n in the Han period partook of the characteristics of an r or l, and regarded Korean and Japanese renderings of Chinese word jùn (郡, “commandery”) as a piece of evidence. But in fact Korean words kol, koŭl, koʋŭl and Japanese words kōri, kohori all correspond to Old Korean pure words, do not correspond to transcriptions of Chinese loanword word jùn (郡). On utilising Korean materials to do research on Chinese historical linguistics, we must separate Korean pure words from Chinese loanwords, distinguish between different readings of Korean sinographs, and notice its temporal difference between the history of Chinese language. Only in this way can Sino-xenic materials be utilised scientifically and valid conclusions be drawn.

After the destruction of the Xiongnu Empire, some groups of the Xiongnu migrated to the west of Eurasia and became those who were known as the Huns. The signs that were used to record the ethnonym Xiongnu 匈奴 were pronounced as *hoŋ-nâ in Late Old Chinese and as *hɨoŋnɑ in Eastern Han Chinese. Word-forms *hoŋ-nâ / *hɨoŋ-nɑ correlate well to the ethnonym Hun. All known examples of the Xiongnu language from Chinese sources have been perfectly interpreted through Yeniseian languages, so it is logical to suppose a Yeniseian etymology of the ethnonym *Hoŋ-nâ / Hun: these forms can be compared to the form hɔʔ 2 "people" existing in Northern dialects of Ket. The name Attila can be a compound of two components: at and til; at correlates to Proto-Yeniseian *ʔat "hunting spear" and til to Proto-Yeniseian *tVr "to shake". And thus, Attila means "[the one who] shakes [a] spear".

漢語史中“屏”的音義關係比較複雜，本文重點討論它的兩項複雜式音變構詞：（1）原始詞指“屏蔽”，幫母靜韻上聲（*pǐeŋ/pǐɛŋ）；滋生詞指“偏僻隱蔽的地方”，又詞義構詞指“廁所”，並母徑韻去聲（*bieŋ/bieŋ）。（2）原始詞指“屏蔽”，幫母靜韻上聲（*pǐeŋ/pǐɛŋ）；滋生詞指“屏風”，並母青韻平聲（*bieŋ/bieŋ）。此外，“屏”還可以由“屏蔽”義變調構詞指“除去”，幫母勁韻去聲（*pǐeŋ/pǐɛŋ）。在確定音變構詞中的語義演變脈絡時，漢語及其他語言中的平行引申是重要參考。 [The phono-semantic relationship of “píng屏” is rather complex. This paper focuses on two complex sound alternation-based derivations of “píng屏”. The main conclusions are as follows: (1) The base word refers to “to screen” with bāng 幫initial, jìng 靜rhyme and shǎng tone, and the derived word refers to “a remote and hidden place” and further refers to “toilet” with bìng 並initial, jìng 徑rhyme and qù tone. (2) The base word refers to “to screen” with bāng 幫initial, jìng 靜rhyme and shǎng tone, and the derived word refers to “screen” with bìng 並initial, qīng 青rhyme and píng tone. In addition, “píng屏” can also be used as the meaning “to remove” with bāng 幫initial, jìng 勁rhyme and qù tone, which is derived from “to screen” through a change in tone. When determining the semantic change path, it is important to take the parallel meaning-extension in Chinese and other languages into account.]

• The position of Sino-Bái: can the Chinese-like vocabulary of Bái legitimately inform the reconstruction of Old Chinese? • Introducing a new reconstruction of Proto-Bái -Compared to the wealth of initial clusters reconstructed by (Wāng, 2006; Yuán, 2006), this reconstruction has a CGVC, modern-Chinese type of phonology. -From Pre-Proto-Bái to Proto-Bái * *ae < Pre-Bái *rV, Pre-Bái *e(ŋ,k). * *iaC < *aet • Comparing the new Proto-Bái with the new Old Chinese -Bái systematically reflects the contrast between Baxter-Sagart *rvs. *C.r-, and probably also *r̥ -. -A few Bái words show uvular stops in Division-III syllables. Possible correlation with Baxter-Sagart uvulars. -Individual forms of interest: Bái *piN¹ 'wind' < 風 OC 1 *prəm, Bái *tʃʰaeN¹ < *tʃʰeŋ¹ 'light' < 輕 OC *[kʰ]eŋ. -For cases where 3th-century Mainstream Chinese differs dialectally from Shāndōng Chinese, current Mainstream Chinese always shows the Shāndōng forms while Bái consistently shows 3th-century Mainstream forms.

