The Chinese Rhyme Tables: Volume I [1 ed.] 9781003376729

Citation preview

The Chinese Rhyme Tables

As the first volume of a two-​volume set that studies Chinese rhyme tables, this book focuses on their emergence, development, structure, and patterns. Rhyme tables are a tabulated tool constituted by phonological properties, which help indicate the pronunciation of sinograms or Chinese characters, marking a precise and systematic account of the Chinese phonological system. This volume first discusses the emergence of the model and factors that determined its formation and evolution, including the Chinese tradition of the rhyme dictionary and the introduction of Buddhist scripts. The second part analyzes the structure and arrangement patterns of rhyme tables in detail, giving insights into the nature of “division” (deng): the classification and differentiation of speech sounds, of vital significance in the reconstruction of middle Chinese. The author argues that deng has nothing to do with vowel aperture or other phonetic features but is a natural result of rhyme table arrangement. He also reexamines the principles for irregular cases (menfa rules) and categorizes the 20 rules into three types. The book will appeal to scholars and students who are studying linguistics, Chinese phonology, and Sinology. Pan Wenguo is a tenured professor and doctoral supervisor at East China Normal University and the honorary president of the Chinese Association for Comparative Studies between English and Chinese. He is a renowned linguist and has a significant impact on fields of Chinese linguistics, including sinogram ontology, word formation, rhyme divisions, and Chinese-​English comparative studies, translation theory and practice, and linguistic philosophy.

China Perspectives

The China Perspectives series focuses on translating and publishing works by leading Chinese scholars, writing about both global topics and China-​related themes. It covers Humanities & Social Sciences, Education, Media, and Psychology, as well as many interdisciplinary themes. This is the first time any of these books have been published in English for international readers. The series aims to put forward a Chinese perspective, give insights into cutting-​edge academic thinking in China, and inspire researchers globally. To submit proposals, please contact the Taylor & Francis Publisher for the China Publishing Programme, Lian Sun ([email protected]) Titles in linguistics currently include: Modern Chinese Grammar IV Special Forms and Europeanized Grammar WANG Li Singapore Mandarin Grammar I Lu Jianming Cognitive Neural Mechanism of Semantic Rhetoric Qiaoyun Liao, Lijun Meng Singapore Mandarin Grammar II Lu Jianming Automated Written Corrective Feedback in Research Paper Revision The Good, The Bad, and The Missing Qian Guo, Ruiling Feng, and Yuanfang Hua For more information, please visit https://​www.routle​dge.com/​China-​Persp​ ecti​ves/​book-​ser​ies/​CPH

The Chinese Rhyme Tables Volume I Pan Wenguo

First published in English 2023 by Routledge 4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2023 Pan Wenguo Translated by Li Zhiqiang, Henry M. Allen, Zhao Xiaojun, Fang Qiyi The right of Pan Wenguo to be identified as author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. English Version by permission of East China Normal University Press Ltd. British Library Cataloguing-​in-​Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-​1-​032-​45388-​0 (hbk) ISBN: 978-​1-​032-​45389-​7 (pbk) ISBN: 978-​1-​003-​37672-​9 (ebk) DOI: 10.4324/​9781003376729 Typeset in Times New Roman by Newgen Publishing UK

Contents

List of Figure List of Tables List of Abbreviations Foreword to the Chinese Edition Introduction

vii viii x xii xiv

PART I

When Was the Rhyme Table Born?

1

1 Traditional Views on the Issue

3

2 The Debate on This Issue in Recent Years and Its Progress

7

3 Views that the Yùnjìng Originated from the Sòng Dynasty According to “Yùnjìng yánjiū”

14

4 Determining the Era in Which Rhyme Tables Were Produced

24

5 Analysis of the Development of Rhyme Dictionaries in the Suí and Táng Dynasties

30

6 Problems in the Qièyùn and the Understanding of It in the Táng Dynasty

34

7 The Historical Process of the Generation of Rhyme Tables

56

vi Contents

8 The Relationship Between Rhyme Tables, Buddhism and Sinogram Initials

79

9 Rhyme Tables and the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn

86

PART II

The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged

89

10 How Was the Question Proposed?

91

11 The Concept of Division and the Birth of Rhyme Tables

98

12 The Nature of the Phonology of the Qièyùn

109

13 The Conditions Satisfied When Rhyme Tables Were Arranged

126

14 The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables

140

15 A New View of Ménfǎ Rules

182

Bibliography Index

204 210

Figure

7.1 An example of defining qīngzhuó with sinographic liaison

72

Tables

3.1 Consistency between rhyme dictionaries and the first three rhyme tables 3.1.1 Rhyme table 1: Four rhymes of the dōng (東) rhyme set 3.1.2 Rhyme table 2: Seven rhymes of the dōng (冬) zhōng (鐘) rhyme set 3.1.3 Rhyme table 3: Four rhymes of the jiāng (江) rhyme set 6.1 On the “failure to reform” of Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn from the sinographic liaisers (SL initials and finals) in the Wángyùn with Sònglián’s afterword 6.1.1 Large and small apertures undifferentiated 6.1.2 Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to the use of labial sounds 6.1.3 Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to other reasons 7.1 The table of velars in Nièpán jīng xītán zhāng 7.2 Conjectured complete table of the Yùnquán 7.3 A timetable for the important events mentioned above 9.1 Phonological examples in Sìděng zhòngqīnglì 12.1 Shān (山) rhyme gathering in the Qièyùn 12.2 A phonological table contrasting the dialects in 11 locations in Northern China Rhyme tables 13.1 Selected phonological texts in the period of the Qièyùn (shined tone) 13.2 Selected phonological texts in the period of the Qièyùn (shaded tone) 13.3 Selected phonological texts in the Táng and Five dynasties periods (shined tone) 13.4 Selected phonological texts in the Táng and Five dynasties periods (shaded tone) 14.1 The categorization of unrounded and rounded labial sounds in YJ and QYL 14.2 Original arrangement of initial groups 14.3 Initial groups with further classification of dental initials

18 18 19 20 37 37 42 49 58 62 74 87 122 123 129 130 131 132 144 149 149

List of Tables  ix 14.4 14.5 14.5.1 14.5.2 14.5.3 14.5.4 14.6 14.7 14.8 14.9 15.1

Initial groups arranged by the author of rhyme tables Form of rhyme tables before division was used Táng (唐) unrounded Jiāng (江) Yáng (陽) unrounded Wén (文) The arrangement of 精莊章 initial sets in rhyme tables Different placements of the yù (喻) initial in the YJ and QYL Distribution of divisions before the rhyme tables were merged The lax tone and entering tone grouping Ménfǎ rules for the theory of rhyme divisions

149 152 152 154 156 158 160 162 166 175 183

Abbreviations

DTQYL Dù Táiqīng’s Yùnlüè (韻略), A concise rhyme dictionary DYJL Děngyùn jílüè (等韻輯略), A compilation of rhyme division GLZS Gānlù zìshū (干祿字書), Sinographic dictionary for position and wealth GY Guǎngyùn (廣韻), Enlarged rhyme dictionary HLYY Huìlín yīnyì (慧琳音義), The pronunciation and meaning of the Tripitaka by Huìlín JDSW Jīngdiǎn shìwén (經典釋文), Annotations and explanations of the ancient classics JY Jíyùn (集韻), Comprehensive rhyme dictionary KMBQQY Kānmiù bǔquē qièyùn (刊謬補缺切韻), A revised and expanded Qièyùn LGYP Lǐ Gài’s Yīnpǔ (音譜), Phonological spectrum LJYJ Lǚ Jìng’s Yùnjí (韻集), A collection of rhymes QY Qièyùn (切韻), The proper rhyme dictionary QYK Qièyùn kǎo (切韻考), Verification of the Qièyùn QYL Qīyīn lüè (七音略), A compendium of seven-​type initials QYZN Qièyùn zhǐnán (切韻指南), A guide to the proper pronunciation of the sinograms in the canons and histories QYZZT Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú (切韻指掌圖), A handy book for signographic liaison SSDZ Sìshēng děngzǐ (四聲等子), Rhyme tables of four tones SSSSK Shěngshì sìshēng kǎo (沈氏四聲考), Study on the four tones by Shěn Kuò SSYP Sìshēng yùnpǔ (四聲韻譜), Rhyme tables of the four tones SWJZXX Xú Xuàn zhù běn Shuōwén jiězì (徐鉉注本《說文解字》), Origins of sinograms by Xú Xuàn SWJZYP Shuōwén jiězì yùnpǔ (說文解字韻谱). A rhyme dictionary of the Shuōwén jiězì written in the small seal style by Xú Kǎi SWYXCJ Shǒuwēn cánjuàn (守溫殘卷), Shǒuwēn’s remnant volumes on phonology SYP Suí yùnpǔ (隋韻譜), Rhyme spectrum of the Suí dynasty TY Tángyùn (唐韻), Rhymes of the Táng dynasty

List of Abbreviations  xi Wǔjīng wénzì (五經文字), A book for distinguishing sinograms in the five Chinese classics WXMY Wànxiàng míngyì (萬象名義), On the names and meanings of all the manifestations of nature WY Wángyùn (王韻), A revised and expanded Qièyùn by Wáng Rénxù WYⅠ Wángyī (王一), The first version of the Wángyùn WYⅡ Wáng’èr (王二), The second version of the Wángyùn XHYSSYL Xiàhóu Yǒng’s Sìshēng yùnlüè (四聲韻略), A concise rhyme dictionary of the four tones rhyme XYYY Xuányìng yīnyì (玄應音義), The pronunciation and meaning of the Tripitaka by Xuán Yìng YJ Yùnjìng (韻鏡), Mirror of rhymes YL Yùnlüè (韻略), A concise rhyme dictionary YQ Yùnquán (韻銓), The measurement of rhymes YSJX Yánshì jiāxùn (顏氏家訓), Yan’s family motto YXZYL Yáng Xiūzhī’s Yùnlüè (韻略), A concise rhyme dictionary YYS Yùyàoshi (玉鑰匙), A direct study on the Yùyàoshi ménfǎ ZZT Zhǐzhǎngtú (指掌圖), A handy book for signographic liaison WJWZ

Foreword to the Chinese Edition

I met Mr. Pān Wénguó (潘文國) at the biennial conference of the Chinese Association for Phonological Studies held in Xi’an in August 1982, when he had just obtained his M.A. degree and began to work at his alma mater, East China Normal University. He was a brilliant student of Prof. Shǐ Cúnzhí (史存直), a veteran master in the field of historical phonology. Apart from discussing our respective research at the symposium, we also toured many places of historic interest such as the Qianling Mausoleum. I was deeply impressed by his cheerful, lively, and spirited personality. A year later, I unexpectedly received a thick book manuscript for my review from a publishing house in Shanghai. I opened it and found that it was Mr. Pān’s Yùntú kǎo (韻圖考), A study of Chinese rhyme tables. Over the course of several days, I read through the book twice. I was quite impressed with it! Historical phonology has always been regarded as a mysterious “profound learning” or “lost knowledge,” in which the study of děngyùn (等韻), rhyme divisions, is an especially abstruse part. It was courageous of Mr. Pān to choose the study of rhyme divisions as his subject, perform textual criticism, and trace the rhyme tables to their roots—​the core issue for the study of rhyme divisions—​because this work not only requires a solid mastery of historical phonology but also involves great effort and arduous labor. Mr. Pān has now finished the book, and it will be published soon. This is indeed delightful to me. In recent years, many excellent young scholars of historical phonology have appeared, which means that there will be a group of qualified successors in this field. Mr. Pān is a prominent one among them. Yùntú kǎo, with its rich contents, has a total of 18 chapters in three parts. It discusses the time when the rhyme tables first appeared and their development process, and it studies the structure and arrangement of the rhyme tables. It not only presents the concepts relevant to rhyme divisions but also provides a new understanding of ménfǎ rules (門法), guides to the reading of rhyme tables. Finally, it restores an ancient rhyme table from the Táng (唐) dynasty based on a deep study of the extant rhyme tables. The whole book is characterized by its innovative ideas, lively style, and original findings. The earliest rhyme tables currently available are works from the Sòng (宋) dynasty such as the Yùnjìng (韻鏡), Mirror of rhymes, and Qīyīn lüè (七音略), A compendium of

Foreword to the Chinese Edition  xiii seven-​type initials, but the first part of this book argues that the first rhyme table was actually a work from the Táng dynasty. The textual research of this part is quite substantial and persuasive, and I completely agree with him on these points. In the third part of the book, an ancient rhyme table is restored. Restoring the table is a highly valuable and original task, which I appreciate very much. As for the understanding of the nature of děng (等), grade or division, and the relationship between the structural features of rhyme tables and the phonological system in the Qièyùn (切韻), The proper rhyme dictionary, in the second part, I take a different view. I exchanged my opinions about this with Mr. Pān through correspondence and at the Guilin biennial meeting in 1984. Furthermore, I wrote an article “Guānyú ‘děng’ de gàiniàn” (關于“等”的 概念), On the concept of “division”, that was published in the third volume of Yīnyùnxué yánjiū (音韻學研究), The study of Chinese phonology. Since this question is rather controversial, we need not impose our views on each other or seek an argument on this touchy subject. For the sake of the development of historical phonology, our Association should encourage scholars to publish diverse and innovative ideas, sticking to the principles of being “truthful, rational, and well-​founded.” Táng Zuòfān (唐作藩 唐作藩) President, Chinese Association for Phonological Studies, Professor, Peking University May 20, 1987.

Introduction

The studies of the sounds of early and middle antiquity and the study of děngyùn (等韻), rhyme divisions, were the three major branches of historical phonology. In the Qīng (清) dynasty, scholars paid different amounts of attention to these three branches. However, in general, the branch that was given the most attention and that reached the most fruitful results was the study of the sounds of early antiquity. The study of the sounds of middle antiquity and the study of rhyme divisions were not like this. Due to limitations in the available materials, the study of the sounds of middle antiquity remained focused on the origin of the fǎnqiè (反切), sinographic liaison1, of the Guǎngyùn ((廣韻), Enlarged rhyme dictionary). Regarding the study of rhyme divisions, apart from the study of rhyme divisions in the Míng (明) and Qīng dynasties promoted by scholars such as Pān Lěi (潘耒) and Láo Nǎixuān (勞乃宣), the understanding of the rhyme tables of the Sòng (宋) dynasty was still within the scope of Jiāng Yǒng’s (江永) theory and the minor help provided by the ménfǎ rules ((門法), guides to the reading of rhyme tables) of rhyme divisions. In addition, the study of rhyme divisions remained muddled. The study of the sounds of early antiquity was aimed at helping read ancient books, the study of the sounds of middle antiquity was aimed at benefiting the study of the sounds of early antiquity, and the study of rhyme divisions was aimed at benefiting the study of the sounds of middle antiquity. Seldom was anyone in the Qīng dynasty able to integrate these three studies. The state of phonological studies in the Qīng dynasty was intertwined with scholars’ goals of reading the ancient classics. Since the beginning of the twentieth century, with the introduction of advanced Western phonological theories and tools and the discovery of a batch of archaeological materials in historical phonology, new light has been shone on the field of Chinese historical phonology. The work of Western scholars such as Paul Pelliot (伯希和), Simon Schaank (沙昂克), Henri Maspéro (馬 伯樂), and especially Benhard Karlgren (高本漢) promoted the establishment of modern Chinese phonology. The contributions made by scholars such as Karlgren were as follows:

Introduction  xv (1) Chinese phonology began to be studied from the perspective of linguistics. It was no longer regarded as a field in service to the study of the Chinese classics. (2) Modern dialects and transliteration from abroad that had not been valued by scholars studying historical phonology were introduced. They were used as materials for comparing and correcting other extant materials. (3) More advanced transcription tools began to be used. The pronunciation of the ancient Chinese language was reconstructed for the first time. Furthermore, Karlgren might have been the first scholar to successfully integrate the three sections of Chinese historical phonology, based on which he established his own system of phonology. Karlgren’s approaches to phonology included the following: (1) Determining the sound categories of Chinese in middle antiquity based on the sinographic liaisons of the Guǎngyùn; (2) Reconstructing the pronunciation of Chinese in middle antiquity based on the theory of rhyme divisions and modern dialects; (3) Reconstructing the pronunciation of archaic Chinese based on the study of the sound categories of archaic Chinese and the description of the phonological values of middle Chinese. The study of rhyme divisions occupied a key position in Karlgren’s system. The most noticeable part, which was also praised and criticized the most, was the system of reconstructed ancient Chinese. This system was closely related to Karlgren’s theory of rhyme divisions. Karlgren once criticized Pelliot and Maspéro, saying that because they thought the rhyme table was the best and most authoritative material for phonological study, they neglected the precious and significant distinctions in sinographic liaison, which was their greatest mistake.2 In fact, Pelliot and Maspéro mistook the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú (切韻指掌圖), A handy book for sinographic liaison, (henceforth Zhǐzhǎngtú) for the rhyme table that represented the pronunciations at the time of the Qièyùn (切韻), The proper rhyme dictionary. Although Karlgren valued “the categories of liaison,” he only studied the rhyme tables from the Zhǐzhǎngtú to the Yùnjìng (韻鏡), Mirror of rhymes. In terms of a reconstruction based on rhyme tables, his view was the same as that of Pelliot and Maspéro. It could be said that, without his theory of rhyme divisions, his system of reconstruction would not have been possible. Since Karlgren, reconstruction became popular in the study of phonology. Those who discussed phonology were bound to discuss reconstruction and vice versa. Therefore, the study of rhyme divisions rose to a prominent position in the study of Chinese historical phonology. However, the high status of the study of rhyme divisions was not accompanied by the effort scholars paid to this study. Scholars were accustomed to making use of rhyme divisions to

xvi Introduction explain the pronunciations of middle antiquity and various phenomena in the study of historical phonology in earlier historical periods, but they were less enthusiastic about the study of rhyme divisions themselves. Scholars of earlier times such as Luó Chángpéi (羅常培) and Wáng Lì (王力) had made plenty of contributions to the study of rhyme divisions. Luó Chángpéi urged that the sense of mystery be removed from this study.3 Wáng Lì held that “to study rhyme divisions well, scholars should be on the alert for mysterious remarks.”4 They used modern phonological theory to explain many terms in the traditional study of rhyme divisions so that the sense of mystery was dramatically removed from the study of rhyme divisions, which helped spread the knowledge of historical phonology. However, the understanding of the nature of rhyme divisions did not make remarkable progress compared to that made by Jiāng Yǒng 300 years ago. When the complexity of the ménfǎ rules of old rhyme divisions was blamed, the enlightenment brought by ménfǎ rules was also neglected. Explanations of děng ((等), divisions) did not improve at all. Luó Chángpéi once commented on divisions in his famous Hànyǔ yīnyùnxué dǎolùn (漢語 音韻學導論), An introduction to Chinese phonology. He first stated, “The large and small apertures of four divisions refer to the degree of opening in the oral cavity when one is pronouncing vowels.”5 It seemed that “divisions” referred to the differences between vowels. He added, “In the cases of the dōng (冬) rhyme versus zhōng (鍾) rhyme and dēng (登) rhyme versus zhēng (蒸) rhyme … the difference lies in the presence or absence of the medial vowel [i]‌.”6 These four divisions are further related to the medial vowel. He then said: The sinographic liaison finals (SL finals) are all in Division Ⅲ. Division Ⅱ and Ⅲ of the front-​tooth sounds are differentiated by the rigidness and softness of their initials (the initials of Division Ⅱ are back apical sounds and the initials of Division Ⅲ are front lingual sounds). The yù (喻) initials and the sinograms of Divisions Ⅲ and Ⅳ of the labials and dentals are differentiated by the presence of the initial sounds made by the attachment of the hard palate (Division Ⅲ with [j]‌and Division Ⅳ without [j]). When front-​tooth sounds and dental sibilants (tooth-​head sounds) cannot share the same row, the sinograms of the jīng (精), qīng (清), cóng (從), xīn (心), and xié (邪) initials are placed in Division Ⅳ …7 This time, the four divisions are relevant to the initials, and the situation is very complicated. Does the difference among divisions lie in vowels, medial vowels, or initials? The answer seems to be all of them and none of them at once. Sometimes it depends on one factor and sometimes on another. No fixed and universal standard exists. Are rhyme tables so chaotic? The author seemed to have been aware of this question, and therefore he made it very clear that all the aforementioned problems were because of “… the fact that the principle of rhyme divisions was inadequate.”8

Introduction  xvii He attributed this failure of justifying his understanding to the nature of rhyme tables. However, his explanation would just make readers confused. Readers might have spent a long time on the introduction only to find that they had no idea what division is. Luó Chángpéi held that the sense of mystery should be removed from the study, but he unwittingly added another sense of mystery to division when he tried to help readers be free of it. The nature of division was exceedingly difficult to understand. In addition, some people thought that there were only two divisions, not four.9 Others thought that it was limiting for scholars to only study four divisions. In fact, the SL final could be one rhyme for one category, and it could also be one rhyme for two, three, or four categories. If similar rhymes were counted together, it could be at most 13 or 14 categories.10 No wonder beginners of Chinese historical phonology are afraid of rhyme divisions. Even experienced scholars of phonology have trouble with rhyme divisions. However, rhyme divisions are essential to the study of phonology. This is a common paradox. In addition, some problems persist in understanding Karlgren’s system. In the field of phonology, some scholars approved of Karlgren’s reconstruction, and other scholars disapproved. However, both those who approved and those who disapproved modified it based on their own research, with the only difference being in the degree of modification. Meanwhile, the core of Karlgren’s theory of rhyme divisions remained untouched. Because the study of rhyme divisions was placed in such a vital position in Karlgren’s study and within phonological research for several decades, and the study of rhyme divisions was a weak point in traditional and modern phonological research, the theories of rhyme divisions should be examined to separate the feasible from the problematic and faulty. In this way, phonological research can be deepened. In the 1950s and early 1960s, the nature of the Qièyùn was discussed in the field of phonology in China. No agreements were made in the discussion. The reasons lay in many aspects. In my opinion, one of the reasons was related to the problems of rhyme divisions. Although each party held different views toward the Qièyùn, many scholars had little disagreement over the nature of rhyme divisions. This was easy to see because when the scholars who advocated the theory of the “inclusive system” wrote papers or books after the discussion, they adopted, or basically adopted, Karlgren’s system when it came to reconstruction. Therefore, determining the origin of rhyme tables might be beneficial to further clarifying the nature of the Qièyùn and solving problems in the history of Chinese phonology. However, determining the origin of rhyme tables is not easy. The main reason is that relevant extant materials are extremely scarce. In the 1930s, Wèi Jiàngōng (魏建功) listed a series of rhyme dictionaries he compiled in the preface to the Shíyùn huìbiān (十韻彙編), A compilation of ten rhyme dictionaries. I selected up to 27 books concerning rhyme tables. However, apart from the Yùnjìng, Qīyīn lüè (七音略), A compendium of seven-​type initials, and Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, the remainder of these books are all missing. For most of the books, even the author and the time when they were written are unknown.

newgenprepdf

xviii Introduction Secondary sources are also pitifully scarce. I could only try to unravel the mystery of rhyme divisions from the three extant texts and the clues in the records of historical literature. This book makes a preliminary exploration of such issues as when the rhyme tables were born, the methods with which rhyme tables were arranged, and the restoration of original rhyme tables.

Notes 1 Sinographic liaison is the traditional method of indicating the pronunciation of a sinogram by using two other sinograms, the first sinogram (SL initial) having the same consonant as the given sinogram and the second sinogram (SL final) having the same vowel and tone. 2 Karlgren, Bernhard, Etudes Sur La Phonologie Chinoise (the Chinese version): (中 國音韻學研究), Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), the Commercial Press, 1940. 454. 3 Luó Chángpéi (羅常培), Hànyǔ yīnyùnxué dǎolùn (漢語音韻學導論), An Introduction to Chinese Phonology, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1956, 24. 4 Wáng Lì (王力), Wánglì wénjí dìsìjuàn hànyǔ yīnyùnxué (王力文集 第4卷 漢語音韻 學), Wáng Lì collected papers, vol. 4: Chinese phonology, Jinan: Shāndōng Jiàoyù Chūbǎnshè (山東教育出版社), Shandong Education Press, 1986. 21–​26. 5 Luó Chángpéi (羅常培), Hànyǔ yīnyùnxué dǎolùn, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華 書局), 1956. 63. 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 9 For example, Zhāng Bǐnglín (章炳麟), Guógù lùnhéng: yīnlǐpiān (國故論衡·音理 篇), The phonological part of the Guógù lùnhéng, Hangzhou: Zhèjiāng Túshūguǎn (浙江圖書館), Zhejiang Library, 1923. 21–​26. 10 For example, Chén Lǐ (陳澧), Qièyùn kǎo: wàipiān, vol. 3, (切韻考·外篇·卷三), Additional chapters of the Qièyùn kǎo, Beijing: Zhōngguó Shūdiàn (中國書店), 1984. 12.

Part I

When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Understanding the nature of something entails having a detailed knowledge of the era in which it occurs. This is also the basic starting point for studying anything in ancient times. Nothing can emerge without a reason for its emergence, so the occurrence, development and extinction of something will inevitably have a close connection with its historical background. The historical background will, to a certain extent, not only determine the time when something comes into being but also, to some degree, its nature and the way it comes into being. The same is true for rhyme tables. Different opinions about the time when rhyme tables first took shape have usually led to different understandings of their nature.

DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-1

1 Traditional Views on the Issue

When it comes to the study of děngyùn (等韻), rhyme divisions, at the beginning of the twentieth century, literati believed that the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú (切 韻指掌圖), A handy book for sinographic liaison, henceforth Zhǐzhǎngtú, was the oldest set of rhyme tables, which explained why it had had such a strong influence. Although literati in the past did know of the Qīyīn lüè (七音略), A compendium of seven-​type initials, by Zhèng Qiáo (鄭樵), a historiographer and philologist in the Sòng (宋) dynasty, 1104–​1162, they held the view that it was written later than the Zhǐzhǎngtú and was modeled on the Zhǐzhǎngtú. This viewpoint can be traced back to the early years of the Míng (明) dynasty. In his Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú jiǎnlì hòuxù (切韻指掌圖检例後序), Epilogue of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú: jiǎnlì, written in the 23rd year of the reign of Hóngwǔ (洪武), 1390, Wáng Xíng (王行) states: The exact time when the fǎnqiè (反切 sinographic liaison1) came into existence is unknown. The widely used book then was Lù Fǎyán’s (陸 法言) Qièyùn (切韻), The proper rhyme dictionary, which comprised five volumes. Rhyme tables featuring initials and rhymes to simplify this complicated knowledge were first found in the work of Sīmǎ Guāng (司 马光).2 The Sìkù quánshū zǒngmù tíyào (四庫全書總目提要), Abstracts of the table of contents of the Sìkù quánshū, in the early Qīng (清) dynasty mentions the following: The principles of rhyme tables were introduced in the late years of the Hàn dynasty (漢), 202 BCE–​220 CE together with the Buddhist sutras. However, only 14 speech sounds were mentioned in the Suí shū (隋書), History of the Suí dynasty, and their usages were not yet clarified; the 42 zìmǔ (字母), sinogram initials, recorded in the Huáyán (華 嚴), Sinograms spectrum of the Buddhāvatamsaka-​mahāvaipulya-​sūtra, henceforth Huáyán, referred to Sanskrit pronunciation and were not followed by sinograms. Shéngǒng’s (神珙) two diagrams at the end of the Yùpiān (玉篇), Jade text, and another anonymous diagram at the end of DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-2

4  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? the Guǎngyùn (廣韻), Enlarged rhyme dictionary, all simply presented a rough outline with no detailed information. The oldest extant book of this kind is no other than Sīmǎ Guāng’s present one.3 Mò Yǒuzhī (莫有芝), a literatus in the Qīng dynasty, stated: Sīmǎ Guāng’s book, as now extracted from the Yǒnglè dàdiǎn (永樂大典), Yǒnglè great canon, is the earliest book to introduce the method of rhyme tables. From this book, I find that there is nothing special about the principles of rhyme tables. Furthermore, it can be concluded that at the beginning, the compilation of this book was based on the Jíyùn (集韻), Comprehensive rhyme dictionary, instead of the other way around. Therefore, the later controversies on this issue were all sparked by intentional troublemakers.4 Even Láo Nǎixuān (勞乃宣), a literatus at the end of the Qīng dynasty, said the following in his Děngyùn yīdé (等韻一得), Observations from studying the rhyme tables: Of the 36 sinogram initials that have been passed down, the list in Sīmǎ Guāng’s Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú is the oldest. Those in other texts such as Zhèng Qiáo’s Qīyīn lüè, Liú Jiàn’s (劉鑒) Jīngshǐ zhèngyīn qièyùn zhǐnán (經史正音切韻指南), A guide to the proper pronunciation of the sinograms in the canons and histories, henceforth Qièyùn zhǐnán, the Zìmǔ qièyùn yàofǎ (字母切韻要法), Key approaches to sinographic liaison and sinogram analysis, and the Děngyùn qièyīn zhǐnán (等韻切音 指南), A guidebook to rhyme tables quoted in the Kāngxī zìdiǎn (康熙字 典), Kāngxī dictionary, were all similar. Furthermore, investigation into texts such as the Guǎngyùn, the Jíyùn, and others proves that they are applicable in all cases. Fundamentally, these sinogram initials can be used to cover the pronunciation of all sinograms. It is not wise for later literati to attempt to make any revision of them.5 Qián Xuántóng (錢玄同), in his book Wénzìxué yīnpiān (文字學音篇), A study of sinograms: part of phonology, still held that the rhyme tables originated in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú: “Yùnshè (韻攝), Rhyme gatherings, refers to the integration of various rhymes according to different criteria such as historical evolution, tonal length, articulation (rounded and unrounded), and aperture (large and small). The first book on rhyme gatherings can be traced back to Yáng Zhōngxiū’s (楊中修) Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, written in the Sòng dynasty.”6 What sets Qián apart from other literati is that, based on the research of Zōu Tèfū (鄒特夫) in the Qīng dynasty, he concluded that the authorship of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú should be attributed to Yáng Zhōngxiū. Xiàng Chǔ (向楚), from Bā County (巴縣), a place in Chóngqìng (重慶), expressed the same opinion in his book Yīnxué biànwēi xù (音學辨微敘), Preface to

Traditional Views on the Issue  5 the Yīnxué biànwēi, stating that, “Since the Sòng dynasty, Yáng Zhōngxiū proposed Děngyùn (等韻) rhyme divisions, and rectified and categorized [the rhymes].”7 In 1923, Gù Shí (顧實) published his article “Yùnjìng shěnyīn” (韻鏡審音), The study of spoken pronunciations for the Yùnjìng. Despite his research on and understanding of the Yùnjìng (韻鏡), Mirror of rhymes, he still strongly recommended the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú in the Yīnyùn chángshí (音韻常識), Common knowledge of Chinese phonology, which he coauthored with Xú Jìngxiū (徐敬修) in 1925. He stated, “The study of rhyme gatherings should take the Zhǐzhǎngtú, the Sìshēng děngzǐ (四聲等子), Rhyme tables of four tones, and Liú Jiàn’s Qièyùn zhǐnán as its models. Meanwhile, the Zhǐzhǎngtú, which was originally based on the Jíyùn, is the closest to the Guǎngyùn … and will not be surpassed by later works.”8 Notably, Benhard Karlgren (高 本漢) also considered the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú to be a set of reliable rhyme tables, stating that it is “the most important set of rhyme tables” that “I can assign an exact date to.” From his point of view, the Yùnjìng is nothing but an “emulated work” with flawed organization, and the Jīngshǐ zhèngyīn qièyùn zhǐnán was completely modeled on the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú.9 The reason why I have taken so much trouble to quote these materials is to prove that all the studies of rhyme divisions from the beginning of the Míng dynasty to the end of the Qīng dynasty or even the early years of the Republican period (民國初年), despite their various opinions, took the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú as their research foundation. By the time Karlgren’s Etudes Sur La Phonologie Chinoise (中國音韻學研究) was published, although the Yùnjìng had been discovered, its value was no better than books such as the Qīyīn lüè in the eyes of scholars studying Chinese historical phonology. This is of great significance. Today, people with some knowledge of Chinese phonology are quite aware that the birth of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú is much later than that of the Yùnjìng or the Qīyīn lüè. The book incorporated and simplified the previous rhyme tables. It placed heavy labials, light labials, apical alveolars, and dorsoprepalates in different lines among the 36 sinogram initials, thus obscuring the original intention of compiling rhyme tables. With pronunciations in the Sòng dynasty mixed in, it did not contribute much to the understanding of the phonological system of the Qièyùn. To paraphrase Luó Chángpéi (a Chinese linguist), the excellence of the academic output we achieve depends on the abundance of the raw materials we have. The literati studying rhyme divisions in the past were mistaken in understanding the materials and inverted the relationship between the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, Qīyīn lüè, and so on. Therefore, their theories of rhyme divisions were highly problematic.

Notes 1 Sinographic liaison (SL) is the traditional method of indicating the pronunciation of a sinogram by using two other sinograms, the first sinogram (SL initial) having

6  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? the same consonant as the given sinogram and the second sinogram (SL final) having the same vowel and tone. 2 See Sī Mǎguāng (司馬光), “Jiǎnlì hòuxù” (检例後序), Epilogue of the Guidelines for the usage of this book Jiǎnlì, in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú (切韻指掌圖), A handy book for signographic liaison, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1985. 3 See Sī Mǎguāng (司馬光), “Sìkù quánshū zǒngmù tíyào” (四庫全書總目提要), Abstracts of the table of contents of the Sìkù quánshū], in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1985, 2. 4 Mò Yǒuzhī (莫友芝), Yùnxué yuánliú (韻學源流) , The origin of Chinese historical phonology, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1962, 131–​132. 5 From Mr. Shǐ Cúnzhí’s personal collection, now lost. See Láo Nǎixuān (勞乃 宣), Děngyùn yīdé rènsǒu zìdìng niánpǔ (等韻一得 韧叟自订年谱), Observations from studying the rhyme tables: A chronicle of Rènsǒu’s life made in person, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 2020, 45. 6 Qián Xuántóng (錢玄同), Wénzìxué yīnpiān (文字學音篇), A study of sinograms: part of phonology, Beijing: Guólì Běijīng Dàxué Chūbǎnbù (国立北京 大学出版部), 1921, 1. 7 See Xiàng Chǔ (向楚), “Yīnxué biànwēi: xù” (音學辨微·叙), Preface to the discrimination on Chinese phonology, in Yīnxué biànwēi, Wèinán Yánshì (渭南嚴 式), 1923. 8 Gù Shí (顧實) and Xú Jìngxiū (徐敬修), Yīnyùn chángshí (音韻常識), Common knowledge of Chinese phonology (Shanghai: Dàdōng Shūjú (大東書局), 1925, 98. 9 Karlgren, Bernhard, Etudes Sur La Phonologie Chinoise (the Chinese version: (中國 音韻學研究), Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), the Commercial Press, 1940, 21–​25.

2 The Debate on This Issue in Recent Years and Its Progress

In the late Qīng dynasty, Lí Shùchāng (黎庶昌) brought the Yùnjìng from Japan back to China. It became known that the Yùnjìng, the Qīyīn lüè, or their prototype, which was called the Qīyīn yùnjiàn (七音韻鑑), Rhyme determination of seven-​type initials, were actually the earliest rhyme tables. Therefore, textual research on the rhyme tables from the original era shifted to the Yùnjìng. Several positions on the Yùnjìng have been proposed on this issue, which can be classified into two general schools. One holds that the prototype of the Yùnjìng was written in the Suí (隋) and Táng dynasties, which was supported by Oya Toru (大矢透), a Japanese phonologist, 1850–​1928. As cited by Zhào Yīntáng (趙蔭棠), Oya Toru provided the following evidence. Firstly, the statements about “sinogram arrangement by initials vertically” (正紐相證), “arrangement by rhymes horizontally” (旁通取韻), “vacancy” (闕位), and so on, in Wǔ Xuánzhī’s (武玄之) Yùnquán: míngyìlì (韻銓·明義例), A guide to the use of the Yùnquán, are all consistent with the Yùnjìng. Secondly, the Rìběn jiànzài shūmù (日本見在書目), Extant bibliography in Japan, henceforth Jiànzài shūmù, recorded the Jízì (集字), A collection of sinograms, in 20 volumes (Reizeiin’s version). The next was the Sìshēng yùnyīn (四聲韻音), Four tones of rhymes, in one volume and the Sìshēng zhǐhuī (四聲指揮), Command of four tones, in one volume (written by Liú Shànjīng (劉善 經), an official in the Suí dynasty). The next was the Qīngzhuóyīn (清濁音), Voiceless and voiced sounds, in one volume, the Yùnjí (韻集), A collection of rhymes, in five volumes, and the Qièyùntú (切韻圖), The Qièyùn in the form of a table, in one volume.1 Wèi Jiàngōng agreed with the second point, saying that, “During the Kanpyou Period in Japan (circa 890), Jiànzài shūmù had recorded the Qièyùntú in one volume, which means that the system of rhyme divisions of the Sòng dynasty must have already appeared in an earlier period.” Because the Qièyùn was written in the seventh century, and the Qièyùntú has been found the Japanese records in the 890s, the time when it appeared in China was likely around the eighth century.2 Luó Chángpéi also agreed with Oya Toru’s position. He added three pieces of evidence in his article, “Tōngzhì qīyīn lüè yánjiū” (《通志·七音略》研究), A study of the Tōngzhì: qīyīn lüè. First, Zhāng Línzhī (張麟之), a phonologist DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-3

8  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? in the Southern Sòng dynasty. left a note under the title of the Yùnjìng xù (韻 鏡序), Preface to the Yùnjìng, saying, “The book was once named the Yùnjiàn (韻鑑), Rhyme mirror, to avoid the sound of jìng (鏡). Although both jiàn (鉴) and jìng (鏡) meant the same thing, ‘mirror,’ jìng (鏡) was a homophone of jìng (敬), which happened to be the name of Yìzǔ (翼祖). Now the dynasty has changed to the Southern Sòng, so the book has reverted to its original name, the Yùnjìng.” Because “Yìzǔ” was the posthumous title that the first Emperor of the Northern Sòng gave to his grandfather, if the Yùnjìng was produced by the literati in the Sòng dynasty, they must have avoided jìng as a taboo from the very beginning. In that case, what was the necessity to revert to the original name? If there was an original name, the Yùnjìng must have appeared earlier than the Northern Sòng dynasty. This is the first piece of evidence. Secondly, the order of the rhyme tables in the Qīyīn lüè is different from those in the Yùnjìng from the 31st table. The former placed the eight rhymes of tán (覃), xián (咸), yán (鹽), tiān (添), tán (談), xián (銜), yán (嚴), and fán (凡) before the table of the yang (陽) and tang (唐) rhymes, and the latter placed these eight rhymes after the table of qīn (侵) rhymes. The arrangement of rhymes in the rhyme dictionaries in the Suí and Táng dynasties can be divided into two groups. Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn and Sūn Miǎn’s (孫愐) Tángyùn (唐韻), Rhymes of the Táng dynasty, fall into one group, and Lǐ Zhōu’s (李 舟) Qièyùn and Chén Péngnián’s (陳彭年) Guǎngyùn fall into another. In the former group, the rhymes of tán (覃) and tán (談) are placed before those of yáng (陽) and táng (唐), and the rhymes of zhēng (蒸) and dēng (登) are placed after those of yán (鹽) and tiān (添). In the latter group, the rhymes of tán (覃) and tán (談) are placed after that of qīn (侵) and the rhymes of zhēng (蒸) and dēng (登) are placed before that of yóu (尤). In the Qīyīn lüè, the tables of the tán (覃) and tán (談) rhymes are placed before those of yáng (陽) and táng (唐). This follows Lù Fǎyán and Sūn Miǎn’s arrangement. To create a more intuitive organization of rhyme tables, it moved the six rhymes of yán (鹽), tiān (添), tán (談), xián (銜), yán (嚴), and fán (凡) to the same position as those of tán (覃) and tán (談). As for the table order in the Yùnjìng, it was obviously rearranged after the Guǎngyùn, leaving only the rhymes of zhēng (蒸) and dēng (登) as the last table, a hint that this arrangement is inspired by Lù Fǎyán and Sūn Miǎn’s rhyme order. This is the second piece of evidence. Thirdly, in the Shǒuwēn cánjuàn of the Dūnhuáng Manuscripts of the Táng dynasty, a record exists of the “instances of four divisions of heavy and light rhymes” (四等重輕例). Its methods of grading rhymes are all in line with those in the Qīyīn lüè and the Yùnjìng. Down in the Northern Sòng dynasty, the Huángjí jīngshì shēngyīntú (皇極經世聲音圖), An ultimate book for ordering the world: a rhyme table, written by Shào Yōng (邵雍), 1011–​1077, divided the pronunciation of sinograms. Apart from initials like the apical alveolar, alveolar, labiodental, and dorsoprepalate in niáng (娘), which are slightly different, into four categories, namely kāi (開 start), fā (發 grow), shōu (收 decline), and bì (閉end), roughly corresponding to the first, second, third, and fourth divisions of rhymes in the Qīyīn lüè, these pieces of evidence

The Debate on This Issue in Recent Years and Its Progress  9 demonstrate that the classification of rhymes into four divisions had already been popular before the Shǒuwēn’s time and was familiar to the phonological scholars in the early period of the Northern Sòng dynasty. Therefore, the prototype of this classification method must have originated in the Táng dynasty. This is the third piece of evidence.3 Zhào Yīntáng held a different view, namely that rhyme dictionaries such as the Yùnjìng were the products of the Sòng dynasty. He rejected Oya Toru’s position and made the following statements. First, the Yùnquán, written by Wǔ Xuánzhī in the Táng dynasty, was merely a rhyme dictionary that was limited to the application of sinographic liaison. Second, the one-​ volume Qièyùntú cannot be regarded as a rhyme table simply based on its title. As for Luo Changpei’s opinions, Zhào Yīntáng agreed with the second and third points and both agreed and disagreed with the first point. He approved because the Yùnjìng might be an abridged version of the Yùnhǎi jìngyuán (韻海鏡源), Origins of the rhyming references, written by Yán Zhēnqīng (顏真卿), a famous literatus and calligrapher in the Táng dynasty, 709–​ 784. He disapproved because Zhèng Qiáo had once mentioned that the Yùnjìng was obtained from Indian Buddhist monks who did not necessarily follow the Sòng people’s taboo of avoiding the use of a sound similar to that of Yìzǔ’s name, just as monks from the Liáo (遼) state had named their book the Lóngkān shǒujìng (龍龕手鏡), A handy mirror for reading Buddhist sutras, with the last sinogram being jìng (鏡). After Zhào Yīntáng had made these statements, he added, In conclusion, it is difficult to find evidence other than of the phonological sort to prove that the prototype of the Yùnjìng originated from the Suí and Táng dynasties. As for the phonological evidence, it is even harder to make a convincing conclusion because the very first rhyme dictionary in the Sòng dynasty, instead of representing the real speech sounds at that time, was inherited from previous dynasties.4 When talking about the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn (守溫韻學殘卷)5, Zhào Yīntáng put particular emphasis on the following points: Other people may wonder how incomplete this book is. In other words, does this rhyme dictionary include rhyme tables at the end? In my opinion, although it is an incomplete work, there is not much missing from the original version. There is no rhyme table at the end of the book. Under the “instances of identifying four divisions of heavy and light rhymes,” the given information is only that a certain sinogram should be put in a certain division. If there is any rhyme table in it, there must be an explanation for why the sinogram should be in a certain rhyme table. And there are 32 even tones, 16 rising tones, 16 departing tones, and 40 entering tones following the “instances” mentioned. If rhyme tables were included in the book, why would the author take the trouble to list all these tones?

10  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Furthermore, all the examples are listed in the order of division, which could therefore be regarded as the embryo of subsequent rhyme tables. All these inferences depend on how readers can best understand the ancients’ intentions.6 Therefore, he disagreed with the third piece of evidence provided by Luó Chángpéi. I find that all the evidence provided in defense of the two opinions remains questionable. The second piece of evidence by Oya Toru is not convincing because it is based only on the name of this book. With rich contents of 360 volumes7, the Yùnhǎi jìngyuán is obviously not the same book as the Yùnjìng. It is quite far-​fetched to conclude that the title of the book could be free from the name taboo of the Sòng dynasty just because Zhèng Qiáo mentioned that the Yùnjìng was obtained from Indian monks. Because Zhāng Línzhī clearly said that this book was obtained from his “friend,” then who was this man? He did not mention whether his “friend” was a literatus like him or a monk. We cannot make such a hasty conclusion as to whether the Yùnjìng was written by Buddhist monks or Confucians just based on this statement. Speaking of the Yùnquán written by Wǔ Xuánzhī, Oya Toru noted that some similarities exist between the book and the rhyme tables, which deserve special attention. Zhào Yīntáng rejected the book only because of its similarities with other rhyme dictionaries, which seemed to be rather hasty. As for the sequence of the Yùnjìng and “instances of four divisions of heavy and light rhymes,” Luó Chángpéi held that the “four divisions” appeared earlier than the “instances,” so the rhyme tables were produced earlier. Zhào Yīntáng thought that “instances” was the prototype of the rhyme tables, so the rhyme tables were produced later. Neither could provide more convincing evidence. They seem to have just taken what they needed as their evidence and what they said became a circular argument. Furthermore, Luó Chángpéi only explained that four divisions were produced earlier than “instances,” but he did not state clearly whether the term division originally existed in sinographic liaison, as Chén Lǐ (陳澧), a versatile literatus in the Qīng dynasty, 1810–​1882, had said8, or if it was introduced after the rhyme tables, so his opinion is not convincing enough. Just like the name change from the Yùnjìng to the Yùnjiàn, to avoid the name taboo of the emperor’s ancestor from the Sòng dynasty, can only prove that it was produced before the Sòng dynasty, perhaps towards the end of the Five Dynasties period. Further, we still need to take great care to discuss the relation between “division” and the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn. These literati, each sticking to their own points of view, could not convince each other. For this reason, phonologists had to choose a position between these two positions. For the sake of convenience, they still followed the previous theories in their works that rhyme tables were produced in the Sòng dynasty. In 1957, Gě Yìqīng (葛毅卿) published “Yùnjìng yīn suǒ dàibiǎo de shíjiān hé dìyù” (韻鏡音所代表的時間和地域), The time and places indicated by the pronunciations in the Yùnjìng. With stronger evidence, Gě Yìqīng proved that

The Debate on This Issue in Recent Years and Its Progress  11 the Yùnjìng appeared in the Táng dynasty and was written between 751 and 805. His argument was elaborated by the following steps: First, according to the fact that the Yùnjìng did not avoid the taboo name of Zhào Kuāngyìn’s (趙匡胤) grandfather, it must have been written before the Sòng dynasty. Second, because neither the labial nor the dental sound groups had been divided into subgroups and the sinogram initials in the Yùnjìng did not have their own names yet, the book was likely written before the end of the Táng dynasty. The names for sinogram initials were created by the monk Shǒuwēn in the late Táng dynasty when the further division of labial and dental sound groups was completed. Third, according to the location of certain sinograms, the Yùnjìng was likely written between the time of Tángyùn and the end of the Táng dynasty. In the sample sinograms, there are cases in which the Yùnjìng is inconsistent with either the Guǎngyùn or existing rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty. However, it is never the case that the Yùnjìng is consistent with the Guǎngyùn but inconsistent with the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty. By contrast, cases exist in which the Yùnjìng is consistent with the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty but inconsistent with the Guǎngyùn. Therefore, we can infer that the Yùnjìng was not based on the Guǎngyùn but on the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty. At the same time, sample sinograms indicate that, while the Yùnjìng is inconsistent with the rhyme dictionaries of the early period of the Táng dynasty, such as the Qièsān (切三), The third version of the Qièyùn, it is consistent with later rhyme dictionaries, such as the Tángyùn. This also indicates that the Yùnjìng was based on rhyme dictionaries after the Tángyùn. Fourth, according to the order of rhyme headings, the development of rhyme headings can be divided into three periods. In the first period, the order of rhyme headings was as follows: the rhymes yáng (陽) and táng (唐) were placed together with the rhymes gēng (庚), gēng (耕), qīng (清), and qīng (青). The rhymes tán (覃) and tán (谈) were placed before the rhymes yáng (陽) and táng (唐). The rhymes zhēng (蒸) and dēng (登) were placed after the rhymes yán (盐) and tiān (添). Rhyme dictionaries from this period include the Qièsān, the Wángyī (王一), The first version of the Wángyùn, and remnants of Jiǎng Fǔ’s (蔣斧) version of the Tángyùn. In the second period, the order of rhyme headings was as follows: the rhymes yáng (陽) and táng (唐) were placed together with the rhymes gēng (庚), gēng (耕), qīng (清), and qīng (青). The rhymes tán (覃) and tán (谈) were placed after the rhymes yáng (陽) and táng (唐). The rhymes zhēng (蒸) and dēng (登) were placed at the bottom. This is the order that the Yùnjìng followed. In the third period, the order of rhyme headings was as follows: the rhymes yáng (阳), tang (唐), gēng (庚), gēng (耕), qīng (清), and qīng (青) were all placed together. The rhymes zhēng (蒸) and dēng (登) were placed after the rhyme of qīng (青). The rhymes tán (覃) and tán (谈) were placed after the rhyme of qīn(侵). Lǐ Zhōu’s Qièyùn as well as

12  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? the Guǎngyùn follow this order. Therefore, the Yùnjìng was likely written after Sūn Miǎn’s Tángyùn but before Lǐ Zhōu’s Qièyùn, between 751 and 805.9 Gě Yìqīng’s reasoning was a major step forward and can be regarded as representative of the idea that the Yùnjìng was produced in the Táng dynasty. Only the last argument that rhyme dictionaries had three periods of development is worth discussing because the Yùnjìng is based on the rhyme dictionary of the second period. No evidence exists to support this other than the table order of the Yùnjìng. Luó Chángpéi also mentioned this issue, and he noted that “although the table order of the Yùnjìng was obviously rearranged based on the Guǎngyùn, its placement of the rhymes zhēng (蒸) and dēng (登) allows us to see the sequence in Lù Fǎyán and Sūn Miǎn’s old version.” However, this leads us to conclude that the Yùnjìng was produced later than the Qīyīn lüè, which is inconsistent with the current understanding. I think that the Yùnjìng, Qīyīn lüè, and their prototype, were all based on the earliest rhyme dictionaries, in which the last several rhymes were ranked as follows: tán, (覃) tán (談), yang (陽), tang (唐), gēng (庚), gēng (耕), qīng (清), qīng (青), yóu (尤), hóu (侯), yōu (幽), qīn (侵), yán (鹽), tiān (添), zhēng (蒸), dēng (登), yán (咸), xián (銜), yán (嚴), and fán (凡).10 The rhymes tán (覃) and tán (談); yán (鹽) and tiān (添); and yán (咸), xián (銜), yán (嚴), and fán (凡) are separated at three places. However, in the rhyme tables, these eight rhymes belong to the same rhyme gathering. This group can be placed at any of the three places. If the Qīyīn lüè, “for the sake of convenience in arranging the tables,” could move six rhymes, including yán (鹽) and tiān (添), before the rhymes yang (陽) and tang (唐) and place the eight rhymes at the position where the rhymes tán (覃) and tán (談) are, then why could not the Yùnjìng, for the same reason, place the eight rhymes at the position where the rhymes yán (鹽) and tiān (添) are? Only allowing the Qīyīn lüè to rearrange the order of the eight rhymes while forbidding the Yùnjìng to do so is unreasonable. We would not be surprised to find rhyme tables in which the rhymes of this group are all placed in the position of yán (咸), xián (銜), yán (嚴), and fán (凡). Provided that the rhyme of qīn (侵) is still in front of the rhymes zhēng (蒸) and dēng (登), we would still believe that such tables might indicate a rhyme dictionary from the first period in the Táng dynasty. In this way, using the rhyme order of the Yùnjìng to prove that the book was based on a rhyme dictionary in the second period and, in turn, relying on the rhyme book to prove that the Yùnjìng was produced between 751 and 805 seems somewhat circular. Gě Yìqīng’s conclusions were influenced by the following: Firstly, the problem with the arrangement of the rhyme dictionary. Secondly, in the third step mentioned above, Gě Yìqīng only cited the locations of certain sinograms but did not investigate the locations of all the head sinograms in the Yùnjìng. In particular, he thought that the Yùnjìng only reflected the Chang’an phonological system and held a rather rigid view of the inclusion of head sinograms in the rhyme tables, not considering that there may be mistakes or additions made based on later rhyme dictionaries. After Gě

The Debate on This Issue in Recent Years and Its Progress  13 Yìqīng’s article was published, although it was not challenged immediately, it was not widely accepted.

Notes 1 Zhào Yīntáng (趙蔭棠), Děngyùn yuánliú (等韻源流), The origin of rhyme divisions, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), the Commercial Press, 1957. 58–​59. 2 Wèi Jiàngōng (魏建功), “Qièyùn yùnmù sìshēng bù yíguàn de jiěshì” (切韻韻目 四聲不一貫的解釋), Explanations for the inconsistency of the four tones of the rhyme headings of the Qièyùn, Běijīng Dàxué Xuébào (北京大學學報), Peking University Academic Journal, no. 2, 1958. 46. 3 Luó Chángpéi (羅常培), Luóchángpéi yǔyánxué lùnwén xuǎnjí (羅常培語言學論文 選集), Selected linguistic papers of Luó Chángpéi, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華 書局), 1963. 105. 4 Zhào Yīntáng (趙蔭棠), Děngyùn yuánliú, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印 書館), the Commercial Press, 1957. 60. 5 Also named the Shǒuwēn cánjuàn. 6 Ibid., 47 7 The Xīn tángzhì (新唐志), The bibliographical records in the new history of the Táng dynasty, Sòngzhì (宋志), Descriptive accounts of the Sòng dynasty, and Tōngzhì: yìwén lüè (通志·藝文略), Descriptive accounts of books in the Tōngzhì, all record that the Yùnhǎi jìngyuán had 360 volumes. Only the Chóngwén zǒngmù (崇文總目), A collection of the table of contents in the Chóngwén, which is quoted by the Yùhǎi (玉海), Jade sea, stated that it had 16 volumes. In terms of the number of volumes, it is close to the rhyme tables, but according to the Fēngshì wénjiànjì (封 氏聞見記), Literary sketches by Fēng Yǎn, written by Fēng Yǎn (封演) in the Táng dynasty, the figure of 360 volumes should be considered more reliable. The book states, “In the late years of the Tiānbǎo (天寶) reign (742–​755) of the Táng dynasty, Yán Zhēnqīng (顏真卿), the Píngyuán prefect (平原太守), wrote the Yùnhǎi jìngyuán, but the book only contained 200 volumes and was unfinished because he went through a difficult journey—​he met with robbers and tried to ford a river, and therefore over 50 volumes were lost. He became Húzhōu prefect (湖州刺史) in the middle of the Guǎngdé (廣德) reign (763–​764) and tried to restore the book. Apart from the Confucian classics, he added contents from other books, including those from Buddhism and Taoism, increasing it to 360 volumes. Since rhyming dictionaries first appeared, no book contained such rich contents as Yán’s.” 8 Chén Lǐ’s Qièyùn kǎo: wàipiān (切韻考·外篇), Additional chapters of the Qièyùn kǎo, states: “The ancient people divided rhymes with similar pronunciation into several rhymes, such as the rhymes dōng (東), dōng (冬), and zhōng (鍾), which all sounded alike. And within a rhyme, the SL finals of sinographic liaison were further divided into several categories. For example, the rhyme dōng (東) is divided into two categories. This led to the subsequent děng (等) division.” 9 See Gě Yìqīng (葛毅卿), “Yùnjìng yīn suǒ dàibiǎo de shíjiān hé dìyù” (韻鏡音所 代表的時間和地域), The time and places indicated by the pronunciations in the Yùnjìng, Xuéshù Yuèkān (學術月刊), Academic Monthly, no.8, 1957. 79. This was abridged when quoted. 10 Wáng Guówéi (王國維), Guāntáng jílín, vol. 8 (觀堂集林), An anthology of the academic works by Wáng Guówéi. Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1959. 379–​384.

