Old Chinese - WikiHQ

Old Chinese, also called Archaic Chinese in older works, is the oldest attested stage of Chinese, and the ancestor of all modern varieties of Chinese. The earliest examples of Chinese are divinatory inscriptions on oracle bones from around 1250 BC, in the Late Shang period. Bronze inscriptions became plentiful during the following Zhou dynasty. The latter part of the Zhou period saw a flowering of literature, including classical works such as the Analects, the Mencius, and the Zuo Zhuan. These works served as models for Literary Chinese (or Classical Chinese), which remained the written standard until the early twentieth century, thus preserving the vocabulary and grammar of late Old Chinese.

Old Chinese was written with several early forms of Chinese characters, including oracle bone, bronze, and seal scripts. Throughout the Old Chinese period, there was a close correspondence between a character and a monosyllabic and monomorphemic word. Although the script is not alphabetic, the majority of characters were created based on phonetic considerations. At first, words that were difficult to represent visually were written using a "borrowed" character for a similar-sounding word (rebus principle). Later on, to reduce ambiguity, new characters were created for these phonetic borrowings by appending a radical that conveys a broad semantic category, resulting in compound xingsheng (phono-semantic) characters. For the earliest attested stage of Old Chinese of the late Shang dynasty, the phonetic information implicit in these xingsheng characters which are grouped into phonetic series, known as the xiesheng series, represents the only direct source of phonological data for reconstructing the language. The corpus of xingsheng characters was greatly expanded in the following Zhou dynasty. In addition, the rhymes of the earliest recorded poems, primarily those of the Classic of Poetry, provide an extensive source of phonological information with respect to syllable finals for the Central Plains dialects during the Western Zhou and Spring and Autumn periods. Similarly, the Chu Ci provides rhyme data for the dialect spoken in the Chu region during the Warring States period. These rhymes, together with clues from the phonetic components of xingsheng characters, allow most characters attested in Old Chinese to be assigned to one of 30 or 31 rhyme groups. For late Old Chinese of the Han period, the modern Southern Min languages, the oldest layer of Sino-Vietnamese vocabulary, and a few early transliterations of foreign proper names, as well as names for non-native flora and fauna, also provide insights into language reconstruction.

Although many of the finer details remain unclear, most scholars agree that Old Chinese differed from Middle Chinese in lacking retroflex and palatal obstruents but having initial consonant clusters of some sort, and in having voiceless nasals and liquids. Most recent reconstructions also describe Old Chinese as a language without tones, but having consonant clusters at the end of the syllable, which developed into tone distinctions in Middle Chinese.

Most researchers trace the core vocabulary of Old Chinese to Sino-Tibetan, with much early borrowing from neighbouring languages.

During the Zhou period, the originally monosyllabic vocabulary was augmented with polysyllabic words formed by compounding and reduplication, although monosyllabic vocabulary was still predominant. Unlike Middle Chinese and the modern Chinese languages, Old Chinese had a significant amount of derivational morphology. Several affixes have been identified, including ones for the verbification of nouns, conversion between transitive and intransitive verbs, and formation of causative verbs. Like modern Chinese, it appears to be uninflected, though a pronoun case and number system seems to have existed during the Shang and early Zhou but was already in the process of disappearing by the Classical period. Likewise, by the Classical period, most morphological derivations had become unproductive or vestigial, and grammatical relationships were primarily indicated using word order and grammatical particles.

Classification

Middle Chinese and its southern neighbours Kra–Dai, Hmong–Mien and the Vietic branch of Austroasiatic have similar tone systems, syllable structure, grammatical features and lack of inflection, but these are believed to be areal features spread by diffusion rather than indicating common descent.

The most widely accepted hypothesis is that Chinese belongs to the Sino-Tibetan language family, together with Burmese, Tibetan and many other languages spoken in the Himalayas and the Southeast Asian Massif.

The evidence consists of some hundreds of proposed cognate words, including such basic vocabulary as the following:

{| class="wikitable"

|+ Sino-Tibetan cognates

! Meaning

! Old Chinese

! Old Tibetan

! Old Burmese

| 'I'

| ṅa

| ṅā

| 'you'

| style="background-color:#ccc" |

| naṅ

| 'not'

| ma

| 'two'

| gñis

| nhac < *nhik

| 'three'

| gsum

| sumḥ

| 'five'

| lṅa

| ṅāḥ

| 'six'

| drug

| khrok < *khruk

| 'sun'

| ñi-ma

| niy

| 'name'

| myiṅ < *myeŋ

| maññ < *miŋ

| 'ear'

| rna

| nāḥ

| 'joint'

| tshigs

| chac < *chik

| 'fish'

| ña < *ṅʲa

| ṅāḥ

| 'bitter'

| kha

| khāḥ

| 'kill' ||

| -sad

| sat

| 'poison'

| dug

| tok < *tuk

Although the relationship was first proposed in the early 19th century and is now broadly accepted, reconstruction of Sino-Tibetan is much less developed than that of families such as Indo-European or Austronesian.