This paper presents a new thesis that builds upon the author's previous work, "A Dual Cipher in the Ancient Chinese Ganzhi System." It argues that two other enigmatic lists from the ancient Chinese text 爾雅 Erya-the 月陽 Yueyang and 月名 Yueming-are not related to the calendar, but are in fact additional, sophisticated cipher systems derived from Sanskrit by the same intellectual group. The analysis reveals that these lists functioned as advanced phonological textbooks. The Yueyang list is shown to be a single, complex sentence defining the Sanskrit term for a stop consonant (sparśa). The Yueming list is a chart of palatal (tālavya) consonants that defines the technical terms for both unaspirated (alpaprāṇa) and aspirated (mahāprāṇa) sounds. This decipherment also reveals that this phonological list is the surprising origin of the characters used for traditional Japanese month names still in common use, such as Kisaragi (如月) for the second month and Satsuki (皐月) for the fifth.

The alternative names for the Heavenly Stems and Earthly Branches recorded in ancient Chinese texts such as the 爾雅 (Erya) and 史記 (Shiji) have long been an enigma. This paper presents a new thesis: that these names are not a single system, but two independent systems created for different purposes by a single intellectual group well-versed in Sanskrit and Śaiva theology. This paper demonstrates that the Heavenly Stem names constitute a "scientific and technical list" designed for learning Sanskrit phonology, including concepts like labial/dental distinctions and consonant clusters (saṃyoga). In contrast, the Earthly Branch names form a "religious and spiritual system": a sacred mantra dedicated to the deity Śiva. The final conclusion of this paper is that these two distinct systems, which originally had no connection to the Chinese calendar, were mistakenly integrated into a single category of "alternative Ganzhi names" by later scholars. This historical misinterpretation occurred because the lists coincidentally contained the characters 丙 (Bing) and 寅 (Yin). This research, therefore, not only deciphers the esoteric names but also restores the traces of a grand intellectual project in ancient China that sought to unify science and religion.

高誘，漢涿郡涿縣人。少受業於同縣盧植。史書無傳，仕履見高誘撰寫之《淮南鴻烈解敘》。高氏在自敘云建安十年（公元205年）為司空掾，除濮陽令，十七年（公元212年）後遷監河東。注《孟子》、《孝經》、《戰國策》、《淮南子》及《呂氏春秋》。惜其論著或佚或殘。本辭典收錄高誘注解《淮南子》、《呂氏春秋》、《戰國策》之內容，並及漢唐訓詁、唐宋類書徵引之逸注，供學術界研究秦漢學術思想、訓詁語言之參考。

Gao You was a native of Zhuo county in the Han dynasty. He studied with Lu Zhi of the same county when he was young. Although there is no biography of him in the history books, his official career can be seen in the preface to his commentary on the Huainan zi. He has held several government positions since 205. Besides the Huainan zi, he also wrote commentaries on the Mengzi, Xiaojing, Zhanguo ce, and Lüshi chunqiu. Unfortunately, some of his works have been lost or mutilated. This dictionary is a collection of Gao You’s commentaries on the extant texts of Huainan zi, Lüshi chunqiu, and Zhanguo ce. References are made to the citations of Gao’s commentaries by Han-Tang commentators, as well as the lost commentaries found in the leishu (encyclopaedias) complied in the Tang and Song dynasties. The dictionary is intended to meet the need of those who want to study the thought and exegesis of the Qin and Han dynasties.