3 Views that the Yùnjìng Originated from the Sòng Dynasty According to “Yùnjìng yánjiū”

After Gě Yìqīng published his article, a silence about the time when rhyme tables were produced lasted for over 20 years. In 1981, Lǐ Xīnkuí (李新魁) published an article called “Yùnjìng yánjiū” (韻鏡研究), A study of the Yùnjìng, in the initial issue of the journal, Yǔyán yánjiū (語言研究), The study of language, cast a new light on this phonological issue. Lǐ’s achievements lie in two areas. Firstly, he was the first scholar to formally note the general principle that xiǎoyùn shǒuzì (小韻首字), the first sinograms of minor rhymes in a rhyme dictionary was always used in rhyme tables. He said: The first sinograms of minor rhymes in the rhyme dictionary are generally applied by the authors of rhyme tables because this is the most convenient way [to make rhyme tables]. It is hard for us to imagine an author not using the first sinograms of minor rhymes in a rhyme dictionary. If they did not do this, they would instead have to look for other sinograms inside minor rhymes. Unless they have to choose certain sinograms out of phonological necessity, they will avoid this trouble. Therefore, the use of the first sinograms of minor rhymes in the rhyme dictionary became the general rule for arranging entries in rhyme tables. These first sinograms become the representatives of each minor rhyme and came together to form rhyme tables, which became the representative of a certain rhyme dictionary and could reflect its phonological system. If all the sinograms used in the rhyme tables correspond to the first sinograms of minor rhymes in a certain rhyme dictionary (for instance, if the listed sinograms in the Qièyùn zhǐnán by Liú Jiàn in the Yuán (元) dynasty correspond to the first sinograms of the minor rhymes in the Wǔyīn jíyùn (五音集韻), A comprehensive rhyme dictionary arranged by the five-​type initials) by Hán Dàozhāo (韓道昭) in the Jīn (金) dynasty, then it is almost safe to assert that this set of rhyme tables is based on the rhyme dictionary. On the contrary, if the sinograms in a certain set of rhyme tables do not correspond to the first sinograms of minor rhymes in a certain rhyme dictionary totally or in part, then the set of rhyme tables cannot be so closely related to the rhyme dictionary. Therefore, whether to use the first DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-4

The Yùnjìng Originated from the “Yùnjìng yánjiū”  15 sinograms of minor rhymes or not (namely, whether the sinograms used in a set of rhyme tables correspond to the first sinograms of minor rhymes in a certain rhyme dictionary or not) becomes a significant criterion for assessing the relationship between rhyme tables and rhyme dictionaries.1 He affirmed the relationship between rhyme dictionaries and rhyme tables and was convinced that rhyme tables were based on rhyme dictionaries. At the same time, he provided an objective and effective method for studying the relationship between rhyme tables and rhyme dictionaries. The second achievement of Lǐ is that he was the first scholar to conduct textual research on the birth of rhyme tables by applying the method of comparing the first sinograms of minor rhymes in a rhyme dictionary with the sinograms listed in a set of rhyme tables. Therefore, his study made a major step forward compared to that of Gě Yìqīng in its comprehensiveness and depth. Based on this method, Lǐ made an overall refutation of Gě Yìqīng’s position. He reiterated that rhyme tables were produced in the Sòng dynasty and proposed that the Yùnjìng was written between 1007 and 1037 and was based on the Jǐngdé yùnlüè (景德韻略), A concise rhyme dictionary, written in the Jǐngdé (景德) period (1004–​1007) of the Sòng dynasty, henceforth Yùnlüè. His specific reasons are as follows: Firstly, those sinograms of minor rhymes in the Guǎngyùn that do not correspond to the Yùnjìng are the ones in the Yùnjìng that correspond to the Lǐbù yùnlüè (禮部韻略), A concise rhyme dictionary authorized by the Ministry of Rites in the Sòng dynasty. From this point, it can be concluded that the sinograms in the Yùnjìng must also correspond to those of the Jǐngdé yùnlüè. Secondly, in terms of arranging entries, the Yùnjìng differed from the Guǎngyùn, but it could not be free from the influence of other rhyme dictionaries of the same series. The compilation of this book could not have been earlier than the Guǎngyùn and yet it was certainly not based on the Guǎngyùn or the Jíyùn. The number of rhymes, the rhyme headings, and the phonological position of the included sinograms generally reflected the layout of the Guǎngyùn. In that case, what kind of rhyme dictionary was the Yùnjìng based on? The most reasonable inference is that the time of the book on which it was based, together with its phonological system, was close to the Guǎngyùn. Only the Yùnlüè (韻略), which is also called the Jǐngdé yùnlüè and was written in the Jǐngdé period (1004–​1007) of the Sòng dynasty, satisfies this condition. Thirdly, many sinograms (including duplicated sinograms) listed in the Yùnjìng cannot be found in the Guǎngyùn but they can be found in the Jíyùn, which indicates the close link between the Yùnjìng and the Jǐngdé yùnlüè. The sinograms that are not found in the Guǎngyùn were obviously added by Dīng Dù (丁度), a phonologist in the Northern Sòng dynasty, 990–​1053 when he was compiling the Jíyùn. Dīng Dù also compiled the

16  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Lǐbù yùnlüè is based on the Jǐngdé yùnlüè, so the Jíyùn and Lǐbù yùnlüè all follow the same compiling principle. Dīng Dù was likely to incorporate the sinographic liaisons of the Jǐngdé yùnlüè, which were not included in the Guǎngyùn, into the Jíyùn, which is well known for the richness of its entries. Because the listing of sinograms in the Yùnjìng was modeled after the Yùnlüè, many sinograms appear in the Yùnjìng that are consistent with those of the Jíyùn but inconsistent with those of the Guǎngyùn.2 Lǐ Xīnkuí proposed a good method but his conclusion was unacceptable. The reason is simple: the three points aforementioned are all speculation and have not been tested in practice. The Jǐngdé yùnlüè is no longer extant, but the Lǐbù yùnlüè is still extant, and it takes the Jǐngdé yùnlüè as its model. If we compare the Jǐngdé yùnlüè3 with the Yùnjìng in detail, it can be easily found that the difference between them is far more than Lǐ claimed. Here, I just take two groups of numbers as an example. For the first group of numbers, we take Lǐ’s method of making a direct comparison between the Yùnlüè and Yùnjìng. Here, we just take the part of the level tone as an example. There are 167 cases of the first sinograms of the minor rhymes being different between these two books, including allographs, vulgar forms of the sinogram, and miswritten or mispronounced sinograms.4 The Yùnjìng includes 198 sinograms missing in the Yùnlüè. The Yùnlüè includes 12 minor rhymes missing in the Yùnjìng. This does not include inconsistencies in terms of rounded or unrounded articulation, differences in divisions, or the complicated relation between the rhymes zhēn (真) and zhūn (谆). Therefore, in the level tone rhymes alone, we can observe 377 inconsistent cases between the Yùnjìng and the Yùnlüè. If all four tonal categories are considered, the number would be far higher. The number of inconsistencies between the Guǎngyùn and the Yùnjìng, as determined by the “Yùnjìng yánjiū,” is smaller, with only 491 inconsistent cases, or 442 if differences in phonological position are not considered. The number of inconsistencies across the four tonal categories is no larger than the difference across one category when comparing the Yùnlüè and the Yùnjìng. In the Guǎngyùn, only 172 first sinograms of minor rhymes differ from those in the Yùnjìng, only five more than that of the level tone category when comparing the Yùnjìng and the Yùnlüè. If we follow the method in the “Yùnjìng yánjiū,” we can further note that among the 167 different first sinograms of minor rhymes with a level tone between the Yùnjìng and the Yùnlüè, 93 sinograms are the same as the first sinograms of minor rhymes in Wáng Rénxù’s (王仁昫) Kānmiù bǔquē qièyùn (刊謬補 缺切韻), A revised and expanded Qièyùn, henceforth Wángyùn王韻, and 87 sinograms are the same as those in the Guǎngyùn. These two numbers are rather significant because they account for more than half of the sinograms. The proportion of sinograms that cannot be found in the Yùnlüè but can be found in the Wángyùn is almost the same as the proportion of sinograms in the Yùnjìng that are consistent with those in the Guǎngyùn but inconsistent with those in the Yùnlüè, as is mentioned in the “Yùnjìng yánjiū.” What

The Yùnjìng Originated from the “Yùnjìng yánjiū”  17 deserves more attention is that, by comparison, 18 sinograms in the Yùnjìng are inconsistent with the first sinograms of minor rhymes of any rhyme dictionary of the Sòng dynasty but consistent with those in the Wángyùn. These sinograms are as follows: chōng (衝) in the zhōng (鍾) rhyme in the 2nd table, zū (葅) and shū (踈) in the yú (魚) rhyme in the 11th table, pī (批) in the qí (齊) rhyme in the 13th table, yín (夤) in the zhēn (真) rhyme in the 17th table, tǐng (涏) in the xiān (仙) rhyme in the 21st table, pán (盤) in the huán (桓) rhyme in the 24th table, cháo (晁) in the xiāo (宵) rhyme in the 25th table, tā (他) in the gē (歌) rhyme in the 27th table, yā (鵶) and yē (耶) in the má (麻) rhyme in the 29th table, gāng (刚) in the táng (唐) rhyme and chuāng (疮) in the yáng (陽) rhyme in the 31st table, kēng (坑) in the gēng (庚) rhyme in the 33rd table, xíng (刑) in the qīng (青) rhyme in the 35th table, rán (髯) in the yán (鹽) rhyme in the 39th table, xún (燖) in the yán (鹽) rhyme in the 40th table, chéng (澄) in the zhēng (蒸) rhyme in the 42nd table. If we follow the logic of the “Yùnjìng yánjiū,” is it not more reasonable to infer that the Yùnjìng is based on the Wángyùn? However, nobody will come to such a conclusion. As to the second group of numbers, we can compare these four extant earliest rhyme dictionaries—​the Wángyùn, the Guǎngyùn, the Jíyùn, and the Yùnlüè—​with the Yùnjìng and Qīyīn lüè to check their consistency. For the sake of space, we only take the first three set of rhyme tables from the beginning as examples. Namely, the four groups—​the rhymes dōng (東), dōng (冬), zhōng (鍾), and jiāng (江) in the rhyme dictionaries. The original materials that I used in preparing the comparison were all photocopies. The Wángyùn is from the Táng wǔdài yùnshū jícún (唐 五代韻書集存), A collection of rhyme dictionaries in the Táng and Five dynasties, compiled by Zhōu Zǔmó (周祖謨). The Guǎngyùn is an imitation version of the Sòng dynasty style printed by Hán Fēn Publishing House (涵芬樓). The Jíyùn is an imitation version of the Sòng dynasty style published by Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House (上海古籍出版社). The version of the Yùnlüè has already been mentioned. The Yùnjìng is from the Yùnjìng jiàozhèng (韻鏡校證), The rectification of the Yùnjìng, by Lǐ Xīnkuí and the Qīyīn lüè is from the Tōngzhì (通志), General record of Chinese history, in the Sìbù bèiyào (四部備要), The collection of classics in four sectors. Six items were compared, and two items were consistent while four items were inconsistent. In the “consistent” category, “same” means that the first

newgenrtpdf

Table 3.1.1  Rhyme table 1: Four rhymes of the dōng (東) rhyme set Rhyme table

YJ(124 sinograms)

Entries of comparison Number of consistent sinograms

Rhyme dictionary WY (114 rhymes)

Identical

90

Small difference in 3 graph Number of Present in rhyme 9 inconsistent tables but absent sonograms in dictionaries Present in rhyme 1 dictionaries but absent in tables Different sinograms 18 Different rhyme 3 positions Ratio of consistency 75%

QYL(127 sinograms)

GY (121 rhymes)

JY (133 rhymes)

YL (105 rhymes)

WY (114 rhymes)

GY (121 rhymes)

JY (133 rhymes)

YL (105 rhymes)

102

86

75

89

96

90

75

1

3

1

4

4

5

2

3

4

26

17

10

1

29

0

11

7

5

4

5

8

14 4

28 3

19 2

15 3

13 4

28 3

18 3

82.4%

65.9%

58.5%

70.5%

75.2%

72%

57%

18  When Was the Rhyme Table Born?

Table 3.1 Consistency between rhyme dictionaries and the first three rhyme tables

Table 3.1.2  Rhyme table 2: Seven rhymes of the dōng (冬) zhōng (鐘) rhyme set Rhyme table Entries of comparison

Rhyme dictionary WY (109 rhymes)

Identical Small difference in graph Present in rhyme tables but absent in dictionaries Present in rhyme dictionaries but absent in tables Different sinogram Different rhyme position Ratio of consistency

QYL(121 sinograms)

GY (115 rhymes)

JY (136 rhymes)

YL (94 rhymes)

WY (109 rhymes)

GY (115 rhymes)

JY (136 rhymes)

YL (94 rhymes)

87 6

95 6

82 8

75 4

82 5

88 5

81 5

69 3

15

9

4

27

21

17

3

34

6

6

22

1

9

11

18

7

5 5

6 2

22 2

10 4

6 7

7 4

27 5

9 6

64.3%

65.3%

75%

81.5%

66.9%

70.5%

62.6%

56.3% (continued)

The Yùnjìng Originated from the “Yùnjìng yánjiū”  19

Number of consistent sinograms Number of inconsistent sinograms

YJ(118 sinograms)

newgenrtpdf

Table 3.1.3  Rhyme table 3: Four rhymes of the jiāng (江) rhyme set Rhyme table

YJ(53 sinograms)

Entries of comparison Number of consistent sinograms

Rhyme dictionary WY (46 rhymes)

Identical

Small difference in graph Number of Present in rhyme inconsistent tables but absent sinograms in dictionaries Present in rhyme dictionaries but absent in tables Different sinogram Different rhyme position Ratio of consistency

QYL(56 sinograms)

GY (53 rhymes)

JY (62 rhymes)

YL (41 rhymes)

WY (46 rhymes)

GY (53 rhymes)

JY (62 rhymes)

YL (41 rhymes)

37

44

36

29

35

40

36

31

3

3

4

3

6

7

9

5

8

1

0

14

10

3

0

16

1

1

9

2

0

0

6

1

5 0

5 0

13 0

7 0

5 0

6 0

11 0

4 0

74.1%

87%

64.5%

58.2%

73.2%

83.9%

72.6%

63.2%

20  When Was the Rhyme Table Born?

Table 3.1 Cont.

The Yùnjìng Originated from the “Yùnjìng yánjiū”  21 sinograms of minor rhymes in the rhyme dictionaries are fully consistent with the sinograms arranged in the set of rhyme tables in terms of the selection of sinograms and phonological positions. A “slight difference in graphic form” means that the first sinograms of minor rhymes are the same as the sinograms listed in the rhyme tables in all other aspects except for their graphic forms, including wrongly written sinograms but not allographs such as “yǎn (兗)” for “chōng (充),” “fēng (豊)” for “fēng (豐),” or “chóng (蟲)” for “chù (矗).” The reason why “slight difference in graphic form” is listed here is that we are aware that ancients had different writing habits or different references when making private copies. The use of the wrong graphic form can sometimes indicate that the rhyme tables were based on different rhyme dictionaries. However, after repeated copying by later generations, some mistakes in rhyme tables and rhyme dictionaries were corrected, and some correct sinograms were carelessly changed into wrong ones. Therefore, too much weight should not be placed on this item; it is only for reference when necessary. For the sake of simplicity, here we regard all mistakes of this type as clerical errors and still count them as “consistent.” Otherwise, the number of items marked “inconsistent” would be much higher. The “inconsistent” category of “included in rhyme tables but not included in rhyme dictionaries” does not mean that a certain sinogram was completely excluded. Instead, it means that the sinogram was not independently arranged as a minor rhyme in a rhyme dictionary. For example, the sinogram róng (肜) in the Yùnjìng is the sinogram included in the minor rhyme of róng (融) in the Guǎngyùn instead of being arranged as an independent minor rhyme. The category of “included in the rhyme dictionaries but absent in rhyme tables” means that some of the minor rhymes in the rhyme dictionaries were not manifested in rhyme tables, although some might simply be duplicated minor rhymes. For example, in the Yùnlüè, a minor rhyme mèng (夢) is present in the rhyme dōng (東) of the level tone, but it does not exist and cannot be manifested in the rhyme tables (in the Yùnjìng and Qīyīn lüè, another sinogram mèng (瞢) is at this position, and it also appears as a minor rhyme in the Yùnlüè). “Using different sinograms” means that the sinograms arranged in rhyme tables are not the first sinograms of minor rhymes in rhyme dictionaries. Most likely, allographs are included in this minor rhyme because a great number of allographs are found to be included in some rhyme dictionaries (especially in the Jíyùn). The first sinograms of minor rhymes differ from one rhyme dictionary to another. For example, wèng (甕) and wèng (瓮) are both allographs in the sòng (送) rhyme. However, in the Táng dynasty, wèng (甕) was chosen as the first sinogram of a minor rhyme in rhyme dictionaries and a note was given to explain that this sinogram was commonly known as wèng (瓮). By contrast, in the Sòng dynasty, wèng (瓮) was chosen as the first sinogram of a minor rhyme and wèng (甕) was viewed as part of it in all rhyme dictionaries without exception. In this way, it does make sense that wèng (甕) was chosen instead of wèng (瓮) to be listed in the Yùnjìng. “The phonological positions are different” means that initial categories or divisions

22  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? demonstrated by sinographic liaison in rhyme dictionaries are not in line with their actual positions in rhyme tables. For example, the sinogram róng (融) should be placed in division Ⅲ instead of division Ⅳ according to the principles of sinographic liaison. The consistency proportion between rhyme tables and rhyme dictionaries was calculated using the following formula: consistency number of consistent sinograms proportion = × 100% number of consistent sinograms + number of inconsistent sinograams for instance: consistency proportion between the Wángyùn and Yùnjìng    =

90 + 3 × 100% = 75% (90 + 3) + (9 + 1 + 18 + 3)

Previously, we produced statistics for three sets of rhyme tables because we were afraid that taking only one set of rhyme tables for reference would not be enough to illuminate the subject and taking a great number of examples would be too tedious. From the three sets of rhyme tables displayed above, the consistency of rhyme dictionaries and rhyme tables turns out to be very close. For instance, in these three sets of rhyme tables, the consistency between the Wángyùn and the Yùnjìng is approximately 75%, and the consistency between the Jíyùn and the Yùnjìng is approximately 65%. To some extent, the proportions are representative and can help clarify some points. The consistency proportions shown in these three sets of rhyme tables reveal the following: (1) The consistencies between the rhyme tables and these four rhyme dictionaries are all beyond 50%, so it can be concluded that the rhyme tables and rhyme dictionaries of the Qièyùn series are closely related. (2) Among the consistency proportions of these four rhyme dictionaries with the two rhyme tables, the highest is that of the Guǎngyùn, followed by the Wángyùn, the Jíyùn, and the Yùnlüè. The value of the Yùnlüè barely exceeds 50% at times; therefore, it is least likely to have served as a model for the rhyme tables. The purposes of compiling the Yùnlüè and rhyme tables differed. The purpose of compiling the Yùnlüè was to widen the way of making poetry with rhymes, which served as the criterion of the civil service examination held by the Ministry of Rites in ancient China. As Gù Yánwǔ (顧炎武) noted, “this book can only be used for official imperial examinations, and some sinograms are omitted because they are inappropriate for this purpose.”5 Therefore, rarely used sinograms, sinograms not used as rhymes, and vulgar sinograms (such as pì (屁), shī (屍), and niào (尿)) were rarely included in the book,

The Yùnjìng Originated from the “Yùnjìng yánjiū”  23 and therefore the number of minor rhymes decreased substantially. However, the purpose of compiling rhyme tables was to demonstrate phonological awareness by manifesting the structure of pronunciations and phonological systems. Because the purposes were entirely different, such abridged rhyme dictionaries could not be used as the prototypes of rhyme tables. From this perspective, the “Yùnjìng yánjiū” was still unable to determine when rhyme tables were produced, so further study is necessary to answer this question.

Notes 1 Lǐ Xīnkuí (李新魁), “Yùnjìng yánjiū” (韻鏡研究) A study of the Yùnjìng, Yǔyán Yánjiū (語言研究) Study in Language and Linguistics, no. 00 (1981), 133. 2 Lǐ Xīnkuí (李新魁), “Yùnjìng yánjiū,” Yǔyán Yánjiū (語言研究) Study in Language and Linguistics, no. 00 (1981), 163–​164. 3 The version we refer to is the Fù shìwén hùzhù lǐbù yùnlüè (附釋文互注禮部韻略) The Lǐbù yùnlüè with different annotations, republished in the third month of the Lunar Gēngyín (庚寅) year (1230) of the Shàodìng (紹定) period in the Sòng Dynasty (1228–​1233) from the Sìbù cóngkān (四部叢刊) Series works of classics in four sectors. In the following part, we refer to it as the Yùnlüè. 4 Due to the limitations of typesetting and seal engraving of the original book, we were unable to list specific sinograms here. The same is true for the rest of this chapter. 5 Gù Yánwǔ (顧炎武), “Yīnlùn: shàng” (音論·上) The upper part in the discussion of sounds, in the Yīnxué wǔshū (音學五書) Five parts of the Chinese phonology. Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1982, 26.

4 Determining the Era in Which Rhyme Tables Were Produced

Lǐ Xīnkuí proposed the helpful principle that the first sinograms of minor rhymes in a rhyme dictionary was always used in rhyme tables, but he failed to reach a convincing conclusion and thus left a question to be answered about how to determine the era in which rhyme tables were produced. This issue can be investigated from two aspects. First, we can continue to adopt the principle of Lǐ Xīnkuí, but his approach needs to be changed. Basically, Lǐ took two approaches. One approach was to compare rhyme dictionaries with rhyme tables to see how they match, with their relationship judged by the amount of consistency. However, he did not actually follow this method. As discussed in the previous chapter, if he did, he would have concluded that rhyme tables were based on the Guǎngyùn, which was unacceptable to him. The other approach was to compare rhyme tables with the Guǎngyùn to locate consistent tables and then compare the inconsistent tables with other rhyme dictionaries. By doing so, he concluded that rhyme tables were produced based on the Yùnlüè. This was what “Yùnjìng yánjiū” discussed. In the preceding passage, such a conclusion was proven unreliable in practice. However, we still need to prove that this approach is theoretically flawed. (1) First, a persuasive conclusion cannot be reached merely by comparing a set of rhyme tables with various rhyme dictionaries. The comparison in the previous section reveals that because rhyme tables were produced based on the rhyme dictionaries of the Qièyùn series, some parts of the tables should be consistent with some of these dictionaries. However, some parts of the tables are inconsistent with these dictionaries, and therefore none of the extant rhyme dictionaries can be regarded as the definitive basis of the rhyme tables. Although the Guǎngyùn demonstrated the highest consistency with the rhyme tables, up to 80%, Lǐ Xīnkuí still asserted that it was not the prototype of the rhyme tables. How then could he persuade readers that other rhyme dictionaries with much lower consistency proportions could be the prototype? In addition, such a comparative method may lead to some strange conclusions. The method in the previous section was adopted to compare DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-5

Determining the Era in Which Rhyme Tables Were Produced  25 the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè, and the results are presented in Tables 3–​1. In Table 3-​1-​1, involving four rhymes of the dōng (東) rhyme set, the numbers of the sinograms in the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè are 124 and 127 respectively. The texts have 96 consistent sinograms and 36 inconsistent sinograms, with a consistency proportion of 72.7%. In Table 3-​1-​2, involving seven rhymes of the dōng (東) and zhōng (鐘) rhyme sets, the numbers of sinograms in the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè are 118 and 121 respectively. The texts have 90 consistent sinograms and 43 inconsistent sinograms, with a consistency proportion of 67.7%. In Table 3-​1-​3, involving four rhymes of the jiāng (江) rhyme set, the numbers of sinograms in the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè are 53 and 56 respectively. The texts have 44 consistent sinograms and 13 inconsistent sinograms, with a consistency proportion of 77.2%. All these proportions are lower than the comparative results between the rhyme tables and the Guǎngyùn or even the Wángyùn. It is assumed that the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè share the same source text, but this kind of rigid comparison led to the opposite conclusion. (2) The second approach by Lǐ Xīnkuí to study the birth time of rhyme tables is by comparing rhyme tables with the Guǎngyùn first to identify the consistent sinograms and then comparing the remaining inconsistent sinograms with other rhyme dictionaries. The problem with this approach does not lie in the method used but in the choice of objects for comparison. In the preceding section, it was proven that different rhyme dictionaries chosen for comparison in the first step will lead to different conclusions. For example, rhyme tables can be compared with the Guǎngyùn first and then compared with other rhyme dictionaries, but rhyme tables can be compared with another rhyme dictionary first and then compared with the Guǎngyùn (or any other rhyme dictionary). Which order of comparison is appropriate? What I want to know is whether rhyme tables were produced in the Táng dynasty or the Sòng dynasty. However, Lǐ Xīnkuí took a rhyme dictionary from the Sòng dynasty as the basis for comparison and only made arguments based on the remaining inconsistent sinograms, putting the consistent ones aside. This method implies that the time when rhyme tables are compiled would to a large extent not precede the time of the chosen dictionary, and this would lead to the conclusion that the rhyme tables were produced after the dictionary. In fact, “Yùnjìng yánjiū” started from the premise that rhyme tables were produced after the Guǎngyùn and then “reached” the conclusion logically entailed by the premise. No wonder such a conclusion is unconvincing. Since these two approaches are both unworkable, how should one follow the principle proposed by Lǐ Xīnkuí? We can do as follows: (1) Conduct a comprehensive comparison between rhyme tables and the first sinograms of minor rhymes in all kinds of rhyme dictionaries instead of

26  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? simply focusing on their consistency proportions. Because rhyme dictionaries from the Qièyùn to the Jíyùn are all the same system, many parts of them will be consistent with rhyme tables. Therefore, the focus should not be on their similarities (consistencies) but their differences (inconsistencies). In other words, the relationship between rhyme tables and a certain rhyme dictionary can only be determined by some of its unique features matching with rhyme tables. For instance, a sinogram wèng (甕) in the sòng (送) rhyme in the first table of the Yùnjìng was arranged as the first sinogram of a minor rhyme only in rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty such as the Wángyùn and not in those of the Sòng dynasty. We can infer that the reason why this sinogram was included in rhyme tables is related to the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty. Similarly, sinograms such as tóng (𣪯), yōng (𥑿), and fēng (𢓱) in the dōng (東) rhyme in the first table of the Qīyīn lüè can only be found in the Jíyùn, which indicates influence from the Jíyùn. After a thorough comparison in this way, it is found that the rhyme tables are related to almost all of the rhyme dictionaries in some special ways. Some might worry that such a conclusion will complicate the issue, but it in fact does not, as there is a pattern behind the relationships. (2) Now that the rhyme tables of the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè are known to be of the same origin, they must not be treated separately in the search for the rhyme dictionary upon which they were based. Rather, when the textual research on the compilation of the rhyme table is conducted, they should be regarded as two versions of the same set of rhyme tables and then be compared with rhyme dictionaries. In this way, not only can the era of rhyme tables be determined, but also the development paths of the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè. (3) As for the choice of objects of comparison, a chronological top-​down principle should be adopted, which means that we should choose the earliest book first and then follow chronological order to see what was added to the rhyme tables from the subsequent rhyme dictionaries. Considering that no rhyme dictionary is earlier than the Wángyùn among the extant, complete rhyme dictionaries, this book should be taken as the basic object of comparison. Subsequently, the Guǎngyùn, the Jíyùn, the Yùnlüè and various incomplete rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty should be referred to in order to draw a reliable conclusion. Some might say that using the Guǎngyùn as the basic object of comparison implies that rhyme tables could not have been produced before the Guǎngyùn. Similarly, would taking the Wángyùn as the basic object of comparison imply that rhyme tables could not have been produced before the Wángyùn? The answer is yes. However, such a premise is permissible for two reasons. First, what we are discussing now is whether rhyme tables were produced in the Sòng dynasty or the Táng dynasty. And the key point is whether they were produced before or after the Guǎngyùn, not the Wángyùn. Therefore, it is permissible to take the Wángyùn as the basis