Although Old Chinese is by far the earliest attested member of the family, its logographic script does not clearly indicate the pronunciation of words.

Other difficulties have included the great diversity of the languages, the lack of inflection in many of them, and the effects of language contact.

In addition, many of the smaller languages are poorly described because they are spoken in mountainous areas that are difficult to reach, including several sensitive border zones.

Initial consonants generally correspond regarding place and manner of articulation, but voicing and aspiration are much less regular, and prefixal elements vary widely between languages. Some researchers believe that both these phenomena reflect lost minor syllables. Proto-Tibeto-Burman as reconstructed by Benedict and Matisoff lacks an aspiration distinction on initial stops and affricates. Aspiration in Old Chinese often corresponds to pre-initial consonants in Tibetan and Lolo-Burmese, and is believed to be a Chinese innovation arising from earlier prefixes. Proto-Sino-Tibetan is reconstructed with a six-vowel system as in recent reconstructions of Old Chinese, with the Tibeto-Burman languages distinguished by the merger of the mid-central vowel with . The other vowels are preserved by both, with some alternation between and , and between and .

Texts

The earliest known written records of the Chinese language were found at the Yinxu site near modern Anyang identified as the last capital of the Shang dynasty, and date from about 1250 BC. These are the oracle bones, short inscriptions carved on turtle plastrons and ox scapulae for divinatory purposes, as well as a few brief bronze inscriptions. The language written is undoubtedly an early form of Chinese, but is difficult to interpret due to the limited subject matter and high proportion of proper names. Only half of the 4,000 characters used have been identified with certainty. Little is known about the grammar of this language, but it seems much less reliant on grammatical particles than Classical Chinese.

From early in the Western Zhou period, around 1000 BC, the most important recovered texts are bronze inscriptions, many of considerable length. These texts are found throughout the Zhou area. Although their language changed over time, it was highly uniform across this range at each point in time, suggesting that it reflected the prestige form used by the Zhou elite. Even longer pre-Classical texts on a wide range of subjects have also been transmitted through the literary tradition. The oldest sections of the Book of Documents, the Classic of Poetry and the I Ching, also date from the early Zhou period, and closely resemble the bronze inscriptions in vocabulary, syntax, and style. A greater proportion of this more varied vocabulary has been identified than for the oracular period.

The four centuries preceding the unification of China in 221 BC (the later Spring and Autumn period and the Warring States period) constitute the Chinese classical period in the strict sense. There are many bronze inscriptions from this period, but they are vastly outweighed by a rich literature written in ink on bamboo and wooden slips and (toward the end of the period) silk. Although these are perishable materials, a significant number of texts were transmitted as copies, and a few of these survived to the present day as the received classics. Works from this period, including the Analects, the Mencius and the Commentary of Zuo, have been admired as models of prose style by later generations. As a result, the syntax and vocabulary of Old Chinese was preserved in Literary Chinese (wenyan), the standard for formal writing in China and neighboring Sinosphere countries until the early 20th century.

Script

thumb|right|upright|alt=Photograph of bone fragment with carved characters|Shang dynasty oracle bone script on an ox scapula

Each character of the script represented a single Old Chinese morpheme, originally identical to a word. Most scholars believe that these words were monosyllabic. William Baxter and Laurent Sagart propose that some words consisted of a minor syllable followed by a full syllable, as in modern Khmer, but still written with a single character. The development of characters to signify the words of the language follows the same three stages that characterized Egyptian hieroglyphs, Mesopotamian cuneiform script and the Maya script.

Some words could be represented by pictures (later stylized) such as 'sun', 'person' and 'tree, wood', by abstract symbols such as 'three' and 'up', or by composite symbols such as 'forest' (two trees).

About 1,000 of the oracle bone characters, nearly a quarter of the total, are of this type, though 300 of them have not yet been deciphered.

Though the pictographic origins of these characters are apparent, they have already undergone extensive simplification and conventionalization.

Evolved forms of most of these characters are still in common use today.

Next, words that could not be represented pictorially, such as abstract terms and grammatical particles, were signified by borrowing characters of pictorial origin representing similar-sounding words (the "rebus strategy"):

The word 'tremble' was originally written with the character for 'chestnut'.
The pronoun and modal particle was written with the character originally representing 'winnowing basket'.

Sometimes the borrowed character would be modified slightly to distinguish it from the original, as with 'don't', a borrowing of 'mother'.