第一人称代词“吾”“我”在上古汉语中经常共现，关于其分工缘由众说纷纭。通过对《左传》及《论语》的穷尽性调查，本文发现“吾”“我”的句法语义分工主要体现为施通格：“吾”充当及物小句的 A，为施格；“我”充当及物小句的 P 和不及物小句的 S，为通格。藏缅语的配列以分裂著称，该特点同样出现在古代汉语中。高自主性及高话题度的 S 会使用“吾”，而低及物性和非实然的 A 会使用“我”。换言之，施事性越强越倾向用“吾”，受事性越强越倾向用“我”。
In Archaic Chinese, the first-person pronouns wu (吾) and wo (我) can be observed to co-occur frequently, with their functional distinctions remaining debated. Through a comprehensive examination of their usages in Zuozhuan (左传) and Lunyu (论语), this study identifies the primary differentiation, namely the Ergative-Absolutive contrast: wu serves as the A role in a transitive clause, taking the ergative case, while wo functions as the P role in a transitive clause and the S role in an intransitive clause, taking the absolutive case. The split reflects a key characteristic of the Sino-Tibetan morpho-syntactic alignment, as well as the Archaic Chinese. S roles with high degrees of volitionality and topicality in intransitive clauses tend to take the Ergative form wu, while A roles in low transitive or irrealis clauses are more likely to take the Absolutive form wo. In other words, the stronger the agentivity of the referent, the more likely wu is used, while stronger patientivity favors the use of wo.

第一人称代词“吾”“我”在上古汉语中经常共现，关于其分工缘由众说纷纭。通过对《左传》及《论语》的穷尽性调查，本文发现“吾”“我”的句法语义分工主要体现为施通格：“吾”充当及物小句的 A，为施格；“我”充当及物小句的 P 和不及物小句的 S，为通格。藏缅语的配列以分裂著称，该特点同样出现在古代汉语中。高自主性及高话题度的 S 会使用“吾”，而低及物性和非实然的 A 会使用“我”。换言之，施事性越强越倾向用“吾”，受事性越强越倾向用“我”。
In Archaic Chinese, the first-person pronouns wu (吾) and wo (我) can be observed to co-occur frequently, with their functional distinctions remaining debated. Through a comprehensive examination of their usages in Zuozhuan (左传) and Lunyu (论语), this study identifies the primary differentiation, namely the Ergative-Absolutive contrast: wu serves as the A role in a transitive clause, taking the ergative case, while wo functions as the P role in a transitive clause and the S role in an intransitive clause, taking the absolutive case. The split reflects a key characteristic of the Sino-Tibetan morpho-syntactic alignment, as well as the Archaic Chinese. S roles with high degrees of volitionality and topicality in intransitive clauses tend to take the Ergative form wu, while A roles in low transitive or irrealis clauses are more likely to take the Absolutive form wo. In other words, the stronger the agentivity of the referent, the more likely wu is used, while stronger patientivity favors the use of wo.

This paper proposes an alternative etymological explanation for the classical Chinese philosophical duality of Yin (陰) and Yang (陽) by identifying them as possible phonological transpositions of the ancient Proto-Turkic words TÜn (night/dark) and Gün (day/light). Drawing from historical phonology, comparative linguistics, and semantic fields in Sino-Tibetan and Altaic languages, we analyze the plausibility of lexical borrowing involving metathesis (transposition) rather than linear sound shifts. The hypothesis is further supported through examples of similar transpositions in Chinese loans from other languages.

Gong Hwang-cherng proposed that the Tangut language has a distinction between short and long vowels. To date, however, no reliable correlates have been found regarding the actual phonological nature of the distinction. A careful examination of Chinese loanwords in Tangut and Sino-Tangut pronunciation reveals that the "vowel length" distinction should be revised to that of the presence vs. absence of a nasal preinitial. The pair 𗻍₃₈₀₆ "weed" vs. 𗽰₂₁₃₈ "tomb," borrowed respectively from Chinese 蒲 bu and 墓 muH (the latter from a Northwest-type reflex with *mb-), hitherto reconstructed as buʶ¹ {bu¹} vs. buuʶ² {buu²}, should be revised to buʶ¹ vs. mbuʶ². The reconstructed nasal preinitial not only has a close typological parallel in Modern West Rgyalrongic, but is equally reflected in other sources of evidence, most strikingly Sanskrit transcription and fǎnqiè. The revision solves a large number of problems in the historical phonology of Tangut, though not without raising some new ones, especially in connection with the treatment of Proto-Rgyalrongic preinitials before nasals.