Determining the Era in Which Rhyme Tables Were Produced  27 of comparison instead of the Guǎngyùn. Second, among the modern scholars who think that rhyme tables were produced in the Táng dynasty, none of them believes that rhyme tables were produced before the Wángyùn. However, the premise that rhyme tables were produced after the Wángyùn is acceptable to everyone. Therefore, I do not think that taking the Wángyùn as the basic starting point would be unfavorable to the view that rhyme tables were produced in the Sòng dynasty. After comparison, if the distinctive features of the Táng dynasty were found in the rhyme tables and those features were also found in the rhyme dictionaries of the Sòng dynasty, that would indicate that the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty did not have any unique influence on rhyme tables, and it would be safe for us to say that rhyme tables were produced in the Sòng dynasty. All in all, choosing the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty as the object of comparison might lead to the conclusion that rhyme tables were produced in either the Táng dynasty or the Sòng dynasty. By contrast, choosing the rhyme dictionaries of the Sòng dynasty as the object of comparison would definitively exclude the possibility that rhyme tables were compiled in the Táng dynasty. These three points are what we refer to in the third part of this book when this comparison is performed in detail. Here, I would like to announce two preliminary conclusions. (1) Rhyme tables were first produced in the Táng dynasty. A great number of sinograms exist which only correspond to the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty in both the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè and cannot be explained from the position that rhyme tables were produced in the Sòng dynasty and were revised and enlarged according to the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty (In the Sòng dynasty, few rhyme dictionaries from the Táng dynasty existed, and they had little influence on general language usage after the Guǎngyùn came out). A general principle is that only the previous rhyme tables could be revised according to the subsequent rhyme dictionaries. Therefore, what is held in “Yùnjìng yánjiū” is doubtful, namely that the Yùnjìng was produced by taking the Yùnlüè (which was later than the Guǎngyùn) as the prototype and then revising according to the Guǎngyùn. (2) After rhyme tables were produced, they were developed in succession. Literati, one after another, revised rhyme tables according to subsequent rhyme dictionaries. Two major revision events occurred. One was that the same prototype of the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè was supplemented according to the Guǎngyùn, and the other was that the Qīyīn lüè was supplemented only according to the Jíyùn. Just as the rhyme dictionaries of the Qièyùn series were under a process of development from the Qièyùn to the Tángyùn and then to the Jíyùn, rhyme tables also went through a process of continuous supplementation. Therefore, a chain of rhyme tables of the Qièyùn series came into being, in which the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè were just

28  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? two links in this chain. These two links of the original rhyme tables, like the relationship between the Guǎngyùn and the Qièyùn, are the supplemented layers of sedimentation. Therefore, neither the originating era of rhyme tables nor the principles of arranging rhyme tables can be verified by referring to just one of the two rhyme tables. Comparing the rhyme tables and rhyme dictionaries in such a direct way is key and serves as “internal evidence” or “phonological evidence,” according to Zhào Yīntáng, to verify the era in which rhyme tables were produced. However, it is not enough to simply perform such a comparison. Nonphonological evidence also needs to be found. Something produced in a certain era always contains the features of that era and is also confined by the specific historical conditions of that era. The key reason why many people are still reluctant to accept the conclusion that rhyme tables were produced in the Táng dynasty is that several prerequisite conditions have yet to be clarified. (1) From the available materials, a sizable gap can be found between the rhyme tables and the rhyme dictionaries, as if the rhyme tables popped up out of nowhere without undergoing any development leading to their creation. The Sìshēng wǔyīn jiǔnòngtú (四聲五音 九弄圖), A table of four tones, five-​type initials and nine phonological methods, is so different from the pattern of the extant rhyme tables that it is hard to believe that the rhyme tables were developed from it. Therefore, even if the Qièyùntú in one volume by Oya Toru and Wèi Jiàngōng and the theory of “renaming of the Yùnjìng” by Luó Chángpéi and Gě Yìqīng are true, they should only be regarded as providing tentative and isolated evidence. (2) Zhèng Qiáo stated, “The rhymes of seven initial categories originated in the western regions of the Táng dynasty and then spread to central China … non-​Chinese monks were aware of such intricate learning, but the Confucian intellectuals in China had never heard about it before.”1 Zhāng Línzhī (circa 1162) agreed with him. Because rhyme tables were produced by monks, the monks in the Táng dynasty only produced the Sìshēng wǔyīn jiǔnòngtú, and the monks in the late Táng dynasty only left the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn. Convincing people that there was already a prototype of the Yùnjìng in the Táng dynasty is difficult. (3) Related to this is the relationship between the rhyme divisions and the sinogram initials. Many people believe that the rhyme tables were produced after the occurrence of the 36 sinogram initials. As Zhào Yīntáng stated, From the Sòng of the Six dynasties to the Suí and Táng dynasties for 400 or 500 years, Sanskrit letters were confined to the Buddhist monks and failed to be known by our Confucian

Determining the Era in Which Rhyme Tables Were Produced  29 intellectuals. Were it not for the establishment of 36 sinogram initials, the formal rhyme tables would not have come into being. Therefore, the Sìshēng wǔyīn jiǔnòngtú after the Yuánhé Era (元 和 806–​820) of Emperor Táng Xiànzōng (唐憲宗) would still have been confined to the realm of alliterated and rhymed disyllables.2 Lǐ Xīnkuí also remarked that, judging from the developmental process of rhyme tables, the Yùnjìng could not have been arranged in such a good order without the names of these 36 sinogram initials.3 As for the occurrence of sinogram initials, what is now certain is that there were only 30 sinogram initials until the late Táng dynasty. This must be explained if rhyme tables are believed to have been produced before the late Táng dynasty. No matter how strong the other evidence is, if these three issues are not settled, the conclusion will be unavoidably doubtful. Therefore, more work must be done to support the conclusion that rhyme tables were produced in the Táng dynasty. As Gě Yìqīng started his discussion from the Sòng dynasty and went back through history, we can start from earlier times and go forward instead. In this way, we can study the necessity and possibility of the production of rhyme tables in the Táng dynasty, trace their occurrence, and discuss their relationship with Buddhism and sinogram initials. By complementing Gě Yìqīng’s argument, we can further develop our understanding of this .

Notes 1 Zhèng Qiáo 鄭樵, “Tōngzhì lüè: qīyīn xù” [通志略·七音序 Preface to the seven-​ type initials of the Tōngzhì lüè], (Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn 商務印書館 The Commercial Press, 1987), 513. 2 Zhào Yīntáng 趙蔭棠, Děngyùn yuánliú: xīnxù [等韻源流·新序 New preface to the Děngyùn yuánliú] (Beijing: the Commercial Press, 1957), 159. 3 Lǐ Xīnkuí 李新魁, “Yùnjìng yánjiū,” Yǔyán Yánjiū 語言研究Study in Language and Linguistics, no. 00 (1981): 159.

5 Analysis of the Development of Rhyme Dictionaries in the Suí and Táng Dynasties

The Northern and Southern dynasties and the Suí and Táng dynasties were the major periods in Chinese history when rhyme dictionaries were compiled and developed. During the Northern and Southern dynasties, the wild turbulence of the political situation and the great migration and intermingling of the people all had a profound impact on the phonological system. In addition, as Buddhism was introduced into China, the study of Sabdavidyā from India was also introduced into China. By combining this with alliterated and rhymed disyllables, the method of sinographic liaison was created as a tool for recording pronunciations, thus resulting in the situation that “rhyme dictionaries sprouted one after another.” However, because of the disunity in the political situation, differences in pronunciation preferences, and differences in the ability to analyze pronunciation, these rhyme dictionaries “featured local accents and incurred criticism and ridicule among literati.” This phenomenon was inevitable under the circumstances of political disruption. With the political reunion of the Suí dynasty, rhyme dictionaries that could reflect this unity were in demand. Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn was thus born. He upheld the two slogans of widening the way of making poetry with rhymes and appreciating phonological awareness. He made a compromise between the Southern and Northern and considered both ancient and contemporary views. Through the arduous work of synthesizing rhyme dictionaries and selecting rhymes, he finally produced a comprehensive rhyme dictionary, which was a significant contribution in the preliminary period of rhyme dictionaries. In the Táng dynasty, the Qièyùn was designated as the official rhyme dictionary and won a dominant position. At that time, when different dialects coexisted and scholars lacked sophisticated sound-​marking techniques, Lù’s Qièyùn indeed represented the highest achievement in the study of Chinese phonology. However, the Qièyùn’s appearance did not mean the end of the development of rhyme dictionaries. In the Táng dynasty, the compilation of rhyme dictionaries, rather than slowing down, actually accelerated. We have studied the list of ancient rhyme dictionaries collected by Wèi Jiàngōng in the preface of his Shíyùn huìbiān. The list includes between 160 and 170 rhyme dictionaries, among which 20 or so were believed to have been made by people in the DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-6

Analysis of the Development of Rhyme Dictionaries  31 Wèi–​Jìn (魏晋) and Northern and Southern dynasties, and another 20 were believed to have been made in and after the Sòng dynasty. These two kinds of books total more than 40. Even if I leave some out, the total number of rhyme dictionaries produced in the Táng dynasty could amount to approximately 100. Although Lù Fǎyán’s rhyme dictionary was the greatest achievement of the Suí dynasty, his compromising policy was not accepted or understood by everyone. Furthermore, the Qièyùn could not be free from flaws due to the restrictions of the historical period, the materials available, and the author’s capability in studying pronunciation. Therefore, the Qièyùn inevitably contained flaws. Accordingly, the Qièyùn was also criticized from two aspects. On the one hand, some scholars disagreed or failed to understand Lù’s methodology due to their knowledge of only certain dialects. As Jǐng Shěn (景審) of the Táng dynasty wrote in the preface of Huì Lín’s (慧琳) Yīqiè jīng yīnyì (一切經音義), The pronunciation and meaning of the Tripitaka, Since ancient times, when people were trying to make use of sinographic liaison, they would choose the pángniǔ (旁紐), neighboring initials, for alliteration, which was started from Fú Qián (服虔), a literatus in the Hàn dynasty, with no settled principles. Therefore, it was difficult to distinguish the Wú (吳) dialect from the Qín (秦) dialect or tell the voiceless rhymes from the voiced rhymes.1 Lǐ Fú (李涪) slandered the Qièyùn in his Kānwù (刊誤), Critical textual research, as follows: “The dialect of Wú is so confounding that the rising and departing tones are mixed, and sinograms with the same pronunciation are placed in different rhymes… Why should he wantonly distinguish between the rhymes of dōng (東) and dōng (冬) or the sounds of zhōng (中) and zhōng (終)?”2 Wǔ Xuánzhī claimed that “Fú Qián was the first to use sinographic liaison, and it was not completely clear. Therefore, I took the spoken pronunciation as evidence for the rhyme dictionary.”3 One of the methods of opposing Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn was to engage in critical textual research, as Lǐ Fú did, but other scholars created new rhyme dictionaries on their own, such as Wǔ Xuánzhī’s Yùnquán, Zhāng Jiǎn’s (張戩) Kǎoshēng qièyùn (考聲切韻), The Qièyùn for textual research on initials, and Chén Tíngjiān’s (陳廷堅) Yùnyīng (韻英), A rhyme dictionary reflecting the spoken pronunciations of Cháng’ān in the Táng dynasty. The original intention of this school was to sharply denounce Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn and replace it. But at that time, due to the Qièyùn’s official status among rhyme dictionaries and people’s preference for traditional and extensive knowledge as well as an understanding of the standards of studying pronunciation, the opposition was not strong enough, at least not enough to remove the Qièyùn from its authoritative position. In contrast, another school, dissatisfied with the Qièyùn, chose not to replace the Qièyùn with another rhyme dictionary but only to correct its errors and supplement it by adding sinograms or notes. With time, these works replaced the Qièyùn and

32  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? became popular, which is an interesting event in the history of Chinese historical phonology. This school held two kinds of criticisms of Lù’s Qièyùn, both of which can be described as using someone’s own spear to attack their own shield. On the one hand, according to the standard of widening the way of making poetry with rhymes, they felt that Lù’s rhyme dictionary was inconvenient for practical use. “Since literati could not stand for its fastidiousness,” they required that similar rhymes be interchangeable with each other or merged into the same category. As the result, “literati such as Xǔ Jìngzōng (許敬宗) reported to the court in detail their opinion that those rhymes close to each other should be merged.”4 Furthermore, as far as the actual use of rhymes in the poetry of the Táng dynasty is concerned, the rhymes in post-​Táng-​style poetry are almost the same as those in the Shīyùn (詩韻), Rhyme dictionary for poetry, of later days and pre-​Táng-​style poetry, which generally correspond to the 16 rhyme gatherings.5 Meanwhile, in the process of supplementation, many words and notes were added to make the rhyme dictionaries more like a classified encyclopedia to facilitate the creation of literary works. Since then, the sequence from the Guǎngyùn to the Lǐbù yùnlüè; Píngshuǐyùn (平 水韻), Píngshuǐ rhymes; Pèiwén yùnfǔ (佩文韻府), Pèiwén rhyme collections; and Pèiwén shīyùn (佩文詩韻), Pèiwén rhyme dictionary for poems; become the main line in the development of rhyme dictionaries. On the other hand, based on the standard of appreciating phonological awareness, some held that the analysis of sounds by Lù Fǎyán in the Qièyùn was not precise enough. Furthermore, such problems as the distinction of qīngzhuó (清濁), voiceless and voiced;, kāihé (開闔), unrounded and rounded; hóngxì (洪細),large-​to-​small apertures; initials; medial vowels; and so on, had not been well resolved by then. These problems needed to be studied thoroughly in the rhyme dictionaries. As Sūn Miǎn stated in the preface to the Tángyùn, “Subsequently, some literati like Yuán Qīngzǐ (元青子) and Jí Chéngzǐ (吉成子) … studied a great many historical records and other books to try to clearly distinguish the voiceless and voiced rhymes.”6 Lǐ Lóngjī (李隆基), or Emperor Xuánzōng (玄宗) of the Táng dynasty, held that “people have not distinguished the use of rhymes since ancient times, and neither has Lù Fǎyán successfully reformed them in the Qièyùn.”7 Therefore, he decided to compile the Yùnyīng himself to solve the problem of the undistinguished rhymes that he had mentioned, for the study of spoken pronunciation. This problem can be approached in two ways. One is to revise and enlarge the rhyme dictionaries and subdivide rhyme groups to highlight qīngzhuó, kāihé, and hóngxì in rhyme dictionaries. However, according to the goal of widening the way of making poetry with rhymes, this approach runs counter to the requirement of reducing the rhyme groups and adding interpretative content. As Sūn Miǎn said, “if the rhyme groups were further divided in detail, the rhyme categories would suffer from over fragmentation and fall into the trap of diction restraints.”8 Obviously, this is a dead end. The other way is to omit the part that is unrelated to phonology by tabulating

Analysis of the Development of Rhyme Dictionaries  33 the rhymes to comprehensively demonstrate the initials, rhymes, intermediate sounds, and qīngzhuó. To do this, however, the original form of the rhyme dictionaries must be broken first. Therefore, we can observe that even though Lù Fǎyán advocated the pursuit of both widening the way of making poetry with rhymes and appreciating phonological awareness, the conflict between these two purposes was so intense that they could not coexist. Separating them was imperative. Because rhyme dictionaries like Sūn Miǎn’s Tángyùn gave priority to the goal of widening the way of making poetry with rhymes, declaring that it was unworkable to subdivide rhyme groups into fragmentary parts, it would not be long before the set of rhyme tables, as an appropriate form to help rhyme dictionaries follow the path of appreciating phonological awareness, was produced.

Notes 1 See Wáng Guówéi’s Guāntáng jílín Volume Eight: “Tiānbǎo yùnyīng chén tíngjiān yùnyīng zhāngjiǎn kǎoshēng qièyùn wǔ xuánzhī yùnquán fēnbù kǎo” (《天寶韻英》、 陳廷堅《韻英》、張戩《考聲切韻》、武玄之《韻銓》分部考), A study of the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng, Chén Tíngjiān’s Yùnyīng, Zhāng Jiǎn’s Kǎoshēng qièyùn, and Wǔ Xuánzhī’s Yùnquán, respectively. 2 Refer to “Qièyùn” in the Lǐfú kānwù (李涪刊誤), Lǐ Fú’s critical textual research, in the Bǎichuān xuéhǎi (百川學海), A collection of various learning. 3 Quoted from Zhào Yīntáng (趙蔭棠), Děngyùn yuánliú (Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1957), 7. 4 Fēngyǎn (封演), Fēngshì wénjiànjì (Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1985), 16. 5 See Shǐ Cúnzhí (史存直), “Cóng táng qījiāshī de yòngyùn qíngkuàng kàn qièyùn de xìngzhì (從唐七家詩的用韻情況看《切韻》的性質), On the nature of the Qièyùn from the using of rhymes in the poetry of seven famous literati in the Táng dynasty,” in Hànyǔ yīnyùnxué lùnwénjí (漢語音韻學論文集), A paper collection of Chinese phonology, Shanghai: Huádōng Shīfàn Dàxué Chūbǎnshè (華東師範大學 出版社), East China Normal University Press, 1997, 179–​200. 6 Sūn Miǎn (孙愐), Tángyùn xù (唐韻序), Preface to the Tángyùn, in the Guǎngyùn (廣韻), Enlarged rhyme dictionary, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1935, 10. 7 Cited from the eighth volume of Guāngtángjílín by Wáng Guówéi: “Tiānbǎo yùnyīng chén tíngjiān yùnyīng zhāngjiǎn kǎoshēng qièyùn wǔ xuánzhī yùnquán fēnbù kǎo”. 8 Ibid., 12.

6 Problems in the Qièyùn and the Understanding of It in the Táng Dynasty

The question now is whether the Qièyùn has any problems, and if the answer is yes, how serious are they? Furthermore, did people in the Táng dynasty realize these problems, and did they think it was necessary to make any changes? Sinographic liaison, invented by linguists in ancient China, is a clever method for the phonological notation of sinograms given the absence of either an alphabet or alternative phonological symbols by using two other sinograms, and it contains many reasonable principles. What exactly are the principles of sinographic liaison? People who stipulated sinographic liaison at the time of its creation did not state them clearly. However, we can infer from the current system of sinographic liaison (SL) that the general method is that the SL initial determines the initial of the sinogram liaised while the SL final determines the rhyme, which includes kāihé, hóngxì, and tones. The reason why I say the “general method” is that there are many exceptions to this method. How should we explain these exceptions? Some people hold the opinion that if we combine the SL initials and SL finals, most of these exceptions can be explained naturally. Therefore, only a very small number of real exceptions to sinographic liaison exist. However, I do not think the problem is so simple because, on many occasions, people still cannot know the exact pronunciation even when the SL initials and finals are grouped. The original book written by Lù Fǎyán is lost, and the earliest Qièyùn available now is the Wángyùn, from which we can still find some information. In the Qièyùn yīnxì (切韻音系), Phonological system of the Qièyùn, written by Lǐ Róng (李榮), several valuable statistical tables are provided about the SL finals of sinographic liaison in the Wángyùn. These tables are as follows: (1) Classified statistical table of the SL finals of the labial sinograms in kāihé rhymes; (2) Summary table of the SL finals, taking labial sinograms as kāi sinograms; (3) Summary table of the SL finals, taking labial sinograms as hé sinograms; (4) Summary table of the SL finals liaison and the sinograms liaised that differ in division; (5) Summary table of the SL finals and sinograms liaised that differ in their kāihé.1 Lǐ Róng stated, “in the differentiation of kāi and hé, it is meaningless to talk about unroundedness or roundedness of labials as they can be neither or both at the same time.” This is quite right. The classified collection DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-7

Problems in the Qièyùn and the Understanding of It  35 of the SL finals of the liaison of labial sinograms in kāi and hé rhymes is listed in Table 1. Table 1 is easy to understand. The only trouble might be how to perform xìlián2 (the method of interconnecting sinographic liaisers). The question is whether the labial should be listed in the kāi or hé rhyme, or should it be listed in the kāi and hé rhymes separately according to the kāi and hé of the SL finals? The indecisiveness of these methods is reflected in later rhyme tables. However, when we view Tables 1–​3 together, the issue becomes more complex. Because a labial sinogram can take any kāi and hé sinogram as its SL final, this labial sinogram can be taken as the SL final for any other kāi and hé sinogram. Then, for example, if a labial pàn (盼) takes the kāi sinogram xiàn (莧) as its SL final (in the Wángyùn, “pàn (盼), liaised as pī (匹) xiàn (莧)”), and pàn (盼) itself happens to be the SL final of a hé sinogram such as guān (鱞) (for example, in the Wángyùn, “guān (鱞), liaised as gǔ (古) pàn (盼)”, or if a labial sinogram takes a hé sinogram as its SL final (for example, in the Wángyùn, “bǐng (丙), liaised as bīng (兵) yǒng (永)”), and it is taken as the SL final of a kāi sinogram (for example, in the Wángyùn, “yǐng (影), liaised as yú (於) bǐng (丙)”), then, since the labials are put between them, should these SL finals be categorized as kāi or hé through xìlián? Lǐ Róng did not make clear notes on this situation in his survey table. Our census counts a total of 12 (uncategorized) rhymes.3 At the same time, deciding whether a labial is kāi or hé is not easy if it is used as the SL final. If we take the SL initial as the discriminating criteria, which means that the pronounced sinogram will be kāi if the SL initial is kāi and vice versa, it is much easier to distinguish kāi and hé. (Of course, it is still not an easy task—​see the preceding discussion.) However, if the SL initial is a dúyùn ((獨韻) monorhyme) sinogram, a sinogram in the rhyme tables of both exclusively kāi and hé rhymes, then, when the SL initial of a sole rhyme (a rhyme table with only kāi or hé rhymes) and the SL final of the labial are put together, it will be very hard to judge whether the pronunciation of the sinogram liaised is kāi or hé.4 There are many examples of such a case. The number of minor rhymes Lǐ Róng listed in Table 2 is 65, among which 41 (63%) take a dúyùn sinogram as the SL initial. The number of minor rhymes he listed in Table 3 is 95, among which 69 (73%) take a dúyùn as the SL initial. If we put these two calculations together, we can see that at least 17 rhymes were in confusion.5 For example, in the guài (夬) rhyme, the kāi rhyme jiè (芥) is liaised as gǔ (古) mài (邁), and the hé rhyme guài (夬) is liaised as gǔ (古) mài (邁); in the fā (发) rhyme, the kāi rhyme yì (刈) is liaised as yú (鱼) fèi (肺), and the hé rhyme huì (穢) is liaised as yú (於) fèi (肺), and so on. This is the situation relevant to labials. Lǐ Róng listed those that are not relevant to labials in Table 5. They are as follows: 1. For the case when the SL initial is kāi, the SL final is hé, and the sinogram to be liaised is kāi, there is one minor rhyme, relating to one rhyme. 2. For the case when the SL initial is hé, the SL final is kāi, and the sinogram to be liaised is hé, there are seven minor rhymes, relating to seven rhymes.

36  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? 3. For the case when the SL initial is neuter while the SL final is kāi and the sinogram to be liaised is hé, there are ten minor rhymes, relating to six rhymes.6 For the sinograms used in sinographic liaison, the minor rhyme is usually the only thing that matters. So why do we take the rhyme as the statistical unit? If we view the question in isolation, it seems to just be a matter of minor rhymes. However, if we take the method of xìlián for phonological categorization, we find that the failure to distinguish the kāihé of minor rhymes is likely to cause confusion for the entire rhyme. Anyone who has ever tried xìlián for phonological categorization with sinographic liaison would agree with me. That is why I attach importance to certain so-​called “limitations” of sinographic liaison. All the aforementioned situations involve a total of 43 rhymes, or 37 after the removal of duplicates. The Qièyùn, written by Wáng Rénxù, includes 195 rhymes in total, including 86 neuter rhymes. Of the remaining 109 kāi or hé rhymes, the number of problematic kāi and hé rhymes is 37 (34%). If 29 rhymes are added (23 if redundancies are removed), including 37% of the minor rhymes in Table 2 and 27% in Table 3,7 the number of problematic kāi and hé rhymes would be 60 (55%), which is more than half of the total. This is a rather severe problem, and this is only a problem with kāi and hé. Another issue exists with hóngxì. From Table 4 by Lǐ Róng, it can be found that this case involves 12 rhymes in total (not counting redundancies). Besides the issue of kāihé and hóngxì, the problem of chóngniǔ doublets (重紐), undistinguished phonological contrast of sinographic liaison in rhyme tables, is also involved. From the materials classified by Lǐ Róng, we can identify 41 cases of chóngniǔ doublets in 26 rhymes of eight groups involved in the Wángyùn. (If a rhyme includes kāi and hé and both have chóngniǔ doublets, this would be counted as two cases.) Perhaps the number would be higher if more parameters were considered. Finally, a problem of qīngzhuó rhymes exists. We will discuss this later. Now, what we need to clarify is whether people in the Táng dynasty realized those serious problems in the Qièyùn in the way we describe it. If people at that time did not take this problem very seriously, it would be absurd if we tried to regulate sinographic liaison with today’s standard of kāihé and hóngxì. However, if people in the Táng dynasty had already realized these problems and made some attempts to solve them, then our discussion of these problems would be somewhat grounded. I studied the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty to answer this question. The materials I used were mainly the Shíyùn huìbiān, the Shuōwén jiězì yùnpǔ (說文解字韻谱), A rhyme dictionary of the Shuōwén jiězì, written in the small seal style, by Xú Kǎi (徐鍇), and the Shuōwén jiězì (說文解字), Origins of sinograms, revised by Xú Xuàn (徐鉉). In addition, I also used the Guǎngyùn for reference. Much of the Guǎngyùn quotes “texts from the past”—​that is, the examples of sinographic liaison are based on materials

Problems in the Qièyùn and the Understanding of It  37 from previous dynasties.8 However, we put it in the “notes” considering that it was written in the Sòng dynasty. In the process of inspection, it became obvious that the rhyme dictionaries before and after the Tángyùn could be divided into two categories. One category includes the first version of the Qièyùn, the second version of the Qièyùn, the first version of the Wángyùn, the second version of the Wángyùn, and the Wángyùn with an afterword by Sòng Lián (宋濂). Another category includes the Tángyùn; the Yùnpǔ (韻譜), Rhyme spectrum; the Shuōwén jiězì revised by Xú Xuàn; and the Guǎngyùn. Obviously, the second category is based on the reorganization of the sinographic liaison system in the first category. The results of my study are provided in Table 6.1. Table 6.1 On the “failure to reform” of Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn from the sinographic liaisers (SL initials and finals) in the Wángyùn with Sònglián’s afterword Table 6.1.1  Large and small apertures undifferentiated Rhyme sòng 送

dōng 冬

Problem found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Remark

“Fèng (鳳), liaised as féng (馮) gòng (貢).” The small aperture rhymes use the SL final of the large aperture. If the xìlián (系聯interconnecting) method is used according to the SL final, the four labial sinograms and qióng (焪) of the xī (溪) initials should all be categorized as large aperture sounds. (Qióng (焪) is liaised as qù (去) fěng (讽).)

Unchanged in all the books mentioned in this table.

In the GY, qióng (焪) is liaised as qù (去) zhòng (仲).

Gōng (恭) is liaised as Gōng (恭) is liaised jū (駒) dōng (冬). The as jù (俱) róng (容) small aperture rhymes in the Yùnpǔ and use the SL final of the the Shuōwén jiězì large aperture. Both annotated by Xú cōng (樅) and Xuán. zhōng (蜙) use gōng (恭) as the SL final.