Later, phonetic loans were systematically disambiguated by the addition of semantic indicators, usually to the less common word:

The word 'tremble' was later written with the character , formed by adding the symbol , a variant of 'heart'.
( ) 'unhulled rice' from proto-Hmong–Mien <sup>A</sup>.

Other words are believed to have been borrowed from languages to the south of the Chinese area, but it is not clear which was the original source, e.g.

( ) 'elephant' can be compared with Mon coiŋ, proto-Tai and Burmese chaŋ.
( ) 'chicken' versus proto-Tai , proto-Hmong–Mien and proto-Viet–Muong *r-ka.

In ancient times, the Tarim Basin was occupied by speakers of Indo-European Tocharian languages, the source of ( ) 'honey', from proto-Tocharian *ḿət(ə) (where *ḿ is palatalized; cf. Tocharian B mit), cognate with English '.

Affixation

Chinese philologists have long noted words with related meanings and similar pronunciations, sometimes written using the same character.

Henri Maspero attributed some of these alternations to consonant clusters resulting from derivational affixes.

Subsequent work has identified several such affixes, some of which appear to have cognates in other Sino-Tibetan languages.

A few of these were still productive or transparent in Old Chinese.

A common case is "derivation by tone change", in which words in the departing tone appear to be derived from words in other tones.

If Haudricourt's theory of the origin of the departing tone is accepted, these tonal derivations can be interpreted as the result of a derivational suffix with a range of functions.

As Tibetan has a similar suffix, it may be inherited from Sino-Tibetan.

The most common function was nominalization of verbs, as in the following examples:

( ) 'to transmit' and ( ) 'a record'
( ) 'to bring in' and < ( ) 'inside'
( ) 'to weave' and ( ) 'silk cloth' (compare Written Tibetan 'to weave' and 'woven, cloth')

The suffix also formed denominal verbs, as in these examples:

( ) 'cap' and ( ) 'to cap'
( ) 'clothes' and ( ) 'to wear, to clothe'
( ) 'king' and ( ) 'be king'
( ) 'to mix' and ( ) 'mixed, confused'
( ) 'to stretch' and ( ) 'long'

Some scholars hold that the transitive verbs with voiceless initials are basic and the voiced initials reflect a de-transitivizing nasal prefix.

Others suggest that the transitive verbs were derived by the addition of a causative prefix to a stative verb, causing devoicing of the following voiced initial.

Both postulated prefixes have parallels in other Sino-Tibetan languages, in some of which they are still productive.

Several other affixes have been proposed.

The derivational affixes lost their productivity towards the end of the Zhou period, and their functions were taken over by forms such as auxiliary verbs.

Reduplication and compounding

Old Chinese morphemes were originally monosyllabic, but during the Western Zhou period many new disyllabic words entered the language.

By the classical period, 25–30% of the lexicon was polysyllabic, though monosyllabic words occurred more frequently and made up 80–90% of the text.

Disyllabic morphemes include the famous ( ) 'butterfly' from the Zhuangzi.

Many disyllabic, monomorphemic words, particularly names of insects, birds and plants, and expressive adjectives and adverbs, were formed by varieties of reduplication:

full reduplication ( 'repeated words'), in which the syllable is repeated, as in ( ) 'tall and grand' and ( ) 'happy and at ease'.
rhyming semi-reduplication ( 'repeated rhymes'), in which only the final is repeated, as in ( ) 'elegant, beautiful' and ( ) 'bollworm'. The initial of the second syllable is often or .
alliterative semi-reduplication ( 'paired initials'), in which the initial is repeated, as in ( ) 'irregular, uneven' and ( ) 'to crawl'.
vowel alternation, especially of and , as in ( ) 'busy' and ( ) 'carefree and happy'. Alternation between and also occurred, as in ( ) 'rushing (of wind or water)' and ( ) 'cricket'.

More words, especially nouns, were formed by compounding, including:

qualification of one noun by another (placed in front), as in ( ) 'quince' (literally 'tree-melon'), and ( ) 'noon' (literally 'middle-day').
verb–object compounds, as in ( ) 'master of the household' (literally 'manage-horse'), and ( ) 'scribe' (literally 'make-writing').

However the components of compounds were not bound morphemes: they could still be used separately.

Compounding became more productive during the following Han period and has continued to the present day.

A number of bimorphemic syllables appeared in the Classical period, resulting from the fusion of words with following unstressed particles or pronouns.

Thus the negatives and are viewed as fusions of the negators and respectively with a third-person pronoun .

Notes

References

Citations

Works cited

External links

(review of )
(review of )
(review of )
Recent Advances in Old Chinese Historical Phonology at SOAS, University of London, November 2015