The linguistic affiliation of the Xiongnu language has long been a subject of debate. Previous studies have often relied on fragmented references in historical texts, but the lack of systematic vocabulary has hindered consensus. Considering that kinship terms tend to exhibit relatively consistent patterns, this paper investigates the core kinship terms such as gutŭ (“孤塗”), yànzhī (“阏氏”), and jūcì (“居次”) to determine the linguistic classification of the Xiongnu language. The study proposes that Xiongnu shows systematic correspondences with Dravidian and Afroasiatic (Hamito-Semitic) languages. Based on these shared kinship terms, it suggests a genealogical relationship and hypothesizes that during the eastward migration of Afroasiatic-speaking peoples, one branch moved southward into Pakistan and India, becoming the Dravidian-speaking populations, while another continued eastward into northern China, becoming the Xiongnu.

This paper is about two writings by the linguist Maurice Grammont: i) Recherches expérimentales sur la prononciation du cochinchinois (1910–11), an investigation – carried out within the framework of the laboratory founded by Grammont in Montpellier – that mainly deals with the tonal system of a dialectal variety of Vietnamese, studied using the instruments of experimental phonetics. This writing is among the very first research on tonetics produced by a professional linguist; ii) Études sur la langue annamite (1912), cosigned by Lê Quang Trinh – a phonetic, “morphological” (about lexical composition), syntactic and semantic study of that language. We examine them from three angles: a retrospective point of view, highlighting their originality in relation to earlier descriptions of Vietnamese and showing that they essentially escape the contrastive approaches that characterized them all; a prospective point of view, evoking particularly their reception by Maspero, Vendryes, Haudricourt and Gsell; and a comparison between them and other phonetic works by Grammont. In this context, we focus on the analysis of vowels dissimilation and, above all, of Vietnamese tones, emphasizing especially two aspects: the “note” (pitch)/timbre combination, and the phonetical particularities of “Cochinchinese” (five tones) vs. standard “Tonkinese” (six tones).

This paper focuses on the research of oracle bone inscriptions, exploring innovative means and methods of analyzing oracle bone inscriptions using artificial intelligence tools. Taking the research of the Chinese character "叀" in oracle bone inscriptions as a starting point, first, with the assistance of an artificial intelligence platform, the Hidden Markov Model is employed to conduct language semantic analysis to obtain probabilities. Then, graphic comparison is introduced, and the relevant research process is elaborated in detail, demonstrating the great potential of artificial intelligence in revealing the semantics of oracle bone inscriptions and inferring their origins. Meanwhile, by integrating mathematical probability analysis, it strongly supports the view that some symbols of oracle bone inscriptions originated from the primitive cuneiform script in West Asia, opening up a new path for the research of oracle bone inscriptions and enhancing the accuracy and objectivity of the research.

This paper examines how the idea of failure originated from the breaking of valuable things in both ancient Hebrew and ancient Chinese cultures. In Hebrew, failure evolved from the imagery of cutting covenants (karat) to stumbling and collapse (kashal). In Chinese, the character 敗 (bài), meaning to defeat, originally depicted breaking shells (⾙, money/wealth). Through linguistic, archaeological, and philosophical analysis, this study shows that both civilizations perceived failure as a profound rupture of value, trust, and societal integrity, linking physical destruction to moral and spiritual downfall. The research offers a cross-cultural perspective on how ancient peoples conceptualized loss and ethical collapse.

Ho Dah-an’s 2016 review of our book Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction
(2014) contains little discussion of the book’s main themes or proposals:
he focuses instead on “errors” which, according to him, “reflect the
outdated concepts of the authors and the insufficiency of their basic
training.” In this response to Ho’s review, we consider his discussion of
these “errors.” On two points (discussed below), he has actually found
errors (a faulty interpretation of an entry in the Shuōwén jiězì and one
incorrect citation), which we are glad to be able to correct. Neither
materially affects our conclusions. The other “errors” that Ho mentions are
not errors at all: in most cases they reflect basic misunderstandings on Ho’s
part: of our book, of other sources, and of basic principles of historical
linguistics. Since some of these misunderstandings relate to general issues
in the reconstruction of Old Chinese, we attempt here to correct these
misunderstandings in order to set the record straight.

This paper identifies a systematic phonological and semantic correspondence between Proto-Sino-Tibetan (PST) g-rak ('fluid') and Proto-Tupian (PT) ɨkɨ ('water/sap'), alongside its Old Chinese (OCh) reflex ɢrAk. By applying the comparative method to newly identified Tibeto-Burman (TB) cognates, we demonstrate that PST g-rak evolved into PT ɨkɨ via sound changes (g-loss, vowel centralization) and into OCh ɢrAk. The retention of 'fluid' semantics across branches, supported by TB evidence, challenges traditional language family boundaries and suggests deep genetic ties or prehistoric contact between East Asian and Amazonian populations.