Gōng (恭) is liaised as jiǔ (九) róng (容) in the GY. The gōng (恭), cōng (樅), and zhōng (蜙) all belong to the zhōng (鍾) rhyme with an annotation mentioning Lù Fǎyán's mistake. (continued)

38  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.1  Large and small apertures undifferentiated Rhyme hǎi 海

gē 歌

Problem found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Remark

Chǎi (茝) is liaised as Other versions may Chǎi (茝) is chāng (昌) dài (殆). The explain chǎi (茝) to doubted to be small aperture rhymes be liaised as a large aperture use the SL final of the chāng (昌) dài (待), sinogram. large aperture. chāng (昌) dài (紿), or chāng (昌) gǎi (改), all of which are the SL final of the large aperture because this rhyme has no rhymes of the small aperture. Shé (虵) is liaised as yí Shé (虵) is a variant In the GY, shé (虵) is (夷) kē (柯); guō (㗻) graph of shé (蛇). liaised as shí (食) is liaised as yú (于) In the WYⅡ, it is zhē (遮) and tuō gě (戈); xuē (鞾) is liaised as shí (食) (託) hé (何). It is liaised as xī (希) zhē (遮), tǔ (吐) not liaised as yí (夷) bō (波). These small hé (何), or yí (夷) kē (柯), perhaps aperture rhymes all use kē (柯), which is because the liaisers the SL final of the large the same as in the are not appropriate. aperture. Wángyùn. In the WYⅠ and In the GY, guō (㗻) WYⅡ, the liaison belongs to the of ɡuō (㗻) is the hé (和) rhyme, same as that of the liaised as hù (户) Wángyùn. (In the gē (戈). If guō (㗻) WYⅡ, guō (㗻) is is regarded as a mistakenly liaised large aperture as dīng (丁) sound, then the gē (戈).) rhyme books of As for xuē (鞾), the the Tang dynasty Wángyùn stated had a redundant that no liaiser of sinogram for the this sinogram is same rhyme; if given by Lù Fǎyán. it is regarded as It now can be a small aperture liaised as either sound, then the huǒ (火) gē (戈) GY confused the or xī (希) bō (波), large aperture and which might small aperture be different sounds. pronunciations of archaic and middle Chinese.

Problems in the Qièyùn and the Understanding of It 39 Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.1  Large and small apertures undifferentiated Rhyme

mǎ 馬

yàng 漾

gēng 庚

gěng 梗

Problem found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Remark

Originally, xuē (鞾), The GY explained liaised as huǒ (火) xuē (鞾) to be gē (戈), was a large liaised as xū (許) aperture sound and yuē (𦚢),which became a small became a small aperture sound in aperture sound. the Suí and Táng dynasties, liaised as xī (希) bō (波), but this liaison is not appropriate. Xiè (灺) is liaised as xú (徐) yǎ (雅). Chě (奲) is liaised as chē (車) xià (下). The small aperture rhymes all use the SL final of the large aperture.

Xiè (灺) is liaised as xú (徐) yě (野) in all the books of this table. Chě (奲) is liaised as chē (車) zhě (者) in all the books of this table.

Fáng (防) is liaised as fú (扶) làng (浪). Làng (浪) belongs to the dàng (宕) large aperture rhyme.

In the TY, the liaisers In the Guangyun, are visually unclear fáng (防) is liaised in the original text, as fú (扶) and the SL final kuàng (況). seems to be kuàng (況).

Shēng (生) is liaised as suǒ (所) jīng (京). Shēng (生) is the large aperture sinogram and jīng (京) is a commonly used SL final of the small aperture.

In the SWJZYP and The zhuāng (莊) the SWJZXX, initials of the four shēng (生) is liaised rhymes of the as suǒ (所) gēng (庚) rhyme gēng (庚). set can use the SL finals of both large and small apertures.

Shěng (省) is liaised as suǒ (所) jǐng (景). Jǐng (景) is a small aperture sinogram.

Unchanged.

(continued)

40  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.1  Large and small apertures undifferentiated Rhyme

jìng 敬

mò 陌

Problem found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Jìng (敬) is a small Unchange. However, aperture SL final. shēng (生), liaised An example of a as suǒ (所) gēng large aperture liaised (更), was changed sinogram is hōng (㵾), into the liaison of liaised as chǔ (楚) suǒ (所) jìng (敬) in jìng (敬). the TY. Gēng (更) and mèng (孟) Jìng (敬) is liaised as are large aperture jū (居) mìng (命) SL finals. And the in the WYⅡ, gǔ small aperture liaised (古) qìng (慶) in sinograms are jìng (敬), the SWJZYP, and liaised as jū (居) jū (居) qìng (慶) in mèng (孟), and yíng the TY. Yíng (迎) (迎), liaised as yú (魚) is liaised as gēng (更). yú (魚) jìng (敬) in the WYⅠ. Labial SL finals are confused in terms of aperture. For example, huò (嚄) of the large aperture is liaised as hú(胡) bó(伯), and of the small aperture is liaised as yú (于) mò (陌) .

Cè (栅) is liaised as cè (惻) jǐ (戟). Suǒ (索) is liaised as suǒ (所) jǐ (戟). Jǐ (戟) is a small aperture sinogram.

is not found in other rhyme dictionaries. The GY put it into the huò (嚄) rhyme. If these two sinograms should not be differentiated, then the WY redundantly put them together; if they should be differentiated, then the GY mistakenly mixed them together. Unchanged.

Remark

Problems in the Qièyùn and the Understanding of It 41 Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.2  Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to the use of labial sounds Rhyme zhì 寘

wèi 未

xiè 蟹

guà 卦

Problems found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Remark

Huì (恚) as a rounded Unchanged. sinogram is liaised as wū (於) bì (避) while bì (避) is liaised as bì (婢) yì (義). Yì (義) is an unrounded SL final. Jì (既) is liaised as jū (居) In the SWJZYP and wèi (未). Wèi (未) is the SWJZXX, liaised as wú (無) fèi (沸) is liaised fèi (沸). Fèi (沸) is as fāng (方) liaised as fǔ (府) wèi (未) so that wèi (謂). Jì (既) is all the labial unrounded and wèi (謂) sounds belong is rounded. to the category of unrounded sinograms and are unrelated to rounded sinograms. Both unrounded and Unchanged. rounded sinograms use labial SL finals. For examples, jiě (解) as an unrounded sinogram is liaised as jiā (加) mǎi (買) while xiāo (枵) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as gū (孤) mǎi (買). Both unrounded and rounded sinograms liaised use labial SL finals. For examples, unrounded sinograms have four rhymes, whereas guà (卦), liaised as gǔ (古) mài (賣), is rounded sinograms.

The rounded category of this rhyme has only one minor rhyme.

In the SWJZXX, guà (卦) is liaised as gǔ (古) huái (懷), pronounced the same as guài (怪).

(continued)

42  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.2  Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to the use of labial sounds Rhyme fèi 廢

guài 怪

guài 夬

Problems found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Remark

Both unrounded and rounded sinograms use labial SL finals. For examples, yì (刈) as an unrounded sinogram is liaised as yú (魚) fèi (肺), and huì (穢) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as wū (於) fèi (肺).

All the books in this table explained it in the same way.

The unrounded category of this rhyme has only one minor rhyme.

Both unrounded and rounded sinograms use the labial SL final bài (拜). For example, as unrounded sinograms, jiè (誡) is liaised as gǔ (古) bài (拜) and shā (鎩) is liaised as suǒ (所) bài (拜). As a rounded sinogram, kuì (聵) is liaised as wǔ (五) bài (拜).

In the SWJZYP, the TY, and the SWJZXX, kuì (聵) is liaised as wǔ (五) guài (怪) so that all the labial sounds belong to the category of unrounded sinograms and are unrelated to rounded sinograms.

Both unrounded and In the TY and the rounded sinograms SWJZYP, use labial SL finals gài (芥) is liaised as mài (邁). Gài (芥) as an gǔ (古) hē (喝) so unrounded sinogram is that all the labial liaised as gǔ (古) sounds belong mài (邁) and guài to the category (夬) as an unrounded of unrounded sinogram is liaised as sinograms and gǔ (古) mài (邁) (both are unrelated sinograms use the same to rounded liaisers). sinograms.

Problems in the Qièyùn and the Understanding of It 43 Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.2  Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to the use of labial sounds Rhyme zhì 質

yuàn 願

mò 没

Problems found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Remark

Both unrounded and All the books in this In DYJL, yù (䫻) rounded sinograms table explained it is liaised as liaised use the labial in the same way. yú (于) yù (聿), SL final bǐ (筆). For In the SWJZYP, but the reference example, yǐ (乙) as an yù (䫻) is liaised as for this liaison is unrounded sinogram yún (筠) bǐ (筆). not known. is liaised as yú (於) YJ categorized bǐ(筆) and yù (䫻) as a yù (䫻) as an rounded sinogram is unrounded liaised as yú (于) bǐ (筆). sinogram perhaps after the unrounded liaisers. Both unrounded and rounded sinograms use the labial SL final wàn (萬). For example, the unrounded sinogram jiàn (建) is liaised as jū (居) wàn (萬) and the rounded sinograms yuǎn (遠) and juàn ( ) are liaised as yú (于) wàn (萬) and jiù (臼) wàn (萬), respectively.

In all the books in this table, yuǎn (遠) is liaised as yú (于) yuàn (願).

Both unrounded and Unchanged. The unrounded rounded sinograms In the rhyme category of this liaised use the labial dictionaries, the rhyme has only SL final mò (没). There hén (痕) rhyme has one minor rhyme. are many examples for no entering tone. rounded sinograms. For an unrounded example, hé (麧) is liaised as xià (下) mò (没). (continued)

44  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.2  Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to the use of labial sounds Rhyme shān 潸

jiǎn 襇

Problems found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Both unrounded and rounded sinograms use the labial SL final bǎn (板). For example, xiàn (僴), the unrounded sinogram of xiá (匣) initials, is liaised as hú (胡) bǎn (板). Huǎn (睆), the rounded sinogram of xiá (匣) initials, is liaised as hù (户) bǎn (板).

In the SWJZYP, xiàn (僴) is liaised as xià (下) nǎn (赧) so that it is differentiated from the rounded sinograms of the same initial group. However, the other sinograms taking bǎn (板) as an SL final remain unchanged. In the SWJZXX, xiàn (僴) is liaised as xià (下) jiǎn (簡), which is mixed into the chǎn (產) rhyme.

1.Xiàn (莧) as an In the TY, xiàn (莧) unrounded sinogram is liaised as is liaised as hóu (侯) hóu (侯) jiǎn (襇). bàn (辦). Huàn (幻) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as hú (胡) biàn (辨). Bàn (辦) and biàn (辨) share the same pronunciation. 2.Guān (鱞) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as gǔ (古) pàn (盼) using a labial SL final. Pàn (盼) is liaised as pǐ (匹) xiàn (莧) using an unrounded SL final.

The TY has no minor rhyme of guān (鱞).

Remark

Problems in the Qièyùn and the Understanding of It 45 Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.2  Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to the use of labial sounds Rhyme xiá 黠

xiǎn 獮

xiàn 線

gē 歌

Problems found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Remark

Both unrounded and Unchanged. rounded sinograms liaised use the labial SL final bā (八). For example, xiá (黠) as an unrounded sinogram of xiá (匣) initials is liaised as hú (胡) bā (八). Huá (滑) as a rounded sinogram of xiá (匣) is liaised as hù (户) bā (八). Zhuàn (撰) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as shì (士) miǎn (免). Miǎn (免) is liaised as wáng (亡) biàn (辯), and biàn (辯) is liaised as fú (符) jiǎn (蹇). Jiǎn (蹇) is an unrounded sinogram.

Unchanged.

Both unrounded and rounded sinograms use the labial SL finals biàn (變) and biàn (弁). For example, the unrounded sinogram, yàn (彦) is liaised as yú (魚) biàn (變) and the rounded sinograms zhuàn (饌) and quàn (𥛁) are liaised as shì (士) biàn (變) and qiū (丘) biàn (弁) respectively.

In the SWJZYP, The TY does not have zhuàn (饌) is liaised sufficient sinograms as zhì (志) liàn (戀). for this rhyme. In In the TY, the GY, quàn (𥛁) zhuàn (饌) is liaised is liaised as qū (區) as shì (士) liàn (戀). juàn (倦).

Xuē (鞾) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as xī (希) bō (波), using a labial SL final; bō (波) is liaised as bó (博) hé (何) using an unrounded SL final.

In the GY, xuē (鞾) is liaised as xū (許) yuē (𦚢).

(continued)

46  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.2  Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to the use of labial sounds Rhyme mà 𧜗

duó 鐸

gēng 庚

Problems found

Corrections made in books like the TY

The rounded sinograms guà (坬), liaised as gǔ (古) mà (駡), and huà (化), liaised as huò (霍) bà (霸), all use labial SL finals while mà (駡), liaised as mò (莫) jià (駕), and bà (霸), liaised as bó (博) jià (駕), use unrounded SL finals.

Unchanged.

Guō (郭) is liaised as Unchanged gǔ (古) bó (博), and bó (博) is liaised as bǔ (補) gè (各). Guō (郭) is a commonly used rounded SL final, and gè (各) is a commonly used unrounded SL final. Héng (橫) is liaised as Unchanged. hú (胡) máng (盲), and máng (盲) is liaised as wǔ (武) gēng (庚). Héng (橫) is a commonly used rounded SL final, and gēng (庚) is commonly used unrounded SL final. Máng (盲) is also used as an SL final for unrounded liaison, such as tàng (趟), liaised as zhú (竹) máng (盲).

Remark

Problems in the Qièyùn and the Understanding of It 47 Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.2  Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to the use of labial sounds Rhyme gěng 梗

jìng 敬

Problems found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Remark

The rounded sinograms kuàng (礦), liaised as gǔ (古) měng (猛), and méng (瞢), liaised as wū (烏) měng (猛), all use labial SL finals. Měng (猛), liaised as mò (莫) xìng (杏), uses unrounded an SL final.

Unchanged.

In the YJ and the QYZZT, méng (瞢) is regarded as an unrounded sinogram.

Yǐng (影) as an The SWJZXX unrounded sinogram is changed “yǒng (永) liaised as yú (於) liaised as róng (榮) bǐng (丙) using a labial bǐng (丙) ” into SL final, while bǐng (丙) “yǒng (永) liaised is liaised as bīng (兵) as yú (于) jǐng (憬) yǒng (永) with yǒng (永) ” so that the SL being an unrounded final does not use sinogram. a labial sound. The liaisers of bǐng (丙) were unchanged. Both unrounded and rounded sinograms use the labial SL final mèng (孟). For example, xìng (行) as an unrounded sinogram of xiá (匣) initials is liaised as hú (胡) mèng (孟) and huáng (蝗) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as hú (胡) mèng (孟).

The rounded category of this rhyme has only one minor rhyme. In the GY, xìng (行) is liaised as xià (下) gèng (更), with rounded and unrounded sinograms differentiated when matching with the same initial. (continued)

48  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.2  Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to the use of labial sounds Rhyme

mò 陌

gēng 耕

zhèng 諍

Problems found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Remark

Bǐng (柄) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as bǐ (彼) bìng (病) and bìng (病) is liaised as pí (皮) jìng (敬), with jìng (敬) as an unrounded sinogram.

In the TY and the SWJZYP, bìng (病) is liaised as pí (皮) mìng (命), using a labial SL final.

The rounded category of this rhyme has only one minor rhyme.

Both unrounded and rounded sinograms liaised use a labial SL final. Unrounded sinograms usually use mò (陌) as an SL final such as gé (格), liaised as gǔ (古) mò (陌); rounded sinograms usually use bó (伯) as an SL final such as guó (虢), liaised as gǔ (古) bó (伯).

Unchanged.

Hóng (宏) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as hù (户) méng (萌) using a labial SL final, while méng (萌) is liaised as mò (莫) gēng (耕) using an unrounded SL final.

Unchanged.

Both unrounded and Unchanged. rounded sinograms use the labial SL final bèng (迸). For example, as unrounded sinograms, chēng (牚) is liaised as chǒu (丑) bèng (迸), and zhèng (諍) is liaised as zhāi (側) bèng (迸). As a rounded sinogram, hōng (轟) is liaised as hū (呼) bèng (迸).

The rounded category of this rhyme has only one minor rhyme. In the QYK, hōng (轟) is categorized as an unrounded sinogram according to its liaisers.

Problems in the Qièyùn and the Understanding of It 49 Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.3 Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to other reasons Rhyme zhī 支

zhì 寘

zhì 至

tài 泰

jiā 佳

Problems found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Remark

Wéi (爲) is liaised as Unchanged. wěi (薳) zhī (支). Wéi (爲) is a commonly used SL final for rounded sinograms while zhī (支) is a commonly used SL final for unrounded sinograms. In the WYⅠand the SWJZXX, wěi (僞) is liaised as wēi (危) shuì (睡). In the SWJZYP, wěi (僞) is liaised as wēi (危) ruì (瑞).

In the WYⅠand the SWJZXX, wěi (僞) is liaised as wēi (危) shuì (睡). In the SWJZYP, wěi (僞) is liaised as wēi (危) ruì (瑞).

Wèi (位) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as wěi (洧) jì (冀). Jì (冀) is an unrounded sinogram.

In the SWJZXX, wèi (位) is liaised as yú (于) bèi (備), using a labial SL final.

Huì (會) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as huáng (黃) dài (帶). Dài (帶) is an unrounded sinogram.

In the TY and the SWJZXX, huì (會) is liaised as huáng (黃) wài (外).

Wā (媧) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as gǔ (古) chái (柴). Chái (柴) is an unrounded sinogram.

In the KMBQQY , wā (媧) is liaised as gǔ (古) wā (咼). In the SWJZYP, wā (媧) is liaised as gǔ (古) wā (鼃). In the SWJZXX, wā (媧) is liaised as gǔ (古) wā (蛙).

In the GY, wèi (位) is liaised as yú (于) kuì (愧).

(continued)

50  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.3 Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to other reasons Rhyme xiàn 霰

yǎng 養

dàng 宕

Problems found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Xiàn (縣), as a rounded sinogram, is liaised as huáng (黃) liàn (練). Liàn (練) is an unrounded sinogram.

In the WYⅡ, xiàn (縣) is liaised as xuán (玄) xuàn (絢). In the SWJZYP, xiàn (縣) is liaised as huáng (黃) xuàn (絢). In the SWJZXX, xiàn (縣) is liaised as hú (胡) juān (涓).

Wǎng (往) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as wáng (王) liǎng (兩). Liǎng (兩) is a commonly used unrounded SL final.

Unchanged.

Remark

Làng (浪) is confusingly In the WYⅡ, the TY, In the GY, kuàng (曠) used for both rounded and the SWJZYP, is liaised as kǔ (苦) and unrounded SL kuàng (曠) is bàng (謗), and finals. For example, liaised as kǔ (苦) huáng (潢) is kàng (抗) as an bàng (謗), using a liaised as hū (乎) unrounded sinogram is labial SL final. kuàng (曠). liaised as kǔ (苦) làng (浪) whereas kuàng (曠) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as kǔ (苦) làng (浪). And háng (吭) as an unrounded sinogram is liaised as xià (下) làng (浪) whereas huáng (潢) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as hú (胡) làng (浪).

Problems in the Qièyùn and the Understanding of It 51 Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.3 Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to other reasons Rhyme qīng 清

jìng 勁

xī 昔

qīng 青

jiǒng 迥

Problems found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Remark

Xīng (騂) as an unrounded Unchanged. sinogram is liaised as xī (息) yíng (營), using a rounded SL final.

In the WYⅡ and the GY, there is xīng (觪) in the xīng (騂) rhyme. Whereas the YJ categorized xīng (騂) as an unrounded sinogram and xīng (觪) as a rounded sinogram, the SSYP categorized both as rounded sinograms.

Xiòng (夐) as a rounded Unchanged sinogram is liaised as xū (虛) zhèng (政), using an unrounded SL final.

The QYK categorized it as unrounded sinogram according to its liaisers.

Yì (役) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as yíng (營) zhī (隻), using an unrounded SL final.

Unchanged.

Yíng (熒) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as hú (胡) dīng (丁), with dīng (丁) being the commonly used unrounded SL final.

In the SWJZYP and the SWJZXX, yíng (熒) is liaised as hù (户) jiōng (扃).

Jiǒng (泂) as a rounded sinogram is liaised as gǔ (古) dǐng (鼎) and jiǒng (迥) is liaised as hù (户) dǐng (鼎), both using unrounded SL finals.

In the SWJZYP, jiǒng In the Zhang’s GY, (泂) is liaised as jiǒng (迥) is liaised gǔ (古) jiǒng (迥) as hù (户) dǐng (頂). and jiǒng (迥) is also In the Gù's GY, liaised as hū (乎) Cáo's GY, and jiǒng (炯). In Ming dynasty GY, SWJZXX, jiǒng (迥) jiǒng (迥) is liaised is liaised as hù (户) as hù (户) jiǒng (熲). yǐng (穎). (continued)

52  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Table 6.1 Cont. Table 6.1.3 Confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to other reasons Rhyme jìng 徑

Problems found

Corrections made in books like the TY

Remark

Both unrounded and rounded sinograms liaised use dìng (定) as a labial SL final. For example, jìng (脛), the unrounded sinogram of xiá (匣) initials, is liaised as hù (户) dìng (定) whereas yíng (熒), the rounded sinogram of xiá (匣) initials, is liaised as hú (胡) dìng (定).

Unchanged.

The QYK categorized yíng (熒) as an unrounded sinogram according to its liaisers.

Explanations: The names of books such as WYⅠ, WY Ⅱ, and KMBQQY in the table above are all from Shíyùn huìbiān. SWJZXXA refers to Shuōwén jiězì annotated by Xú Xuàn. QYK was written by Chén Lǐ in the Qīng dynasty. DYJL was written by Páng Dàkūn in the Qīng dynasty. SSYP was written by Liáng Sēngbǎo in the Qīng dynasty.

The results presented in the table reveal the following: 1. Most of the issues of hóngxì in the Wángyùn were corrected after the Tángyùn. It is from the remaining unsettled issues that we can obtain some insight. For instance, the light labials are probably hóng. Chǎi (茝) is supposed to be a sound with a large aperture. It is listed in division Ⅲ because of its initial. The initials of the zhuāng (莊) group can be liaised as rhymes of either hóng or xì. 2. One-​third of the confusions between kāi and hé caused by labials were resolved. A situation exists where, in certain rhymes, only one minor rhyme with kāi or hé pronunciation exists. Therefore, the rhyme cluster cannot play the role of the SL final. Here, the best solution is to take the labials of neuter roundedness as the SL final. Given that this part cannot be changed, what was corrected accounts for over half of the cases of confused kāi and hé. 3. More than half of the cases caused by other factors have also been improved. If the improved numbers of all cases account for more than half of the total, this is by no means a small proportion, especially

Problems in the Qièyùn and the Understanding of It  53 considering that the missing portions of rhyme dictionaries from the Táng dynasty make the verification of many sinograms impossible. Therefore, this number is in fact a rather cautious estimate. However, we believe that scholars in the Táng dynasty realized the problems in the Qièyùn. We also used the Guǎngyùn during the process of verification. If the Guǎngyùn is also considered, the proportion is higher. In that case, is it possible that the work of correction had been done when the Guǎngyùn was being compiled? I do not think so. First, enough evidence exists illustrating that sinographic liaison had been improved before the appearance of the Guǎngyùn. Second, compared with previous rhyme dictionaries, the Guǎngyùn was supplemented with many minor rhymes, whose phonological notation perhaps did not follow the principle of improving the sinographic liaison mentioned above. Here is an example: The xiǎn (獮) rhyme in the Qièyùn has a sinogram zhuàn (撰), which is liaised as shì (士) miǎn (免). The SL initial is a dúyùn whereas the SL final is a labial. It was hard to decide its kāihé, and it was exactly copied by the Guǎngyùn. Furthermore, one minor rhyme was added: zhàn (棧), liaised as shì (士) miǎn (免).9 Therefore, the SL initials and the SL finals of these two minor rhymes are all the same. This only makes the problem more confusing. Third, some of the sinographic liaisons in the Guǎngyùn were incorrectly revised, for example, the minor rhyme wǎi (崴) in the jiē (皆) rhyme. In all the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty, it was liaised as yǐ (乙) guāi (乖) and it was taken as a hé rhyme, whereas the Guǎngyùn changes it into the sinographic liaison of yǐ (乙) and jiē (皆), which leaves no trace of the hé rhyme at all. At the same time, one minor rhyme was added: hóu is the liaison of yǐ (乙) and xié (諧), which increases the confusion about the difference between these two kinds of sinographic liaisons. Of course, the cases of sinographic liaison in the Guǎngyùn might have a reliable basis, but all signs indicate that the compilation of the Guǎngyùn mainly lay in collecting material widely and quoting texts from the past rather than determining sinographic liaison and testing pronunciation. Some improved cases of sinographic liaison came from the collection of previous rhyme dictionaries, and it is the literati in the Táng dynasty who discovered and even improved upon the faults in the Qièyùn. This suggests one additional question. The purpose of rhyme tables is to clarify the phonological system in rhyme dictionaries and help people understand sinographic liaison. Making a rhyme dictionary certainly requires that the author himself could settle these easily confused issues of kāihé and hóngxì, which are hard to clarify from the SL initials and finals. Because this problem cannot be verified from the SL initials and finals, the author of the rhyme dictionaries could only test it with their own pronunciations. Therefore, the closer the time of making rhyme tables was to the composition

54  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? of the Qièyùn, the closer the content of kāihé and hóngxì would be to the exact situation of the Qièyùn. However, even so, all these: kāi, hé, hóng, and xì would still be marked with the historical features of their time. Taking one of the flaws of the Qièyùn as an example to analyze, I find that I am actually comparing the Qièyùn with those later rhyme tables. If the later rhyme tables are contradictory, it will be difficult for me to settle the issue. One example is the sinogram yíng (䁝), which belongs to the gěng (梗) rhyme. Its SL final is a labial, and it was taken as kāi in the Yùnjìng and the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú but as hé in the Qīyīn lüè. Therefore, dealing with this confusion is a painstaking process. Some of the problems are not the faults of sinographic liaison but are rather due to the rhyme table author’s interpretation according to the pronunciation of their time. Therefore, if we believe that the early rhyme tables we now have, such as the Yùnjìng, reflect the real situation of the Qièyùn, then we must believe that these two works are very close in their compilation time. Otherwise, according to the present view, it would be much more difficult for people to study sinographic liaison through rhyme tables by the time of the Sòng dynasty because of phonological changes. Because the pronunciation has changed, how could the author of rhyme tables distinguish kāi, hé, hóng, and xì of the Qièyùn based on situations that were not reflected in sinographic liaison? For example, when considering a sinogram liaised through the sinographic liaison of shì (士) and miǎn (免), how do people decide its kāihé and hóngxì? We can draw some inspiration from the manner of dealing with some minor rhymes in the Qièyùn kǎo by Chén Lǐ listed in the above-​mentioned table. The literati of the Táng dynasty were able to compile such rhyme tables like the Qièyùn, whereas literati of the Sòng dynasty could only compile rhyme tables that reflected the pronunciation of the Sòng dynasty—​unless a blueprint of the Táng rhyme tables was already present before the Sòng dynasty.

Notes 1 Lǐ Róng (李榮), Qièyùn yīnxì (切韻音系), Phonological system of the Qièyùn, Beijing: Kēxué Chūbǎnshè (科學出版社), Science Press, 1956), 97–​103. 2 According to the principle that the SL initial is the same with the initial of the sinogram liaised and the SL final is the same with the rhyme of the sinogram liaised, the SL initials corresponding with the same initial are classified into the same initial category and the SL finals corresponding with the same rhyme are classified into the same rhyme category. This method in Chinese historical phonology is xìlián, which was put forth by Chén Lǐ (陳澧) in the Qīng dynasty. 3 These twelve rhymes are “寘未襇獮歌禡鐸庚梗開梗開敬耕.” For more information, see Table 2. 4 If the kāihé of a single rhyme is discriminated according to the standards of some rhyme tables, the situation would be more complex. 5 These 17 rhymes are “廢蟹卦怪夬質没願潸襇黠線庚梗敬陌諍”. 6 Lǐ Róng (李榮), Qièyùn yīnxì, Beijing: Kēxué Chūbǎnshè (科學出版社), Science Press, 1956, 103.

Problems in the Qièyùn and the Understanding of It  55 7 The 23 rhymes are “紙旱翰末德脂旨微隊文吻問物軫混慁阮月陽漾藥麥職”. 8 Dīng Dù (丁度), et al. Jíyùn: xù (集韻·序), Preface to the Jíyùn, Shanghai: Shànghǎi Gǔjí Chūbǎnshè (上海古籍出版社), Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House, 1985. 9 There is only one kind of sinographic liaison for zhàn (棧), in the previous rhyme dictionaries, namely, zhàn (棧), liaised as shì (士) xiàn (限). Until in the Guǎngyùn, one more pronunciation was added for zhàn (棧) in chǎn (產) rhyme.