He de comenzar esta reseña, vergonzosamente, con la confesión de un pecado, de hybris, de soberbia: cuando apareció en 2007 el libro de Paul Rouzer A new Practical Primer of Literary Chinese exclamé con ufana rotundidad y ridícula petulancia: "Jamás va a salir al mercado un manual de chino clásico que supere a este". Me equivoqué. Mea culpa. Es que soy de la generación que aprendió sus rudimentos de la disciplina en el espartano manual de Raymon Dawson (1968 y 1984), aquel librito, extraordinario sin duda para la época, con una introducción lingüística somera, pero clara y útil, con las oportunas traducciones de los textos iniciales, pero falto de anotaciones de vocabulario y de ejercicios, tan importantes en el aprendizaje de un idioma, incluso uno antiguo. Esto nos obligaba al penoso y continuo uso del diccionario y a resignarnos al estudio de los usos sintácticos por mera exposición a los textos más que por la práctica. El contenido del de Rouzer suponía un avance importante, sobre todo para los autodidactos, como yo mismo: su estructura, en cuarenta lecciones, con su vocabulario razonado, su glosario final, sus ejercicios y sus prácticas explicaciones gramaticales hacían infinitamente más llevadero el aprendizaje. Si a todo eso le añadimos la inclusión de glosas coreanas y japonesas, además de un apéndice final con rendición de los textos en lectura kanbun kundoku 漢文訓読, a los que, como yo, nos dedicamos principalmente a los estudios niponológicos aquel manual nos parecía un sueño. Anteriormente al de Rouzer había visto la luz en tres tomos, publicado por Princeton University Press, Classical Chinese, a Basic Reader (varios autores) (2004), con sus textos, acompañados de traducciones al inglés y al chino moderno, transcripciones a pinyin y Wade-Giles, apéndice de ejercicios y detalladísimas explicaciones gramaticales. Aunque la aparición de otros tres volúmenes de textos-históricos (2005), filosóficos (2006) y literario-poéticos (2006)-remedió el hecho de que la selección del manual de Princeton fuera limitada en esos tres tomos nuevos las explicaciones gramaticales eran demasiado someras y quedaban con mucho superadas por las de Rouzer. Después han ido apareciendo en lenguas europeas otros métodos, que a nuestro juicio no han supuesto un avance excesivo en la didáctica del chino clásico. Quizá sea solo digno de destacar Classical Chinese Primer, publicado también en 2007 por The Chinese University of Hong Kong (varios autores), pero sobre todo por su inclusión, en apéndice, de los textos de sus lecciones en caracteres simplificados, acompañados de su correspondiente pinyin, lo que los hacía más accesibles a los estudiantes de chino moderno. Además la editorial proporcionó acceso libre a grabaciones de esos mismos textos en internet, lo que era una mejora con la que no cuenta ningún otro manual. El libro de Vogelsang, supone, con respecto a todos los anteriores, otro avance notabilísimo: por un lado, y esto quizá sea lo principal, el tratamiento de la gramática es claro, sencillo y extenso. Por supuesto que el estudiante que quiera adquirir un conocimiento profesional en esta disciplina no quedará libre de dominar la obra básica de referencia, todavía hoy, de los estudios gramaticales del chino clásico, Outline of Classical Chinese Grammar (1995), de E. Pulleyblank; pero para todo coreanólogo, niponólogo o sinólogo interesado fundamentalmente en la lengua moderna, cualquiera de estos que desee acercarse al chino clásico y conseguir una competencia suficiente (algo que desde nuestro punto de vista es fundamental en el orientalista que pretenda ostentar tal título), el manual de Vogelsang contiene todo lo necesario para su propósito.

We did’t know Qapγan Qaγan's mausoleum in a long time. A very special Second Turkic Khanate’s site found in Bulgan province, Mongolia, called Shiveet-ulaan Memorial Complex. Most of the memorial complex remains of Turks and Tiele in Mobei Steppe are located in the valley, but the site is constructed on a mountain, similar to the mausoleum of the Tang Dynasty’s emperor. All kinds of stone statues found in this site are more than Bilge Khan and Kül Tegin’s Memorial Complex. The wordless tablet found in the site also implies the connection between this site and Qian Ling. The writer think the owner of this site is Qapγan Qaγan.

El presente artículo intenta aclarar la génesis y evolución de las
palabras japonesas de origen chino que aparecen en la edición vigente del Diccionario de la Lengua Española. En una primera parte del artículo se pone al tanto al lector de la información básica y necesaria con respecto a los estudios de las lenguas japonesa y china a fin de que le sea posible comprender ese origen y evolución, que se detallan en la segunda parte del trabajo.

В статье рассматривается система вопросительных местоимений категории предмета и лица на материале всех ветвей диалектов группы Минь сино-тибетской семьи. Главная задача исследования — выявить различные инновации в этой системе, возникающие в миньском регионе, вскрыть ле- жащие в их основе механизмы и (методом исключения) определить, какие из на- блюдаемых лексем можно вывести на праминьский уровень. Помимо обычного сравнительно-исторического метода, анализ учитывает также ареальный фак- тор, отмечая возможное влияние на формирование современных систем вопросительных местоимений со стороны как соседних диалектных групп, так и общенационального литературного языка.

Using newly excavated Chinese texts for linguistic reconstruction has become a twenty-first century trend: phonologists have paid increasing attention to the newly abundant evidence to examine previously proposed hypotheses and to put forward new ones, whereas philologists have helped to provide a reasonable morphological analysis of the texts. Essays on Chinese Palaeography and Old Chinese Phonology is a captivating and enlightening work by Professor Fuhai Zhang, which delves deep into the interpretations of excavated ancient Chinese texts, the analysis of Chinese characters, and some particular issues on Old Chinese phonology with the use of excavated documents, which offers many remarkable insights.

In the Sinitic language of the Shē minority of Southeastern China, the universally used existential/ possessive verb (comparable to yǒu in Modern Standard Chinese), is a word which is reconstructable as Common Shē *ho1. The etymology of this word is obscure, and it has on occasion even been suggested that it is non-Sinitic in origin. Interestingly, far to the southwest, in the border area of southern Húnán and northern Guǎngxī, there are taxonomically unclassifi ed dialects, often called Tǔhuà "local patois", where one fi nds words, beginning with initial h-or x-and ending in various monophthongs or diphthongs, which also serve as existential/possessive verbs. The purpose of the present paper is to compare all these forms, both those found in Shē and those in Tǔhuà, and then to reconstruct an ancestral Common Early South Central Chinese form, *ɣueu4, which would account for all of them. In conclusion, it is then suggested that this early southern dialect word may have been cognate to, or perhaps even a variant of, the far more widely used general Sinitic verb yǒu. It is further suggested that the precise nature of this relationship would be worthy of future study.

This volume gathers seven Warring States-period manuscripts with stories about Springs and Autumns period affairs from Zheng 鄭, Qin 秦, Jin 晋, and Chu 楚. Originally published in volumes 6 and 7 of the Tsinghua Manuscripts, these were brought together in the Collated Interpretations (Jiaoshi 校釋) and the present volume because of their topical and material proximity. The sequence chosen reflects the chronological order and geographical division amongst the texts, and where relevant, the similarity of the writing support:

1. *Zheng Wu Furen gui ruzi 鄭武夫人規孺子 (Zheng, events ca. 744 BCE)
2. *Zheng Wen Gong wen Tai Bo A 鄭文公問太伯（甲） (Zheng, events ca. 672 BCE)
3. *Zheng Wen Gong wen Tai Bo B 鄭文公問太伯（乙） (same as above)
4. Zi Fan Zi Yu 子犯子餘 (Qin, Jin, events ca. 637–636 BCE)
5. *Jin Wen Gong ru yu Jin 晋文公入於晋 (Qin, Jin, events ca. 636– 628 BCE)
6. *Zi Yi 子儀 (Qin, events ca. 621 BCE)
7. *Zhao Jianzi 趙簡子 (Jin, events ca. 500? BCE)