7 The Historical Process of the Generation of Rhyme Tables

The previous chapter discussed how scholars in the Táng dynasty understood and determined the sinographic liaison in the Qièyùn. From this, we inferred that rhyme tables might have been introduced in the Táng dynasty. However, “might have been introduced” is not the same as “were introduced.” After all, rhyme tables differ considerably from rhyme dictionaries. Although the transformation from rhyme dictionaries to rhyme tables can be attributed to the introduction of the Siddham script from India, rhyme tables could not have been made in one step. Instead, there must have been transitional stages which developed into rhyme tables. Unfortunately, very few materials have been passed down. However, extant sources still provide clues, and in the following we will identify some such clues.

7.1  Introduction of the study of the Siddham script from India The method of the rhyme tables was first introduced from Indian studies, and therefore the first step of rhyme table studies is to focus on the introduction of Sabdavidyā from India, especially the table form of the matching of initials and rhymes. There are three sources relevant to this investigation. The first source is the Brāhmana (婆羅門書). The Suí shū: jīngjízhì (隋書·經籍志), Record of bibliography, states, “Since the late Hàn Dynasty, when Buddhism was prevalent in China, a Sanskrit book was introduced from Serindia. In this book, all sounds were represented using 14 sinograms, which expressed considerable meaning with minimal text. This book is called the Brāhmana.”1 The Suí shū: jīngjízhì does include a volume of the Brāhmana, but this volume is missing. However, in the Huìruìzhuàn (慧叡傳), Biography of the monk Huìruì, Volume VII of the Gāosēngzhuàn (高僧傳), Biographies of dignitary monks, written by the monk Huìjiǎo (慧皎) in the Liáng (梁) dynasty, 14 initial categories are mentioned. The book states, Xiè Língyùn (謝靈運), living in Chén County (陳郡), was dedicated to Buddhism. He had excellent knowledge of many sounds that deviated

DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-8

The Historical Process of the Generation of Rhyme Tables  57 from common pronunciations. He then asked Huìruì about certain sinograms in the Buddhist sutras, and different meanings of the sounds, and wrote the Shísìyīn xùnxù (十四音訓敘), An introduction and explanation of 14 sounds, to match Sanskrit with Chinese and clarify the meaning so as to make words convincing.2 Now the Shísìyīn xùnxù is missing, too. However, according to Volume V of the Shittanzō (悉曇藏) written by the Japanese monk Annen (安然), Xiè Língyùn elaborated on Siddham in Huìjūn’s (惠均) Xuányìjì (玄義記), A record of mysterious meanings. The general idea is as follows: The Mahāparinirvāna-​sūtra (大涅槃經) has 50 scripts. They are the roots of all the words. They are connected to each other to make syllables. Of the 50 scripts, 12 are initials, and 34 are rhymes.3 The 50 scripts are listed below. Although this paragraph mentions that “they are connected to each other” and “[they are put together] to make syllables,” the form of the table is not used. Perhaps Xiè Língyùn had already used a table in his book, but it is impossible for us to know. What we can know is that there was a Sanskrit–​Chinese version of the Brāhmana at that time, and it was written by a Chinese literatus who was “dedicated to Buddhism.” The second source is the Xītán zhāng (悉曇章), The Siddham chapter. Siddham means “achievement” in Sanskrit. It is also called Siddhirastu, meaning “eager to succeed” in Sanskrit. Perhaps the syllable table with which Indian children learn the spelling was titled with such auspicious words, and therefore, Chinese monks chose “Siddham” as the name of the Sanskrit syllable table.4 Luó Zhènyù (羅振玉), a scholar from Shàngyú (上虞) in Zhejiang province, published a book named the Nièpán jīng xītán zhāng (涅槃經悉曇章), Siddham chapter of the Nirvana Sutra, by the monk Kumarajiva (罗什三藏) in the Jìn dynasty. Zhào Yīntáng thought that the table in this book accorded with the arrangement of rhyme divisions later, which placed initials on the first line and rhymes to the right column of it. Therefore, this book might be enlightening for rhyme divisions. For instance, the Table 7.1 of velars is on the following page (the Sanskrit alphabet is omitted and simplified here). In this form, it bears little resemblance to the rhyme tables of later dynasties, but it is like the present-​day gojūonzu (五十音圖), Japanese 50 sounds chart. Compared to the Brāhmana, this source is much more closely related to the study of rhyme tables because the matching of initials and rhymes is involved. In Luó Zhènyù’s view, the Xītán zhāng was written by Kumārajīva Tipiwakqcariya (羅什三藏) in the Jìn dynasty. I think this might be true. In the Xītán zìmǔ bìng shìyì (悉曇字母並釋義), An introduction and interpretation of the letters of the Siddham script, Dharma Shaku Kukai (釋空海) of Japan provided annotations to the 12 sinogram initials: jiā (伽), jiā (迦), qí

58  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Table 7.1 The table of velars in Nièpán jīng xītán zhānga é

jìng

qié

qū

jiā

Velars

yǎ

誐

𠷐

伽

佉

伽

牙音

啞

zhī 吱

qié 伽 qí 祇

qū 佉 zhī 吱 zhī 吱 qū 駈 qū 駈 qì 契

jiā 伽 jī 雞 jī 雞 jù 俱 jù 俱 jì 計 jì 計 hào 哠 hào 哠 jìn 唫 jìn 唫

é 誐 ní 倪 ní 倪 yú 愚 yú 愚 chī 喫 chī 喫 yí

jù 𠰠 jī 䛴

qū 㘗 qū 㘗 qí

qiáo 嘺

qiáo 橋

xiāo 嘵

yǎn 噞

qián

qiàn 欠

yí

yán 嚴

ā 啊 yī 噫 yī 咿 yù 喐 yōu 嚘 yǎ 啞 yě 嘢 wū 嗚 páo 咆 ǎn 唵 ā 啊

a Translated by Luóshísānzáng (羅什三藏譯), Nièpán jīng xītán zhāng (涅槃經悉談章), Siddham chapter of the Nirvana Sutra, Shàngyú Luózhènyù (上虞羅振玉), 1917. According to the Nièpán jīng xītán zhāng, the table is also used in the Děngyùn yuánliú, p. 30.

(祈), jī (鶏), jù (句), jù (句), jì (計), gài (蓋), jù (句), hào (皓), qiàn (欠), and jiā (迦). The annotations are as follows. The 12 sinograms are the zhuǎn (轉), literally “turn,” the term for earlier rhyme tables, of jiā (迦). From the root jiā (迦), 12 sinograms are produced. In this way, 12 sinograms can be born from one sinogram initial. Subsequently, one zhuǎn produces 408 sinograms. If the èrhé zhuǎn (二合轉) and sānhé zhuǎn (三合轉) are present, 3,872 sinograms are produced. The natural and inherent root of the sinograms that are produced by zhuǎn is the Xītán zhāng.5 The “natural and inherent root of sinograms” is just as necessary for the translation of Buddhist sutras as Xiè Língyùn’s need to “match Sanskrit with Chinese” and “make words convincing” as quoted earlier. Kumārajīva Tipiwakqcariya (鳩摩羅什) is a master translator who is proficient in both Sanskrit and Chinese. When he summarized previous experience and lessons and organized translation activities on a large scale to introduce the Xītán zhāng, it was necessary and possible for him to sort out the Sanskrit and Chinese and formulate the “inherent root of sinograms.”

The Historical Process of the Generation of Rhyme Tables  59 The third source is the Huáyán zìmǔpǔ. The table is included in the Buddhāvatamsaka-​mahāvaipulya-​sūtra (大方廣佛華嚴經) translated by Sikshananda (實叉難陀). It is also included in the Děngyùn jílüè edited by Páng Dàkūn (龎大堃). This table is like the Xītán zhāng, with initials above sinograms and rhymes to the right. (However, there are slight differences. As is mentioned above, in the Xītán zhāng, a row of rhymes is on the right, but no headings are provided for the initials, whereas in the Huáyán zìmǔpǔ, a row of initials is above but no headings are provided for rhymes.) The 42 initials above are ā (阿), duō (多), bō (波), zuǒ (左), nà (那), luó (邏), yí (柂) (light articulation), pó (婆), chá (茶), shā (沙), pó (嚩), duō (哆), yě (也), sè (瑟), zhà (吒), jiā (迦), suō (娑), mó (麽), jiā (伽) (light articulation), tā (他), shè (社), suǒ (鏁), yí (柂), shē (奢), qū (佉), chā (叉), shāduō (沙多), rǎng (壤), héluóduō (曷攞多), pó (婆), chē (車), suōmó(娑麽), hēpó (訶婆), cī (縒), jiā (伽), zhàná (吒挐), suōpó (娑頗), pójiā (婆迦), yěpó (也婆), shìzuǒ (室左), chà (侘), and tuó (陀).6 The 13 rhymes on the right are yǎng (佒), ēng (鞥), wēng (翁), wū (烏), āo (爊), āi (哀), yī (醫), yīn (因), ān (安), yīn (音), ān (諳), ōu (謳), and ā (阿). Zhào Yīntáng thought that this table, which was produced between the Yuán and Míng dynasties, was not included by Sikshananda because the sounds it recorded were the same as those in the time when the Zhōngyuán yīnyùn (中 原音韻), Rhyming system of central China, was written. However, I think that this table was likely produced by Sikshananda because the 13 rhymes are almost the same as the 13 rhyme gatherings of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, which means that they can represent the main phonological categories of the Northern Sòng Dynasty. The span between the Northern Sòng dynasty and the Táng dynasty is not very long, and certain dialects which included 13 main phonological categories may have been present in the Táng Dynasty. Overall, because of the needs of the translation of Buddhist sutras, the table form of the matching of initials and rhymes must have been introduced into China before the Táng dynasty. This is the first step in the origin of rhyme tables.

7.2  The sinicization of the matching pattern of initials and rhymes The second step was the sinicization of the matching pattern of initials and rhymes. Of the sources mentioned above, the Brāhmana and Shísìyīn xùnxù are missing. Disagreement exists over the time when the Huáyán zìmǔpǔ was written. The source in the Xītán zhāng conforms to the matching pattern of initials and rhymes in Sanskrit. To convert Siddham into Chinese rhyme tables, the first step was sinicization. This sinicization applied Siddham to the Chinese language. (1) In the matching pattern of initials and rhymes, the “initials” and the “rhymes” should be Chinese ones. (2) Chinese tones had to be considered. In summary, the form of Siddham must be combined with the rhyme dictionaries and sinographic liaison of the Chinese language. Although it is unclear when this task began, by the time the Yùnquán was written by Wǔ Xuánzhī, the sinicization process was almost complete. The Yùnquán, written by Wǔ Xuánzhī, who lived at the time of Emperor Gāozōng (唐高宗), the third emperor of the Táng dynasty, is a masterpiece

60  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? of Chinese historical phonology worthy of note. Although the original book is lost, from the Míngyìlì (明義例), Guidelines to the book, the general arrangement of the book can be deduced. The Míngyìlì states, There are four principles for formulating a rhyme dictionary. First, the four tones [even, rising, departing, and entering] have fixed positions. Second, zhèngniǔ (正紐) are taken as references [zhèngniǔ indicates sinograms with the same initial and similar rhymes but different tones; vertically, to let sinograms with the same initial be in the same column] so that the SL initial and the SL final in a sinographic liaison are self-​evident. For example, rén (人), rěn (忍), rèn (仞), and rì (日). Third, sinograms with the same rhymes, for example chūn (春), zhēn (真), rén (人), and lún (倫), are arranged in the same line horizontally to produce the correct pronunciations. Fourth, sinograms with phonic but not graphic forms, such as the rhyme of entering tone in the chén (辰) rhyme set where the other three rhymes are chén (辰) rhyme of even tone, shèn ) rhyme of rising tone, and shèn (眘) rhyme of departing tone. It is regarded as the missing part and is not filled in.7 Oya Toru, a Japanese linguist, believed that the principles accorded with the principles of rhyme tables. Although Zhào Yīntáng compared the Yùnquán to the Yùnjìng, he said, We must not regard the Yùnquán as a real work on rhyme divisions. First, the very mention of zhèngniǔ indicates that at that time 36 sinogram initials had not been invented yet. Second, when we read the Shittanzō, we should know that the function of 50 rhymes is replaced by the 16 rhyme gatherings (including tōng (通), jiāng (江), zhǐ (止), yù (遇), xiè (蟹), zhēn (臻), shān (山), xiào (效), guǒ (果), jiǎ (假), xián (咸), dàng (宕), gěng (梗), liú (流), shēn (深), and céng (曾)). We will know that Yùnquán does not have well-​ arranged rhyme tables or gatherings yet. Furthermore, the book contains 15 volumes including many rhyme sinograms found in the Guǎngyùn and the Jíyùn. It is by no means a book studying rhyme divisions.8 This viewpoint is controversial. Zhào Yīntáng held that “the 36 sinogram initials were prerequisites for producing rhyme tables,” so he neglected Wǔ Xuánzhī’s second and fourth principles. Wǔ Xuánzhī’s first and third principles, that “the four tones have fixed positions” and “arrange the same rhymes in the same line horizontally,” are discussed as conforming to the general arrangement of a rhyme dictionary. However, when it comes to having fixed positions and arranging in the same line horizontally, we should be aware that the rhyme dictionary mentioned here is not an ordinary one. Instead, it seems to be one with rhyme tables. Wǔ Xuánzhī’s second principle mentioned that “zhèngniǔ are taken as references so that the SL initial (upper sinogram) and the SL final (lower sinogram) in a sinographic liaison are self-​evident.”

The Historical Process of the Generation of Rhyme Tables  61 From this, it can be inferred that rhyme tables must have been arranged. Otherwise, there would be no upper lines or lower lines. Moreover, for an ordinary rhyme dictionary, why make the minor rhymes with the same initials vertically aligned? Without the form of a table, how can the sinograms with the same initials be vertically aligned? From this perspective, the aforementioned “fixed positions” and “arrange in the same line horizontally” are for arranging rhyme tables rather than rhyme dictionaries, in which volumes are classified according to four tones and the sinograms with the same rhymes are placed into a single rhyme group. Wǔ Xuánzhī’s fourth principle is especially to the point. If tables are not present, the following is incoherent: “sinograms with phonic but not graphic forms as the missing parts are not filled in.” Missing parts only occur in tables. If it were for ordinary rhyme dictionaries, the fourth principle would be useless. Overall, Wǔ Xuánzhī’s Míngyìlì does not provide formatting guidelines for an ordinary rhyme dictionary, but for rhyme tables. The Yùnquán is by no means a rhyme dictionary like the Guǎngyùn or the Jíyùn. Instead, it is a rhyme dictionary in the form of a table. Its general arrangement might be the one shown in Table 7.2 which is on the following page. (To avoid lengthy paragraphs, I take the rhymes of jiāng (江), jiǎng (講), jiàng (絳), and jué (覺) as examples, which include comparatively fewer head sinograms. The head sinograms and the sinographic liaison of each rhyme should conform to rhyme dictionaries near the historical period of Wǔ Xuánzhī. Under current conditions, only the Wángyùn lives up to the requirement, but its head sinograms and annotations are greater than those in the Qièyùn.) As seen in Table 7.2, the possible form of the Yùnquán is very similar to that of the Sìshēng yùnpǔ (Rhyme tables of the four tones) written by Liáng Sēngbǎo (梁僧寶) of the Qīng dynasty. (I have emphasized this point in my study.) What differs is that perhaps under each rhyming sinogram of the Yùnquán, simple explanations are provided, just like rhyme dictionaries of the early Táng dynasty such as the Qièyùn and the Wángyùn. Therefore, the Yùnquán turned out to be much larger, up to 15 volumes.9 Therefore, the Yùnquán is significant in three aspects. First, in terms of rhyme dictionaries, the Yùnquán developed substantially in its form. Second, in terms of studying Sabdavidyā, the Yùnquán is the sinicization of Siddham. Notably, the sinicization was completed by those who were not religiously Buddhist. Third, in terms of the rhyme tables appearing in later dynasties, the Yùnquán is a transitional text between rhyme dictionaries and rhyme tables. If our inference is correct that the Yùnquán is such a rhyme dictionary like the Sìshēng yùnpǔ, then its birth time is not far from that of rhyme tables. Liáng Sēngbǎo of the Qīng dynasty wrote the Sìshēng yùnpǔ and Qièyùn qiúméng (切韻求蒙), Tables for the Qièyùn: a primer. The two books complement each other. The Qièyùn qiúméng was written before the Sìshēng yùnpǔ because Liáng Sēngbǎo already had rhyme tables as his blueprint. When rhyme divisions were first produced, the sequence of works was the reverse. Only when rhyme dictionaries such as the Sìshēng yùnpǔ appeared could

62  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Table 7.2 Conjectured complete table of the Yùnquán

Even tone 平 jiāng 江

Risingtone 上 jiǎng 講

Departing tone 去 jiàng 絳

Entering tone 入

gǔ shuāng

mò jiāng

nǚ jiāng

chǔ jiāng

bó jiāng xià jiāng

pǐ jiāng

lǚ jiāng

suǒ jiāng

古雙

莫江

女江

楚江

博江

下江

匹江

呂江

所江

jiāng 江 káng hóng 扛玒 gàng gāng 杠䚗 jiāng 茳 gāng 釭

máng 庬 máng máng 駹牻 máng máng 狵娏 máng máng 浝䵨 máng máng 哤蛖

náng 𦗳 nóng 𣰊 nóng 鬞 nóng 𩟊

chuāng 窓 zōng 稯 zōng 樅 chuāng

bāng 邦

xiáng 栙 xiáng 䜶 xiáng 降 gāng 缸 jiàng 洚

pāng 胮 pāng 𩐨

lóng 瀧

shuāng 雙 shuāng 䉶 shuāng 䝄 sǒng 愯

gǔ xiàng 古項

wǔ xiàng 武項

hú jiǎng 胡講

jiǎng 講 jiǎng 港 jiǎng 耩 jiǎng 傋 xiàng gǔ 巷古

mǎng 𠈵 mǎng 𪁪

xiàng 項 xiàng 缿

jiàng 絳 hóng 虹 jiàng 降 jiàng 洚

chā jiàng 叉降

hú jiàng 胡降

pǔ jiàng 普降

chuàng 䎫

xiàng 巷 xiàng 衖 hòng 闀

pàng 肨

gǔ yuè 古岳

mò jiǎo 莫角

nǚ jiǎo 女角

cè jiǎo 測角

běi jiǎo 北角

hù jiǎo 户角

pǐ jiǎo 匹角

lǚ jiǎo 呂角

suǒ jiǎo 所角

jiào 覺 jiào xué 斠鷽

miǎo 邈 miǎo mù 藐毣

nuò 搦 nuò 䚥

chuò 娖 chuò 䃗

bāo 剝 bó bó 駮

xué 學 què 確

pú 璞 bó bó 㩧懪

luò 犖

shuò 朔 shuò shuò 欶箾

xí jiǎo

mào miǎo

nuò

chuò

bó bó

xué

pǔ bào

shuò shuò

䚫角 jué què 桷搉

眊㦝 mào 瞀

搙 nuò

𪘏 chuò 娕

駁肑 yǎn bó 𢾑𥭖

嶨 xué 澩

樸暴 pǔ bó 㹒𢪊

槊㮶 shuò shuò 蒴𦂗

The Historical Process of the Generation of Rhyme Tables  63

báo jiāng

xū jiāng

kǔ jiāng zhái jiāng

chǒu jiāng

dū jiāng

薄江

許江

苦江

宅江

丑江

都江

páng 龐 pāng 胮

gāng 肛 páng 舽

qiāng 腔 kòng 控 kōng 悾 qióng 跫 kōng 涳

zhuàng 幢 zhuàng 撞 chuáng 橦

chǔn 惷 chuāng 𧡲

chūn 椿

bù xiàng 步項

wū xiàng 烏項

bàng 㭋 bàng 玤 bàng 棓 bàng 蚌

yǎng 慃

zhí jiàng 直降

chǒu jiàng 丑絳

zhēng jiàng 丁降

shì xiàng 士巷

chuáng 䡴 zhuàng 幢 chōng 憧 chuāng 䚎

chuàng 𥈄

zhuàng 戇

zhuàng 漴

báo jiǎo 薄角

xū jiǎo 許角

kǔ jiǎo 苦角

zhí jiǎo 直角

chì jiǎo 敕角

zhēng jiǎo 丁角

wū jiǎo 於角

shì jiǎo 士角

wǔ jiǎo 五角

zhāi jiǎo 側角

báo 雹 pū báo 𢷏

hè 㕰 gǒu xuè 豿

què 𣪊 què hú 愨觳

zhuó 濁 zhuó

chuō 逴 zhuó 晫

zhuó 㓸 zhuō zhuó 涿啄

wò 渥 wò yào 握藥

zhuó 浞 shēn zōu 莘齺

yuè 嶽 yuè yuè 樂㹊

zhuō 捉 zhuō 穛

pǎo bó

xuè xuè

què què zhuó zhuó chuō

zhuó zhuō

wò wò

zhuó zhuó

yuè

zhuō

跑 bó báo 𩣡

𩌥䤕 hè 翯

搉塙 濯㺟 踔 què què zhuó zhuó zhuó 確燩 鵫蠗 㪬

諑倬 zhuó zhuó 㧻晫

偓䮸 wò wò 鷽龏

鋜捔 zhuó zhuó 灂𤉐

鸑 yuè 𩓥

穱 zhuó 𧂒

(continued)

64  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Table 7.2 Cont. jiào 覺

jiào jiǎo 較龣 kū 㲄

miǎo jué 𤤴

báo 𥭓

báo báo 𦢊㿺 bào 趵

pū páo 攴鞄 pú 㙸

shuò 揱

rhyme tables such as the Qièyùn qiúméng be produced. The Yùnquán provides us with a useful clue to conduct further research to see if two books of this kind were produced around that period. The Sòngshǐ: yìwénzhì (宋史·藝文志), The bibliographical records in the history of the Sòng dynasty, and the Yùhǎi (玉海), Jade Sea, both include two volumes of the Sìshēng lèiyùn (四聲類韻), Classified rhymes in four tones, and Shēngyùn lèilì (聲韻類例), Guidelines to initials and rhymes, written by Jiá Shēngqīng (郟升卿). In the Yùhǎi, annotations indicated that the latter book was attached to the former. From the book names and the number of volumes, the two books remind us of the two books written by Liáng Sēngbǎo. That the latter book was attached to the former further confirms the hypothesis of the sequence of the birth of the two books. Will it reflect the traces of the birth of rhyme tables? Neither Jiá Shēngqīng nor his books can be traced. We can only keep a record of his materials so that people in the future might figure it out.

7.3  Collection and classification of initials Technically speaking, the Yùnquán is only a rhyme dictionary with the feature of rhyme tables. Compared to rhyme tables, it is still very rough in its pattern of compilation, which is mainly manifested in two aspects. Firstly, the initials in the Yùnquán are not yet arranged in a fixed order. These initials were likely to be arranged randomly, just like the initials in the Huáyán zìmǔpǔ. Therefore, in Table 7.2, the rhymes are arranged purposefully following the rhyme sequence in the Wángyùn instead of the classification of initials in later rhyme tables. Secondly, no division is used as in the rhyme tables of later dynasties. Let us examine how these two problems are resolved. When Siddham scripts were first introduced into China, they were classified into pí (毘) initials and chāo (超) initials. The 25 pí (毘) initials were further classified into five groups. These groups were the velar, dorsopostpalatal, velar (listed twice in the original), dental, and labial.10 However, the Sanskrit initial categories differ considerably from the Chinese categories, and after

The Historical Process of the Generation of Rhyme Tables  65

bào báo 骲窇 fù báo 鰒㿺 báo báo 䈏

hù 嗀

què què tiǎo 𤿩硞 嬥 què què zhào

zhú zhuó 孎 zhuó zhuó 琢𢁁 zhuó 卓

yào wò 箹腛 wò wò 幄 wō wū 喔剭 wò 媉

zhuó zhuó 鷟斮

zhuó 燋

the Sabdavidyā was introduced, it was not assimilated into Chinese all at once and different parts were prioritized. Firstly, according to the principle of Siddham, the method of sinographic liaison was created as a tool to mark the sound of sinograms. Secondly, the sinographic liaisons of sinograms were collected to compile rhyme dictionaries and stipulate the rhyming principles, facilitating the writing of literary works. At that time, the study of initials was not an urgent question, resulting in a delay in the classification of initials. By the time Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn was published, marking the completion of a comprehensive rhyme dictionary, literati concerned with the usage of rhymes began to switch their attention to initials. Wǔ Xuánzhī’s Yùnquán first brought this study to light. He “took zhèngniǔ as references.” Sinograms with the same initial were arranged in a column so that initials were sorted out and collected more easily. Consequently, by the time that Sūn Miǎn’s Tángyùn xù was published, the following ideas were formally proposed. “Initials can be classified into ‘labial, dental, guttural, lingual, and velar,’ which can be arranged in the proper order.” Such terms as “labial, dental, guttural, lingual, and velar” are somewhat like the five-​type initials in the pí (毘) initial category in Sanskrit. The commonality lies in the method, which not only proposes five types of initials but also might have taken the names of the five-​type initials of the pí (毘) initial category in Sanskrit for reference. The difference is that the terms used in Sūn Miǎn’s five-​type initials are much clearer,11 and perhaps more reasonable, than any translation of the five-​type initial terms of the pí (毘) initial in Sanskrit. In addition, Sūn Miǎn’s five-​type initials include all the Chinese initials, whereas the five-​type initials of the pí (毘) initial in Sanskrit exclude chāo (超) initials (fricatives and semivowels). Therefore, it is hard to conclude that Sūn Miǎn’s theory of five-​type initials was derived from the Siddham script directly. Some influence from Siddham might have been present, but it is more likely that Sūn Miǎn devised these terms based on the SL initial, taking the method employed in rhyme dictionaries such as the Yùnquán. In other words, he might have used the xìlián method towards the Qièyùn.

66  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Sūn Miǎn proposed the theory of five-​type initials—​“labial, dental, guttural, lingual, and velar.” Subsequently, were the five-​type initials classified into qīng (清), voiceless; and zhuó (濁), voiced sounds? Theoretically, if he compared them with Sanskrit materials, he could have done this. However, as a matter of fact, it might not be the case because, in the Siddham script, such terms like “qīng” or “zhuó” did not exist. Moreover, no strong evidence exists that Sūn Miǎn classified the five-​type initials as voiceless or voiced sounds. Sūn Miǎn stated, “The pronunciations of sinograms are determined by the five-​ type sounds which are represented by the traditional Chinese musical terms gōng (宮), shāng (商), jué (角), zhǐ (徵), and yǔ (羽). They are matched with sinograms to adjust the tones. They have qīng and zhuó sounds.”12 People have different understandings of this sentence. The term qīngzhuó (清濁) may be used for the wǔyīn (五音), five-​type sounds. (It is still uncertain whether wǔyīn refers to the five-​type initials. For example, Wáng Guówéi thought that wǔyīn referred to the five tones, namely, yīn (陰) the even-​shaded tone, yáng (陽) the even-​shined tone, shǎng (上) the rising tone, qù (去) the departing tone, and rù (入) the entering tone). Qīngzhuó may also be “matched with sinograms to adjust tones.” In this way, qīngzhuó is used for tones. This question is discussed in the following section.