The events narrated in these texts span well over two and a half centuries, involving well-known figures from Zheng, Qin, and Jin, as well as Chu history. The majority of these narratives present dialogues between famous rulers of the period and a varied cast of interlocutors, including foreign emissaries, ministers, generals, elders, and mothers. Except for the outlier *Jin Wen Gong ru yu Jin—likely a companion piece to the Zi Fan Zi Yu — which is a monologue, the texts are all dialogues that feature the rulers in an inferior position to their interlocutors. These rulers are either looking for goodwill or they receive advice — solicited or unsolicited — from their often more experienced counterparts. While the texts themselves do not have counterparts in received literature, this power dynamic between ruler and minister is familiar from the larger body of literature on the Springs and Autumns. In terms of style, this type of text has been compared especially to texts such as the Guo yu, and other unearthed texts such as the narratives on Springs and Autumns Chu from the Shanghai Museum manuscripts, and, of course, the Zuo Zhuan.
This volume is divided into two parts. The first part introduces the texts and studies their narrative form. I focus on the narrative structure of the texts, the types of narration and dialogue, the way the story’s characters are represented, and the use of image-based language. The second half of the study presents the texts line by line, followed by a presentation of the full text in Chinese and English.

The morphophonology of Old Chinese has usually been reconstructed as an earlier version of the traditional reconstruction of Middle Chinese, with exclusively monosyllabic morphemes. For Old Chinese some scholars have posited syllabic morphemes with long or short vowels, or even polysyllabic morphemes, and other theories have been proposed, but it is still assumed that by Late Old Chinese any longer morphemes that once existed were already monosyllabic. However, Central Asian loans in Chinese suggest some disyllabic morphemes still existed in Late Old Chinese. They seem to be confirmed by a new study of little-noted Old Japanese transcriptions known as nigōgana. Thus the hitherto problematic Old Chinese and Old Japanese transcriptions of foreign words such as Saka and Buddha, and the monosyllabic theory of Old Chinese morphology, must be reconsidered. This paper's new reconstructions conform to the data and have great implications for the reconstruction of Old Chinese as well as for the reconstruction of the early Chinese loans into Japanese.

Oltre Marco Polo. Forme e modelli della scrittura di viaggio nei secc. XIV-XV
5-6 DICEMBRE 2024
PALAZZO ANTONINI-CERNAZAI, SALA GUSMANI, VIA TARCISIO PETRACCO 8, UDINE

Intervento: Un manoscritto per il pellegrinaggio a inizio Cinquecento (Ricc. 2819/IV)

Although stylometry and related quantitative-linguistic approaches have long been in use for assessing text authorship or for addressing other textual issues in Western literature, I am not aware of any serious attempts in the field of study of pre-modern Chinese texts. It is quite surprising given the fact that the authorship and dating of particular ancient Chinese books or their components have belonged to the most fiercely discussed topics in pre-modern Chinese philology in the last few decades. This paper is therefore conceived as an experiment in this vein, centering on the problem of dating. On the basis of a set of detailed statistic data, involving e.g. occurrence frequencies of word classes, syntactic functions, special function words, constructions, or polysyllabic words, I tried to find out applicable parameters, which would be sensitive to date of composition. As the primary linguistic material is concerned, it consists of a series of stylistically variegated chapters of several texts a) clearly dated as Warring States texts, b) clearly dated as mediaeval texts, c) two chapters of the Yinwenzi, a text with disputed dating. In the article, the results of these experiments are reported, interpreted, and evaluated, and some recommendations for the future research are suggested.

The Chinese name of the war chariot: chē 車, MC tsyhae, refers in texts and paleography to the chariot itself, to the spoked wheel and to instruments using spoked wheels. Shaughnessy (1988) places the introduction of the chariot to China at c. 1200 BCE, from a west Asian source. Following Shaughnessy’s papers, proposals (Pulleyblank 1996:15; Mallory and Mair 2000:326; Schuessler 2007:182) were made that chē 車 could be a loan from IE, ultimately reflecting Proto-Indo-European *kwekwl-o ‘wheel’, as part of the transmission of the horse/chariot/wheel cultural complex from the Central Asian steppes to East Asia. Here we show that the Old Chinese form of 車 as reconstructed by us (Baxter and Sagart 2014) provides an attractive fit to Indo-Iranian words for 'wheel' *cakra and *caxra.