7.4  Detailed classification and Analysis of the rhyme categories of the Qièyùn The classification of initials has provided another condition for the birth of rhyme tables, and the last condition is the theory of division. The principle and method of division will not be discussed here. However, one look at rhyme tables is enough to know the result of division, which is obvious. The rhyme categories of a set of rhyme tables decidedly outnumber the rhyme groups of the Qièyùn. Therefore, the premise of division is to further analyze rhyme groups. From what was analyzed in Chapter 6, it is known that the literati of the Táng dynasty analyzed and sorted out sinographic liaisons in the Qièyùn. In the Tángyùn xù: lùnyuē (唐韻序·論曰), Theory of rhyme, a preface to the Tángyùn, Sūn Miǎn states, “If the entries are classified in an overly detailed way, the rhyme groups will become cumbersome, which will cause the meaning of writing to be restricted by the form of language.” Sūn Miǎn must have read rhyme dictionaries in which the entries were classified in such an overly detailed way that the rhyme groups were cumbersome. Because the “meaning of writing” is “restricted by the form of language,” which is not conducive to widening the ways of versing with rhymes, Sūn Miǎn did not follow such rhyme dictionaries when he was compiling the Tángyùn, which explains why this kind of rhyme dictionary is unable to be seen. Fortunately, from extant materials, it is known that such a rhyme dictionary did exist at that time and in which rhyme categories were classified and analyzed overly in detail. This dictionary is the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng (天寶韻英), Rhyme dictionary

The Historical Process of the Generation of Rhyme Tables  67 written in the Tiānbǎo period of the Táng dynasty. In the “Huìlín yíqiè jīng yīnyì fǎnqiè kǎo” (慧琳《一切經音義》反切考), A study of sinographic liaison in the pronunciation and meaning of the Tripitaka, Huáng Cuìbó (黄 粹伯) states: And there was also a rhyme dictionary called the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng. The Tángzhì (唐志), Táng annals, states, “There were five volumes of the Yùnyīng. They were written in the 14th year of the Tiānbǎo (天 寶) period of the Táng dynasty.” The Táng huìyào (唐會要), The change of ancient laws and regulations in the Táng dynasty, states, “In April of the 14th Tiānbǎo year of the Táng dynasty, the emperor himself wrote a five-​ volume Yùnyīng and promulgated it to the Jíxiányuàn (集賢院), The royal academy of scholarly worthies, for making duplicates to be spread.” According to the Yùhǎi, Wéi Shù (韋述), in his Jíxiánjì (集賢記), A memorabilia of the royal academy of scholarly worthies, made the following annotations: our emperor thought that the usage of rhymes had not been regulated carefully since ancient times and Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn still failed to solve this problem. Therefore, our emperor rewrote the rhyme dictionary Yùnyīng and compiled it into five volumes, which had a total of 580 rhymes,13 with 439 old rhymes and 151 new rhymes. As a result of overly detailed analysis, there were altogether 19,177 rhyming sinograms.14 Because poetry was given unprecedented attention in the Táng dynasty, the study of historical phonology became so popular that even Lǐ Lóngjī (李隆 基), the emperor in the Tiānbǎo period of the Táng dynasty, engaged himself in compiling a rhyme dictionary. What interests me is not that the emperor compiled a rhyme dictionary, but why rhymes could be classified in such an overly detailed way in the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng. And what do the “old rhymes” refer to? These questions need to be studied in detail. From my point of view, there were only two possible ways for the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng to classify rhyme groups in this way. The first was to further classify the Lùyùn (陸韻), Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn, in detail, and the second was to take another dialect as a reference. However, according to the current study on the pronunciations of the Táng dynasty, the second might not have resulted in as many rhyme groups. In addition, Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn was mentioned by the emperor, and the rhymes in the Qièyùn were regarded as official rhymes in the Táng dynasty. Therefore, the emperor could only classify rhymes based on the Lùyùn. What was the standard if the rhymes were classified based on the Lùyùn? Qīngzhòng (輕重), light and heavy, and qīngzhuó (清濁), voiceless and voiced, might be the answer. In the Qièyùn xù (切韻序), Preface to the Qièyùn, Lù Fǎyán states, “If the ways of making poems with rhymes are to be broadened, the qīng and zhuó sounds should be mutually replaceable. If poetic meter is to be appreciated, the qīng and zhòng sounds need to be differentiated.”15 These words reflect his purposes of compilation and paved the way for people later

68  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? to classify rhymes in detail. He told readers very clearly that in his rhyme dictionary, qīng and zhuó sounds were mutually replaceable and qīng and zhòng sounds were different, but the latter principle was for the purpose of appreciating poetic meter. Lù Fǎyán also stated, “Those who are excellent in literary writing must have a good command of using initials and rhymes.”16 Fēng Yǎn (封演) stated, “Lù Fǎyán of the Suí dynasty, together with Yán Zhītuī (颜 之推) and Wèi Yànyuān (魏彦渊), made clear statements on the difference between Northern and Southern pronunciations and wrote the Qièyùn… as a reference for literary writing. ”17 It can be known from Lù Fǎyán’s two purposes that broadening “the ways of versing with rhymes” was primary, and therefore “qīng and zhuó sounds may be mutually replaceable.” By contrast, because differentiating qīng and zhòng sounds was only for “the purpose of appreciating poetic meter,” this principle did not need to be explicitly stated and could simply be implied in sinographic liaison. It seems unquestionable that the qīngzhòng and qīngzhuó were used for rhymes, but the explanations for this have varied throughout history. According to our study, in terms of qīngzhòng, the most reasonable explanations in the Northern and Southern dynasties were that they were even and uneven tonal categories. The Sòng shū: xiè língyùn zhuàn (宋書·謝靈運傳), Biography of Xiè Língyùn in the Sòng shū, Shěn Yuē (沈約) states: If the verses need to show the change of different musical rhymes and the contrast of rising and falling tones, then qīng sounds must be accompanied by zhòng sounds. In a bamboo slip, the initials and rhymes are completely different. In just two verses, the qīngzhòng are clearly distinguished. A person will not be qualified for poetic writing until he is fully aware of this principle.18 (emphasis added) The two italicized sentences perfectly align with the alleged theory of the “eight sound defects in prosody (八病說)”19 proposed by Shěn Yuē for rules of poetic meter, which include píngtóu (平頭), parallel head; shǎngwěi (上尾), consonant end; fēngyāo (蜂腰), wasp waist; hēxī (鶴膝), crane knee; dàyùn (大韻), unnecessary rhyming; xiǎoyùn (小韻), lesser unnecessary rhyming; zhèngniǔ (正紐), central initials; and pángniǔ (旁紐), side initials. The italicized text describes the matter positively whereas the theory of the eight sound defects in prosody does so negatively. The first italicized sentence and the last four sound defects in prosody all refer to initials and rhymes, whereas the second italicized sentence and the first four sound defects in prosody all refer to even and uneven tonal categories. However, Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn not only classified the even and uneven tonal categories but also further classified them into four tones. Therefore, qīngzhòng cannot be used to refer to even and uneven tonal categories. Therefore, it is likely that it refers to kāihé (開合), unrounded and rounded, as is said in the Qīyīn lüè. The Qièyùn hid kāihé and sometimes even large and small apertures in the liaisers so that those who wanted to appreciate poetic meter could do so.

The Historical Process of the Generation of Rhyme Tables  69 What do qīngzhuó (清濁) rhymes refer to? They must be the terms used to refer to yīnyáng (陰陽), shaded and shined, tones. The term yīnyáng had not been coined at that time, and therefore qīngzhuó was used to represent yīnyáng. According to present knowledge, yīnyáng tones are related to both initials and rhymes. Perhaps they are more closely related to voiced and voiceless initials. Therefore, to understand the sinographic liaison used by early scholars, it is necessary to observe the tones of the SL initial and the SL final. “The SL initial determines yīnyáng whereas the SL final determines the four tones.”20 Just like the present belief that tones are attached to primary vowels21, ancients thought that yīnyáng, together with the entire tone, was attached to rhymes. However, rhymes were represented by the SL final in ancient times, and therefore yīn and yáng tones were also represented by the SL final, resulting in the theory that rhymes were classified into qīng and zhuó categories. Some evidence for this is as follows: (1) For the zhǒng (腫) rhyme, Wáng Rénxù’s Kānmiù bǔquē qièyùn states, “zhǒng (腫), liaised as dū (都) lǒng (隴). It is regarded as an overvoiced sound.”22 Because the SL final is lǒng (隴), it is regarded as overvoiced.23 (2) The annotations, which were given to yīdōng (一東) in the preceding part of the Tángyùn collected by Wèi Hèshān (魏鶴山), state, “dōng (東), liaised as dé (德) hóng (紅). It is voiced with rounded articulation.”24 Because the SL final is hóng (紅), it is voiced. (3) The Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn states, “gāo (高) is guttural and voiced.”25 Gāo (高), liaised as gǔ (古) háo (豪). Háo (豪) is guttural and voiced. (4) The Sòngshǐ: yìwénzhì contains one volume called the Qīngzhuóyùn qián (清濁韻鈐), The art of voiced and voiceless rhymes, written by the monk Shǒuwēn (守溫). The Tōngzhì: yìwén lüè (通志·藝文略), Descriptive accounts of books in the Tōngzhì, has one volume called the Dìng qīngzhuó yùnqián (定清濁韻鈐), The art of defining voiced and voiceless rhymes, written by the monk Xíngqìng (行慶). (5) The Guǎngyùn: Biànzì wǔyīn fǎ (廣韻·辨字五音法), A method of distinguishing five-​type initials in the Guǎngyùn, states: Firstly, bìng (並) and bǐng (餅) are labials. Labials are voiceless. Bìng (並), liaised as bǔ (補) yíng (盈). Bǐng (餅), liaised as bì (必) yǐng (郢). Yíng (盈) and yǐng (郢) can be both voiceless and voiced. Secondly, líng (靈) and lì (歷) are linguals. Linguals are voiceless. Líng (靈), liaised as láng (郎) dīng (丁). Lì (歷), liaised as lǘ (閭) jī (激). Dīng (丁) and jī (激) are both voiceless. Thirdly, zhì (陟) and zhēn (珍) are dentals. Dentals are voiced. Zhì (陟), liaised as zhú (竹) lì (力). Zhēn (珍), liaised as zhì (陟) lín (鄰). Lì (力) and lín (鄰) can be both voiceless and voiced.26 Fourth, jiā (迦) and qū (佉) are velars. Velars are voiced. Jiā (迦), liaised as jū (居) jiā (伽). Qū (佉), liaised as qiū (丘) jiā (伽). Jiā (迦) is voiced. Fifth, gāng (綱) and gè (各) are gutturals. Gutturals are voiced. Gāng (綱), liaised

70  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? as gǔ (古) láng (郎). Gè (各), liaised as gǔ (古) luò (落). Láng (郎) and luò (落) can be both voiceless and voiced. In the second and fourth examples, qīngzhuó is closely related to the SL finals. However, in the first, third, and fifth examples, the SL finals can be both voiceless and voiced. Therefore, later in the Yùnjìng, pronunciations such as nasals, laterals, and semivowels were called qīngzhuó. Qīngzhuó refers to the sinogram chosen as either the initial or SL final, which can be either voiceless or voiced in rhyming. The term qīngzhuó in the Yùnjìng was used for rhymes and this was an old-​fashioned usage. As for terms like bùqīngbùzhuó (不清 不濁), nonvoiceless and nonvoiced, in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú and cìzhuó (次 濁),second-​voiced, in other rhyme dictionaries, the qīngzhuó was used for initials. (6) In the Yùnjìng, Qīyīn lüè, and Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, the order of gutturals is yǐng (影) initial, xiǎo (曉) initial, xiá (匣) initial, and yù (喻) initial, which has greatly confused a few later generations of scholars. For example, Chén Lǐ stated, The order in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú of the yǐng (影) initial, xiǎo (曉) initial, xiá (匣) initial, and yù (喻) initial was wrong. It seemed that the one who had made the order did not know that the yù (喻) initial was the voiced pronunciation of the yǐng (影) initial. In the Sìshēng děngzǐ, Wǔyīn jíyùn, and Qièyùn zhǐnán, these initials take the order of the xiǎo (曉) initial, xiá (匣) initial, yǐng (影) initial, and yù (喻) initial, in which case the matching of the yǐng (影) and yù (喻) initials was correct in terms of qīngzhuó. However, because the pairing of the xiǎo (曉) and xiá (匣) initials precedes the pairing of the yǐng (影) and yù (喻) initials, the order was also wrong. The yǐng (影) and yù (喻) initials are starting initials whereas the xiǎo (曉) and xiá (匣) initials are succeeding initials.27 In fact, the order of the yǐng (影), xiǎo (曉), xiá (匣), and yù (喻) initials is aligned with that of other sets of initials such as the bāng (幫), pāng (滂), bìng (並), and míng (明) initials, which proves that qīngzhuó was used for rhymes. All the sinograms under the yǐng (影) initial belong to qīng rhymes, namely the yīn tone, just like the situations of other sinograms under the bāng (幫), duān (端), and jiàn (見) initials. If the qīng (清) under the yǐng (影) initial was to be regarded as a voiceless initial, the imitated phonetic transcription of the qīng (清) initial would have to be (ʔ), just as Karlgren put it. The order was changed in rhyme tables such as the Sìshēng děngzǐ, which means that since then qīngzhuó was used for initials.28 (7) In the Huángjí jīngshì jiě qǐshùjué (皇極經世解起數訣), Techniques for solving frequency problems in the Huángjí jīngshì; henceforth

The Historical Process of the Generation of Rhyme Tables  71 Qǐshùjué, Zhù Mì (祝泌) of the Southern Sòng dynasty stated, “From Gù Yěwáng’s (顧野王) Yùpiān to Lù Fǎyán’s Guǎngyùn, the study of phonology in later dynasties was able to identify the hūxī (呼吸), aspiration and inspiration, of the five-​type initials and the qīngzhuó of the four tones.”29 In the Wǔyīn jíyùn: xù (五音集韻·序), Preface to the Wǔyīn jíyùn, Hán Dàoshēng (韓道昇) of the Jīn dynasty mentioned, “identifying the qīngzhòng (輕重) features of the five-​type initials and discussing the qīngzhuó (清濁) of the four tones.”30 Of course, yīnyáng (陰陽) here referred to the qīngzhuó used on four tones. However, by the time of Zhù Mì and Hán Dàoshēng, qīngzhuó was already generally used for initials. Their theories might be based on those of scholars of their predecessors. (8) Therefore, the statement that “they have qīngzhuó sounds” noted by Sūn Miǎn was meant to explain how “they are matched with sinograms to adjust tones.” It means that when “the pronunciations of sinograms are determined by wǔyīn sounds” and the wǔyīn sounds “are matched with sinograms to adjust tones,” the yīnyáng tones would naturally be pronounced. Using qīngzhuó (yīnyáng) for rhymes was extremely unscientific. Therefore, if I make use of this viewpoint to determine “the method of identifying four tones” at the back of the Guǎngyùn, some questions can be answered, especially if the sinographic liaison of an earlier time is used. For example, “chén (陳)” was both qīng (light (輕)) and qīng (voiceless (清)). It was annotated as “chén (陳), liaised as zhí (直) lín (鄰).”In the Wángyùn, there was “chén (陳), liaised as zhí (直) zhēn (珍).” Yīn (禋) was both qīng (light (輕)) and qīng (voiceless (清)). It was annotated as “yīn (禋), liaised as yú (於) lín (鄰).” In the Shuōwén jiězì yùnpǔ and Xú Xuàn’s (徐铉) Shuōwén, there was “yīn (禋), liaised as yú (於) zhēn (真).” Chūn (春) was zhòng (heavy (重)) and zhuó (voiced (濁)). It was annotated as “chūn (春), liaised as chāng (昌) lún (倫).” In the Wángyùn, there was “chūn (春), liaised as chāng (昌) chún (唇).” Hóng (洪) was zhòng (heavy (重)) and zhuó (voiced (濁)). It was annotated as “hóng (洪), liaised as hù (户) gōng (公).” In the Wángyùn, there was “hóng (洪), liaised as hú (胡) lóng (籠).” There are more examples. However, many other questions cannot be answered. This can be explained very clearly nowadays. Because the yīnyáng tones are related to voiceless or voiced features of initials, the correct tone will not be possible when the initial of the SL final is lost. No wonder Jǐng Shěn at that time exclaimed that “it was not easy to distinguish between qīng (清) rhymes and zhuó (濁) rhymes.” Yuán Qīngzǐ and Jí Chéngzǐ wanted to “determine the exact definition of qīngzhuó by researching a wide range of historical literature.” In addition, one volume of the Qīngzhuóyīn was included in the Rìběn jiànzài shūmù. It seemed that such a practice was popular among those who were elaborating on historical phonology in the Táng dynasty. It was in such circumstances that the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng analyzed rhymes in detail and classified qīngzhuó.

72  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? If this explanation has been acceptable, a calculation can be made about the number of classified rhyming sinograms of the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng. A total of 195 rhyming sinograms were classified into 58 rhyme sets in the Sòng-​postscript version of the Wángyùn. If rhyming sinograms were further classified into rounded and unrounded articulations with large and small apertures according to the “qīngzhòng” standard, there would be 291 rhyming sinograms, except those with chóngniǔ doublets, classified into 93 rhyme sets. If these rhyming sinograms were further classified according to qīngzhuó, the number of classified rhyming sinograms of the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng would be obtained. Therefore “439 old rhyming sinograms” might be from the rhyme dictionary read by Sūn Miǎn, in which “rhyme groups were cumbersome.” Because the classification of rhymes in it was not specific enough, the Xuánzōng emperor of the Táng dynasty wanted to “write an improved one” himself. Although Emperor Xuánzōng of the Táng dynasty had a brilliant mind, sometimes he also made mistakes. It is known that he made a fool of himself by mispronouncing pō (頗) for pí (陂) when he read wúpiān wúpō, zūn wángzhīyì (無偏無頗，遵王之義), to obey the orders of the king without bias, in the Shàngshū: hóngfàn (尚書·洪范), Governing rules of the Shàngshū. He clearly possessed limited knowledge of historical phonology. Perhaps he knew little about rhyme dictionaries as well. The Tiānbǎo yùnyīng was not passed down because, first, Ān Lùshān (安祿山) and Shǐ Sīmíng’s (史思明) rebellions (安史之亂) began shortly afterward and made the political situation turbulent, and, more importantly, the emperor ignored Sūn Miǎn’s warning that the rhyme groups would become cumbersome if the entries were classified in an overly detailed way, which served to make the essays linguistically restricted. Therefore, the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng was not of practical use. The fact that the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng was not passed down after it was written proved that rhyme dictionaries at that time could no longer undertake the tasks of both widening the way of making poetry with rhymes and appreciating poetic meter at the same time. The only solution to this problem was to make rhyme tables undertake the task of appreciating poetic meter. The detailed classification and analysis of rhyme dictionaries such as the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng directly resulted in the birth of rhyme tables. In addition to rounded and unrounded articulation with large and small apertures, even the usage of qīngzhuó gradually changed from rhyme-​oriented to initial-​oriented

Figure 7.1 An example of defining qīngzhuó with sinographic liaison.

The Historical Process of the Generation of Rhyme Tables  73 due to the hard-​ to-​ evaluate effort by the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng, which could only be defined as neither a success nor a failure. Originally, the question of qīngzhuó was left by the Lùyùn. Why did the literati of the Táng dynasty regard qīngzhuó as something related to rhymes? In my opinion, because the zhuó sounds of the most northern areas of the Suí and Táng dynasties had turned into qīng sounds,31 the qīngzhuó of initials came to be reflected by the changes of tone value. If qīngzhuó sounds are said to be related to each other, then they must be different. If the tone values of qīngzhuó sounds are the same, no such relation needs to be mentioned. Lù Fǎyán held that qīngzhuó sounds were related to each other, which was necessary for widening the way of making poetry with rhymes, but the relation between qīng and zhuó had to be maintained. In the Qièyùn, Lù Fǎyán combined the rhymes of various rhyme dictionaries. He is also believed to have combined the initials. However, he did not combine tones as he did rhymes. Instead, he accepted his predecessors’ theory of the four tones. The reasons were as follows. Firstly, the theory of four tones had been widely accepted. If the tones were combined and several new tones of different types appeared, these new tones would not have been accepted. Secondly, although, in the Táng dynasty, the tone values of ancient and present sounds differed from each other, just as those of the Northern and Southern areas, tonal categories were roughly the same. Previous rhyme dictionaries lacked relevant materials on this issue. Thirdly, although some dialects contained the classification of yīn and yáng for tones, the classification did not change the tones. For example, yīnpíng (陰平), even-​shaded, and yángpíng (陽平), even-​shined, tones still belonged to the category of even tones. Yīnshǎng (陰上), rising-​shaded, and yángshǎng (陽上), rising-​shined, tones still belonged to the category of rising tones. Fourthly, and more importantly, sinographic liaison was in chaos. Due to the lack of classification of yīn and yáng for tones when sinographic liaison was formulated, many confusing cases appeared when the SL initial was yáng and the SL final was yīn, or the SL initial was yīn and the SL final was yáng . If the voiced rhymes were to be sorted out thoroughly, the entire system of sinographic liaison would need to be reconsidered. Lù Fǎyán dared not take such a risk because it would not be easily accepted at that time. Emperor Xuánzōng of the Táng dynasty did not know that in ancient times, tones had no classification of yīn and yáng. He was unwise to think that people had not distinguished the use of rhymes since ancient times. However, he was right to say that Lù Fǎyán failed to reform them in the Qièyùn. Up to the Táng dynasty, a clear trend was present of zhuó sounds becoming qīng sounds, which also triggered the change in tone value, for example, voiced rising tones became departing tones. Accordingly, traditional Chinese phonologists began to pay more attention to this phenomenon. They had only two solutions if starting just from sinographic liaison: Firstly, they could choose to determine qīngzhuó according to the SL final as before. As

74  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? discussed above, this solution would bring about confusion because some cases were rather paradoxical. Secondly, they could choose to redefine the SL final. The method that the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng used is still unknown, but what is known is that Lǚ Kūn’s (呂坤) Jiāotàiyùn (交泰韻), Jiāotài rhyme, of the Míng dynasty was the first to use the SL final to indicate yīn and yáng.32 Also, there was no direct evidence that Emperor Xuánzōng had made such a reform. In fact, when rhyme tables were being arranged, the problem of qīng and zhuó rhymes could be easily identified and solved. Qīngzhuó could be first defined by the SL final and then the voiced rhyme of the sinographic liaison could be put under the sinogram zhuó (濁) and the voiceless rhyme of the sinographic liaison under the sinogram qīng (清). An example is as follows. Because every sinogram in rhyme tables can be either the SL initial or the SL final, if they are used in a sinographic liaison in turn, some problems will be found immediately as is shown in the examples below. The result of the sinographic liaison of dū (都) and hóng (紅) was a qīng rhyme dōng (東), which should have been a zhuó rhyme. The result of the sinographic liaison of hú (胡) and dōng (東) was a zhuó rhyme hóng (紅), which should have been a qīng rhyme. The same is true for the sinographic liaison of hú (胡) with hóng (紅) and dū (都) and that of dū (都) with dōng (東) and hú (胡). Therefore, defining qīngzhuó based on the SL final would lead to confusion due to the lack of a standard. Instead, defining qīngzhuó according to the SL final was plausible. It is believed that it was in the process of formulating rhyme tables that qīngzhuó began to be used for initials rather than rhymes. The detailed analysis of the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng did have a direct influence in this aspect. Because initials were classified into qīng and zhuó and Sūn Miǎn proposed five-​type initials, the analysis and categorization of initials were completed. Now with every condition fulfilled, the production of rhyme tables was imminent. Table 7.3 A timetable for the important events mentioned above (1) The introduction of the Brāhmana Xiè Língyùn’s Shísìyīn xùnxù

The late Hàn dynasty

The Eastern Jìn dynasty to the Liú Sòng (劉宋) dynasty (2) Kumārajīva Tipiwakqcariya’s The late Qín dynasty Xītán zhāng (3) Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn The Suí dynasty (4) Wǔ Xuánzhī’s Yùnquán The time of Emperor Gāozōng of the Táng (5) Sūn Miǎn’s Tángyùn hòuxù The 10th Tiānbǎo year of the (唐韻後序), Follow-​up Táng dynasty paragraph to the Tángyùn. (6) Tiānbǎo Yùnyīng The 14th Tiānbǎo year of the Táng dynasty

Before 220 CE 385–​433 CEa Approximately 400 CE 601 CE 650–​683 CE 751 CE 755 CE

a This was Xiè Língyùn’s birth and death year. His Shísìyīn xùnxù (十四音訓敘), An introduction and explanation of fourteen sounds, should come after Kumārajīva Tipiwakqcariya, but whether this book and the Xītán zhāng appeared at the same time is uncertain.

The Historical Process of the Generation of Rhyme Tables  75

7.5  A timetable Now let us arrange a timetable that includes the aforementioned points. From this table, the following conclusions can be drawn. (1) A long time lapsed from the introduction of the Brāhmana when Buddhism was introduced into China to Kumārajīva Tipiwakqcariya’s Xītán zhāng. This period witnessed the gradual improvement of Buddhist sutra translation in quantity and quality. It was quite appropriate for Kumārajīva Tipiwakqcariya, an earlier master in the translation of Buddhist sutras, to introduce and summarize the Siddham. (2) A long time was also present between Kumārajīva Tipiwakqcariya’s Xītán zhāng and Wǔ Xuánzhī’s Yùnquán. On the one hand, the sinicization of Siddham was a lengthy process, and on the other hand, during this time rhyme dictionaries developed substantially. Before the development of rhyme dictionaries was complete, initials could not be studied. In the year 601, Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn was finished. Subsequently, initials began to be given more and more attention. (3) After Sūn Miǎn’s Tángyùn and Emperor Xuánzōng’s Tiānbǎo yùnyīng, only one step remained: to process and organize the available materials. Rhyme tables would soon come into being. Therefore, I believe that it only took several years after 755 CE to witness the birth of rhyme tables. The birth time that I determine conforms to Gě Yìqīng’s conclusion that the Yùnjìng came into existence between the years 751 and 805 CE. It also conforms to Wèi Jiàngōng’s deduction that the Qièyùntú must have been born around the eighth century CE. Therefore, this conclusion is reasonable in terms of historical facts.

Notes 1 Wèi Zhēng et al. (魏徵等), Volume 32 of Suí shū, (隋書), History of the Suí dynasty, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1973. 947. 2 Quoted from Zhāng Jiànmù (張建木), “Fójiào duìyú zhōngguó yīnyùnxué de yǐngxiǎng” (佛教對於中國音韻學的影響), The Buddhist influence on Chinese historical phonology, Zhōngguó Yǔwén (中國語文), Chinese Language, no. 11, 1956. 23. 3 Quoted from Zhào Yīntáng (趙蔭棠), Děngyùn yuánliú, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1957. 4–​5. 4 See Zhōu Yīliáng (周壹良), Wèijìn nánběicháo shǐlùnjí (魏晉南北朝史論集), Collection of history of the Wèi, Jìn, and Northern and Southern dynasties, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1963. 326. 5 Zhào Yīntáng (趙蔭棠), Děngyùn yuánliú, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印 書館), The Commercial Press, 1957. 16. 6 According to the Děngyùn jílüè (等韻輯略), A compilation of rhyme divisions. What is recorded here is slightly different from what is included in Luó Chángpéi’s Yuánmíng zìlún yìwén biǎo (圓明字輪譯文表), A transliteration table for sinograms in the Yuánmíng zìlún. In Luó Chángpéi’s table, zuǒ

76  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? (左) is replaced by zhě (者), chá (茶) is replaced by tú (荼), pó (嚩) is replaced by fù (縛), suǒ (鏁) is replaced by suǒ (鎖), shāduō (沙多) is replaced by suōduō (娑多), yěpó (也婆) is replaced by yěluō (也囉), and shìzuǒ (室左) is replaced by shìzhě (室者). See Luó Chángpéi’s table in the Luóchángpéi yǔyánxué lùnwén xuǎnjí (羅常培語言學論文選集), Selected linguistic papers of Luó Chángpéi, pp. 64–​65. The table is cited in the appendix of Lǐ Róng’s Qièyùn Yīnxì. 7 Zhào Yīntáng (趙蔭棠), Děngyùn yuánliú, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印 書館), The Commercial Press, 1957. 28. 8 Ibid., 29. 9 According to the number of volumes, which is 15, Zhào Yīntáng affirmed that the Yùnquán was not about the study of rhyme divisions but was a rhyme dictionary like the Guǎngyùn and the Jíyùn. This opinion seems to be negotiable. Zhào Yīntáng held that the Yùnhǎi jìngyuán of 360 volumes was probably related to the Yùnjìng, whereas he denied the relations between the Yùnquán and the Yùnjìng, which bewilders many scholars. In our view, although the book with 15 volumes does not seem to be a book studying rhyme divisions, it is not like an ordinary rhyme dictionary. From Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn, Chinese rhyme dictionaries always contain five or ten volumes. The Tiānbǎo Yùnyīng, which is carefully classified, has five volumes. The Jíyùn, with the broad inclusion of head sinograms, has ten volumes. The number of volumes being 14 or 15 is quite strange. Annen’s Shittanzō (悉曇藏) stated that “50 head rhymes in the Yùnquán nowadays have been categorized into the 16 head rhymes of the Siddham script...” (see Volume Ⅷ of the Guāntáng Jílín by Wáng Guówéi) The mention of “nowadays” instead of “can” indicates that it is true that, in the Yùnquán, 16 head rhymes did include 50 head rhymes. Then the number 15 might be related to the 16 head rhymes. If so, the rhyme gatherings of the rhyme tables in later dynasties may also be related to the Yùnquán. 10 According to Xiè Língyùn quoted in Annen’s Shittanzō (Japan), quoted in the Děngyùn yuánliú, p. 5. 11 See the list of names of each school of the Děngyùn yuánliú, pp. 6–​7. 12 Sūn Miǎn (孙愐), Guǎngyùn: tángyùn xù, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書 館), The Commercial Press, 1935. 12. 13 The actual number should be 590 rhymes. 14 Huáng Cuìbó (黄淬伯), Huìlín yíqiè jīng yīnyì fǎnqiè kǎo (慧琳一切經音義反切 考), A study on the sinographic liaison of Huìlín’s Yíqiè jīng yīnyì, Taipei: Guólì Zhōngyāng Yánjiūyuàn Lìshǐ Yǔyán Yánjiūsuǒ (國立中央研究院歷史語言研究 所), The Institute of History and Philology Academia Sinica, 1931. 2–​3. 15 Lù Fǎyán (陸法言), Guǎngyùn: qièyùn xù, (廣韻·切韻序), The preface to the Qièyùn in the Guǎngyùn, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1935. 5. 16 Ibid., 6. 17 Fēngyǎn (封演), Fēngshì wénjiànjì, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1985. 16. 18 Zhōng Huáshūjú (中華書局), Volume 67 of Sòng shū (宋書), History of the Sòng dynasty), in the Sìbù bèiyào (四部備要), A collection of classics in four sectors, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1985. 558. 19 The eight sound defects in prosody are píngtóu (平頭), parallel head, indicating the same tone at the beginning, shǎngwěi (上尾), consonant end, indicating the same tone at the end, fēngyāo (蜂腰), wasp waist, indicating an uneven tone between

The Historical Process of the Generation of Rhyme Tables  77 two even tones, hēxī (鶴膝), crane knee, indicating an even tone between two uneven tones, dàyùn (大韻), unnecessary rhyming, indicating the words using the same rhyme of the verse, xiǎoyùn (小韻), lesser unnecessary rhyming, indicating the words using the same rhyme besides the verse, zhèngniǔ (正紐), central initials, indicating the words of both the same initial and the same final, and pángniǔ (旁 紐), side initials, indicating the words with the same initial. 20 For example, Chén Lǐ (陳澧), Qièyùn kǎo: wàipiān: juànsān, (切韻考·外篇·卷 三), Volume 3 of additional chapters of the Qièyùn kǎo, Beijing: Zhōngguó Shūdiàn (中國書店), 1984. 2. Chén Lǐ agreed with this. He stated, “Sinographic liaison is a traditional method of indicating the pronunciation of a sinogram with two other sinograms, the initial sinogram (SL initial) having the same consonant as the given sinogram and the final sinogram (SL final) having the same vowel (with or without a final nasal) and tone. The SL initial determines the qīng (voiceless) and zhuó (voiced) of the sinogram liaised and the SL final determines the tone of the sinogram liaised.” 21 See Shǐ Cúnzhí (史存直), “Cóng yīnwèixué kàn hànyǔ de zìdiào” (從音位學看漢語 的字調), On the tones of sinograms from the perspective of phonology, Zhōngguó Yǔwén (中國語文), Chinese Language，no.9, 1957. 15. 22 Zhōu Zǔmó (周祖謨), Táng wǔ dài yùnshū jícún, (唐五代韻書集存), A collection of rhyme dictionaries from the Táng and Five Dynasties, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1983. 471. 23 Originally, lǒng (隴) could be both voiceless and voiced. Perhaps it was regarded as voiced here and therefore classified as “overvoiced.” 24 Quoted from Zhào Yīntáng (趙蔭棠), Děngyùn yuánliú, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1957. 47. 25 Zhōu Zǔmó (周祖謨), Táng wǔ dài yùnshū jícún, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書 局), 1983. 796. 26 Nowadays, ancient pronunciations such as nasals and laterals are pronounced with entering yáng tones (入陽調), but in ancient times they were not. Volume IV of the Qīndìng tóngwén yùntǒng (欽定同文韻統), A collection of transliteration sinograms of the alphabetical letters from Serindia, entitled “The Theory that Indian Alphabets are Classified into Yīn and Yáng Categories” states, “The sinogram initials representing Indian alphabetical letters were all pronounced with voiceless even tones in Chinese. However, the 16 Indian rhyming sinograms were all yīn (voiceless). Only four rhyming sinograms, lì (唎), lìyī (唎伊), lì (利), and lìyī (利伊), could be both yīn (voiceless) and yáng (voiced). The 34 rhyming sinograms used in sinographic liaison were all yáng (voiced). Only five rhyming sinograms, yíng’ā (迎阿), níyā (尼鴉), nà (那), nà (納), and má (嘛), could be both yáng (voiced) and yīn (voiceless).” These words can serve as evidence that the lái (來), rì (日), ní (泥), and míng (明) initials could be both yīn and yáng (namely, qīng and zhuó). Page 449 of the Chinese translation of Karlgren’s Etudes sur la Phonologie Chinoise includes a discussion of half-​voiced initials being either yīn (voiceless) or yáng (voiced) in some Chinese dialects. Karlgren states, “There are still some examples of sinograms that should have become yáng (voiced) but remain yīn (voiceless) in a variety of dialects. These are almost half-​voiced initials, not full-​ voiced initials.” For example, in the Beijing dialect, sinograms with a míng (明) initial are pronounced with an even-​shaded tone instead of an even-​shined tone, whereas in the Shanghai dialect, they are pronounced with a rising-​shaded tone or departing-​shaded tone instead of a rising-​shined tone or departing-​shined tone.

78  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? 27 Chén Lǐ (陳澧), Qièyùn kǎo: wàipiān: juànsān, Beijing: Zhōngguó Shūdiàn (中國書 店), 1984. 8. 28 On p.108 of the Qièyùn yánjiū (切韻研究), Study of the Qièyùn, by Shào Róngfēn (邵榮芬), the author demonstrates that the imitated phonetic transcription of the yǐng (影) initial should be [ʔ] by emphasizing that the sinograms under the yǐng (影) initial had inconsistent tone changes in the even and entering tones. Because the phonology of the Qièyùn and the Zhōngyuán yīnyùn were from different historical periods and the evolution of the entering tone was especially complicated, the inconsistency in tone changes with the even and entering tones also existed with other sinograms under full-​voiceless initials. 29 Zhù Mì (祝泌), Huángjí jīngshì jiě qǐshùjué, (皇極經世解起數訣), The techniques for solving frequency problems in the Huángjí jīngshì, the appendix of the Sìkù quánshū zhēnběn chūjí: guānwùjiě, (四庫全書珍本初集·觀物解), The part of observing things in the Sìkù quánshū zhēnběn chūjí, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1934. 2. 30 Hán Dàozhāo (韓道昭) and Níng Jìfú (甯忌浮), Jiàodìng wǔyīn jíyùn, (校訂五音集 韻), A proofread version of the comprehensive rhyme dictionary arranged by the five-​type initials, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1992. 1. 31 See Shǐ Cúnzhí (史存直), “Cóng yīnwèixué kàn hànyǔ de zìdiào” (從音位學看漢語 的字調), On the tones of sinograms from the perspective of phonology, Zhōngguó Yǔwén (中國語文), Chinese Language，no.9, 1957, 15. 32 See Lǚ Kūn, Fánlì: biàn mǔzì, (凡例·辨母字), Examples: to differentiate initials, in the Jiāotàiyùn (交泰韻), Jiāotài rhyme.

8 The Relationship Between Rhyme Tables, Buddhism and Sinogram Initials

The conclusion of the birth time of rhyme tables contradicts the traditional views in some ways. To make the conclusion acceptable, these contradictions should be clearly explained. Firstly, the relationship between rhyme tables and Buddhism as well as sinogram initials needs to be discussed. The theory that rhyme tables came from Buddhism was first proposed by Zhèng Qiáo. Apart from what he said in the Qīyīn xù (七音序), A prelude to seven-​type initials, quoted in Chapter 4, he also mentioned this theory many times. An example is as follows: Recently, the Qīyīn yùnjiàn was introduced from Serindia. What was written in that book corresponds to the seven strings of a zither that could make beautiful sounds in the world.1 Ancient Chinese people had difficulty identifying sounds. Before the Hàn dynasty, the study of the Qièyùn was beyond scholars’ reach. In fact, these studies were introduced from Serindia into China. Therefore, most Buddhists could read rhyme tables and the like while Confucian literati could not identify these sounds. The main reason was that the studies came from Serindia.2 Zhāng Línzhī accepted this theory and incorporated the theory into his Yùnjìng hòuxù (韻鏡後序), Epilogue to the Yùnjìng. Since then, this theory has been widely cited. Moreover, after the Sòng dynasty, many literati and Buddhists discussed rhyme divisions. For example, the Sìshēng děngzǐ was attached to the Lóngkān shǒujìng and the monk Zhēnkōng (釋真空) wrote the Zhízhǐ yùyàoshi ménfǎ (直指玉鑰匙門法), A direct study on the Yùyàoshi ménfǎ; Yùyàoshi ménfǎ or Yùyàoshi for short. It seemed that rhyme divisions were closely related to Buddhism. From what has been discussed, there was no doubt that after the Sòng dynasty, rhyme divisions had a close relationship with Buddhism. However, how can we be so sure that rhyme tables were created by Buddhism? This is a question that needs to be discussed further. Those who held that rhyme divisions were created by Buddhism had four reasons. First, Zhèng Qiáo’s theory. Second, the sinogram initials in rhyme tables were created by the monk Shǒuwēn. Third, before the production of rhyme tables, sinographic liaison was discussed in the monk Shéngǒng’s DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-9

80  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Sìshēng wǔyīn jiǔnòngtú. Fourth, a new viewpoint in the twentieth century states that it is widely acknowledged that the production and development of Chinese historical phonology were influenced by the Sanskrit Sabdavidyā. Let us examine that last reason. There is no doubt that the production and development of historical phonology were influenced by the Sanskrit Sabdavidyā. Furthermore, there is no doubt that the form of the rhyme table was inspired by the matching of initials and rhymes of Siddham. However, to accept does not mean to copy, and to inspire does not mean to substitute. (Zhèng Qiáo confused precisely these two pairs of concepts.) After all, Siddham is quite different from what is shown in rhyme tables. Except for the similarity in matching initials and rhymes, Siddham and rhyme tables have little in common. Sanskrit has a phonological script. Its structure of initials and rhymes differs substantially from that of Chinese. The vowels of Sanskrit are not as complicated as the rhyme groups of the Qièyùn. The consonants of Sanskrit are very different from the SL initials in the Qièyùn. Furthermore, unlike Chinese, Sanskrit does not have tones which are used on sinograms. Rhyme tables are much more complicated than Siddham. It is hard to believe that “Sanskrit monks” directly created rhyme tables. In that case, who was the most likely creator of rhyme tables? Chinese monks or literati? I think it was Chinese literati. The rhymes in the Qièyùn were official rhymes. In the Táng dynasty, poetic excellence was rewarded with high social position, and therefore having mastery of the Qièyùn was closely linked to a literati’s interests. However, for monks, social position was to be dispensed with. Of course, in the Táng dynasty, plenty of literati were keen on Buddhism and most monks were able to write poems. They would likely cooperate with each other. However, Chinese literati were still more likely to have created rhyme tables. From what has been discussed in the previous chapters, in the process of producing rhyme tables, the key roles were not played by Buddhist monks. Now let us look at the first reason. Those who held that rhyme divisions were created by Buddhist monks always followed Zhèng Qiáo’s theory. Zhèng Qiáo’s view should be stressed because he lived in an era comparatively nearer than us to the time when rhyme tables were produced. However, if rhyme tables were born around the eighth century in the Táng dynasty, then over 300 years had passed between the birth of rhyme tables and Zhèng Qiáo’s life. Therefore, his view was not based on first-​hand material and was not necessarily reliable. Perhaps his view was based merely on hearsay and assumptions. Whether his words are sufficiently reliable depends on the reasons he proposed. From my point of view, Zhèng Qiáo had two reasons to believe that rhyme divisions came from Serindia. The first is as follows: “Sanskrit monks wanted Buddhism to spread all over the world, and they wrote this book. Although the book was not easy to translate, when there were points that could not be translated to make sense, transliteration was used to reproduce sounds and meanings.”3 The second reason is as follows: “Buddhists regarded Zen meditation as the great awakening and the mastery of phonology as a partial awakening.”4 In other words, two conditions enabled Sanskrit monks to

Relationship Between Rhyme Tables, Buddhism and Sinogram Initials  81 create rhyme tables. One was their great interest in phonology, and the other was their need to preach Buddhism. These reasons for the creation of Siddham and even the writing of the Xītán zhāng with transcriptions between Sanskrit and Chinese are quite convincing. But they are less convincing as reasons for the creation of rhyme tables like the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè. Why? Siddham was used for studying Buddhist sutras and spreading Buddhism whereas rhyme tables were used for mastering sinographic liaison and making use of rhyme dictionaries to interpret the Confucian classics. The purposes were very different. It was improbable that Buddhist monks created rhyme tables. Even if they had done it, it was of no use for spreading Buddhism. Jì Xiànlín (季羡林) studied the language stipulations of Buddhism in “Yuánshǐ fójiào de yǔyán wèntí” (原始佛教的語言問題), The language problem of primitive Buddhism. He stated, “Primitive Buddhism adopted a laissez-​faire approach to language. On the one hand, it forbade using Sanskrit, the language of Brahmanism. On the other, it did not sanctify the Magadha that the Buddha had used or elevate it to the status of a classical language. Instead, it directed monks to use their dialects to study and spread Buddhist teachings.”5 Just as the Buddha himself had said, “Buddhist sutras should be recited and studied through official and colloquial languages.”6 In other words, it was advocated that Buddhism be spread by translation. The more translations, the better. (Among the world’s three major religions—​ Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam—​the spread of teachings of Buddhism is like Christianity and different from Islam.) Provided that the spread of religious teachings benefited, translation and transliteration could both be adopted. This was the reason why Buddhism spread so fast when it first appeared. Looking back at the situation in China during the Hàn, Wèi, and Six Dynasties periods, we can find the fast spread of Buddhist teachings quite understandable. At that time, Buddhism was very popular in China and numerous Buddhist sutras were translated. According to the statistics of the Dàzhōu kāndìng zhòngjīng mùlù (大周刊定眾經目錄), A collection of the table of contents of Buddhist sutras, from the Hàn and Wèi dynasties to the early Táng dynasty,7 3,616 volumes of Mahayana sutras and 8,641 volumes of biographies had been translated into Chinese, not including those translated into Tibetan. But why had so few people mastered Sanskrit and not even a single book existed for learning Sanskrit grammar? This was because, as Buddhism spread, the religious teachings rather than the language were emphasized. Therefore, translations were sufficient. Rhyme tables with typical Chinese features were useless in doing translation. Compared with rhyme tables, the Xītán zhāng and Sanskrit–​Chinese dictionaries (such as the Fànyǔ qiānzìwén (梵語千字文), Sanskrit thousand words compiled by the monk Yìjìng (義凈) in the Táng dynasty), were much more useful for doing translation. Therefore, it was unbelievable that Buddhist monks from ancient India to China created rhyme tables to spread Buddhism. In that case, was it correct that Buddhist monks regarded Zen meditation as the great awakening and mastery of phonology as a partial awakening and

82  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? were therefore keen on Chinese historical phonology? Given the background of Chinese Buddhism after the eighth century, this was correct. The situation was also related to the study of sinogram initials in China, but it had nothing to do with the birth of rhyme tables. What has been discussed above is about early Buddhism. In the eighth century, Buddhist Tantrism was introduced into China. Particularly, Tantrism advocated mysticism and conjuring magic. Zhōu Yīliáng (周一良) stated, “Almost all Tantric sutras include Buddhist mantras. Most of the mantras are meaningless, so translators choose to transliterate them. When the mantras are chanted, only the correct pronunciation ensures desirable results.”8 Zhèng Qiáo also stated: Most Chinese people are not good at phonology. Now if Indian monks chant a mantra for rain, it rains. If they chant a mantra for a lóng (龍, a Chinese mythical creature often identified as a dragon), a lóng appears. What will happen next depends on what mantra they are chanting. Although Chinese monks have learned the pronunciation of mantras, when they chant a mantra, they do not obtain the expected result. This is because they are not well cultivated in the rules of pronunciation.9 No wonder Chinese monks paid special attention to the rules of pronunciation. This also explains why Chinese monks were so keen on rhyme divisions later. However, when rhyme divisions were first created, could the rules of pronunciation that Chinese monks followed for chanting Sanskrit mantras refer to Chinese rhyme tables? Of course not. Therefore, Chinese monks who wanted to study the rules of pronunciation, such as Zhìguǎng (智廣), turned to Indian monks to chant dhāraṇī.10 Apart from chanting mantras, the mysticism of Tantrism also included zìmén (字門), the doctrine that every Sanskrit letter represented a kind of truth in the Buddhist creed. “Sanskrit letters are usually talked about in Buddhist scriptures … Letters gradually become holy symbols.”11 Let’s take two examples from the Jǐngyòu tiānzhú zìyuán (景佑天竺字源), An etymological introduction to Sanskrit written in the Jǐngyòu period of the Sòng dynasty, Zìyuán for short, to have a proper look at zìmén. The third volume of Zìyuán is Shí’èr zhuǎnshēng shíèr’fān zìmǔ lüèyì yìzhǐ (十二轉聲十二番字母略譯義旨), An explanation for the general translation of 12 rhymes and 12 sets of initials. The first two letters of “Shíèr zhuǎnshēng (十二轉聲), twelve rhymes” are as follows: (遏 è 一切法本不生義), All dharmas originally do not arise. The Nirvana sutra states, “è (遏) means no destruction, which suggests no flows, and therefore no permanence.” (遏者不破壞，故不流，故常). Hence, it means the supererogation of Tri-​Ratna (故即是三寶衆功德義). (阿引 ē 一切法寂静義) All dharmas are tranquil. It also has the meanings of saintliness, purity, regulation, and instruction (聖者義，清 净義，制度義，教誨義).12

Relationship Between Rhyme Tables, Buddhism and Sinogram Initials  83 As another example, two letters of “the 34 Sanskrit letters in the first set of initials” are as follows: (葛) gě (一切法作業義), All dharmas are activity. It also has the supplementary saying that “Great compassion occurs for all living creatures, and this compassion is from your own mind and brings about excellence.” (於諸衆生起大慈悲，生於子想，作妙善義)

(渴 kě 一切法等虚空不可得義), All dharmas are vacant and unobtainable. It has another saying that “There is neither a good nor bad friend. There are only misused names with mixed-​up meanings. All these are the result of disbelief in the Tathāgatagarbha-​sūtra.” (非善友，非惡友，名 雜穢義，不信如來祕密藏故).13 These two kinds of Tantric mysticism have both influenced China. The result of the mystification of the rules of pronunciation is the Sìshēng wǔyīn jiǔnòngtú written by the monk Shéngǒng. This table is about sinographic liaison. Therefore, some people think that the ancients took great trouble in describing the sound of sinograms. In fact, sinographic liaison is the combination of Sanskrit phonics and traditional Chinese phonics using alliterated disyllables and rhymed disyllables. Using alliterated disyllables and rhymed disyllables to perform sinographic liaison is not difficult. If it were, sinographic liaison would not have been created so early. Shéngǒng merely mystified the table by adding some Tantrist elements; the table cannot be regarded as the origin of rhyme tables. However, some mysterious claims about the study of rhyme divisions can be traced back to it. In addition, the influence of the doctrine of zìmén led to the study of sinogram initials in China. The Sanskrit zìmǔ (字母), alphabetical letter are fundamentally different from the Chinese zìmǔ (字母), sinogram initial. Sanskrit is a phonemic language. One zìmǔ is a vowel or a consonant. Therefore, it is true that zìmǔ (字母), alphabetical letter is the mǔ (母), mother, of a zì (字), word. By contrast, each sinogram is a syllable combined with an initial and a rhyme. In the study of the zìmǔ of Chinese Buddhism, only the sinogram initials were called zìmǔ. In this way, the zìmǔ excluded numerous rhyme categories, but could not exclude the nonconsonantal elements in the initials. The Sanskrit phonological method is rather unsuitable for sinographic studies. However, the Tantric monks did not want to desecrate the “sacredness” of the Tantric zìmén by using familiar rhyming characters, so they had to find the way out from the study of initial categories. This was why the study of sinogram initials began only after the introduction of Tantrism even though the study of Siddham had been introduced into China for such a long time. Some people attributed the delay in the study of sinogram initials to the ancients’ inability to analyze initials well, which was not the case. In ancient China, alliterated disyllables and rhymed disyllables almost came into being at the same time. There are quite a few such examples in the Shījīng (詩經), The book of poetry. In Volume 5 of the Shíjià zhāiyǎng xīnlù (十架

84  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? 斋养新录), A record for new cultivation in “ten-​day persistent riding” study, Qián Dàxīn (錢大昕) mentioned the names of many people, plants, insects, and fish with alliterated disyllables and rhymed disyllables, which indicated that even ordinary people knew well about alliterated disyllables and rhymed disyllables. In addition, the shuāngfǎn (雙反), double reverse, prevailing in the Northern and Southern dynasties was also a game that ordinary people could play. The sum of rhymed disyllables was rhyme categories, and the sum of alliterated disyllables was initial categories. Because initial categories were not as necessary for writing and reading literature as rhyme categories were, the ancients were not eager to categorize them. Even rhyme categories did not come into being very fast. Although a great number of rhyming sinograms had been used since the Shījīng, it was not until the introduction of the Sanskrit Sabdavidyā in the Wèi and Jìn dynasties that rhyme dictionaries began to be compiled and rhyme headings established. The generation of initial headings or sinogram initials was possible only if the sinograms representing initials were categorized first. From this point of view, despite the existence of the zìmén of Tantrism, the zìmǔ (sinogram initials) suitable for sinogram features could only come into being after the categorization of the sinograms ascribed with initials. In other words, the time was bound to be later than that of rhyme dictionaries such as the Yùnquán and even rhyme tables such as the Yùnjìng. In this way, sinogram initials and rhyme tables originally belonged to two schools of study. One was Buddhism, and the other was Confucianism. However, with the sinicization of the concept of zìmǔ and its alienation from zìmén, rhyme tables began to be adopted. Therefore, two schools of study were merged into one. Buddhists began to study rhyme divisions rather than Siddham. Due to the late birth of the sinogram initials, the initial categories represented by these sinograms were quite different from the initial categories of the Qièyùn reflected in rhyme tables. When sinogram initials were assigned to rhyme tables, there were many unsuitable cases between these initials and rhyme tables. The ancients did not know that differences existed between ancient and contemporary sounds. They tried to explain this phenomenon by proposing many kinds of ménfǎ rules. Once sinogram initials were mixed into rhyme tables, ménfǎ rules began to multiply and rhyme divisions began to bewilder people. The Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn was the first rhyme dictionary to mention ménfǎ rules. It was also the first to mention both sinogram initials and four divisions with qīng and zhòng tones. This is telltale proof for the occurrence of ménfǎ rules.

Notes 1 Zhèng Qiáo (鄭樵), Volume 2 of Tōngzhì: liùshūlüè: lùn huáfàn zhōng (通志·六 書略·論華梵中), The second part of discussing Chinese and Sanskrit in the Liùshūlüè of the Tōngzhì, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1987. 510. 2 Zhèng Qiáo (鄭樵), Tōngzhì: liùshūlüè: lùn huáfàn xià (通志·六書略·論華梵下), The third part of discussing Chinese and Sanskrit in the Liùshūlüè of the Tōngzhì, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1987. 511.

Relationship Between Rhyme Tables, Buddhism and Sinogram Initials  85 3 Zhèng Qiáo (鄭樵), Tōngzhì lüè: qīyīn xù in Tōngzhì, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中 華書局), 1987. 513. 4 Zhèngqiáo (鄭樵), Tōngzhì lüè: qīyīn xù in Tōngzhì lüè, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1939. 16. 5 Jì Xiànlín (季羨林), “Yuánshǐ fójiào de yǔyán wèntí” (原始佛教的語言問題), The language problem of primitive Buddhism, Běijīng Dàxué Xuébào (北京大學學報), Journal of Peking University, no. 1, 1957: 70. 6 Quoted from Ibid., 69. 7 Qián Zhōnglián (錢仲聯), “Fójiào yǔ zhōngguó gǔdiǎn wénxué de guānxì” [佛教與 中國古典文學的關係), The relationship between Buddhism and Chinese classical literature, Jiāngsū Shīyuàn Xuébào (江苏师院学报), no. 1 1980. 111. 8 Zhōu Yīliáng (周壹良), “Zhōngguó de fànwén yánjiū” (中國的梵文研究), Sanskrit studies in China in Wéijìng nánběicháo shǐlùnjí Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書 局), 1983. 327. 9 Zhèng Qiáo (鄭樵), Tōngzhì: liùshūlüè: lùn huáfàn zhōng Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1987. 511. 10 Shì Zhìguǎng (释智廣), Xītán zìjì: zìxù (悉曇字記·自序), Preface to the Siddham script, Shàngyú Luózhènyù (上虞羅振玉), 1916. 3. 11 Zhōu Yīliáng (周壹良), “Zhōngguó de fànwén yánjiū,” in Wèijìn nánběicháo shǐlùnjí Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1983. 328. 12 Fǎhù (法護) and Wéijìn (唯凈), Volume 3 of Jǐngyòu tiānzhú zìyuán (景佑天竺字 源), An etymological introduction to Sanskrit written in Jǐngyòu period of the Sòng dynasty, Guǎngshèngsì (廣勝寺), 1149. 2. 13 Ibid., 5–​6.

9 Rhyme Tables and the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn

Speaking of the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn, as mentioned above, a debate existed about the time when it was written and whether rhyme tables came first or the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn came first. The resolution of the debate is obvious now. Luó Chángpéi’s viewpoint was correct: rhyme tables came first and then the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn (Cánjuàn for short) was written. In addition to the reasons mentioned above, some evidence can be found in the Cánjuàn itself. Some people thought that the Sìděng zhòngqīnglì (四等重輕例), Examples of heavy and light articulations of four rhyme divisions, in the Cánjuàn shed light on the Yùnjìng and was the prototype of rhyme tables later. Was that true? Let us look at the examples taken from the Sìděng zhòngqīnglì (hereinafter referred to as the Sìděnglì). In the Yùnjìng, the shān (山) and shān (删) rhymes are placed into two separate rhyme tables whereas in the Sìděnglì sinograms, tán (譠), jiǎn (簡), and bàn (扮), which belonged to the categories of even tone, rising tone, and departing tone in the shān (山) rhyme, respectively, were all put into the shān (删) rhyme category, as is shown in examples (2), (3), and (7) above. In the Yùnjìng, the sinograms in the yuàn (願) and xiàn (線) rhymes were not mixed, whereas in the Sìděnglì the sinogram jiàn (建) of the yuàn (願) rhyme was placed in the xiàn (線) rhyme category, as is shown in example (6) above. In the Yùnjìng, the sinograms mǎn (滿), mǎn (矕), bàn (半), and biàn (變) were in the 24th rhyme table of rounded articulation; the sinogram miǎn (免) was in the 23rd rhyme table; and the sinograms miǎn (緬), bàn (扮), and biàn (徧) were in the 21st rhyme table of unrounded articulation, whereas in the Sìděnglì these sinograms were all placed together, as is shown in examples (4) and (7) above. Coincidentally, although these cases in the Sìděnglì do not conform to the Yùnjìng, they conform to the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú perfectly. In the last two examples, the labial sinograms that belonged to the categories of rounded and unrounded articulation in the Yùnjìng were all listed in the eight-​ rhyme table of rounded articulation in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú. In addition, in the Yùnjìng, the tán (談) rhyme was separated from the rhyme table that included the xián (咸), yán (鹽), and tiān (添) rhymes, and the sinograms of Division III and Division IV of the yǎn (琰) rhyme were listed in two rhyme tables, whereas DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-10

Rhyme Tables and the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn  87 Table 9.1 Phonological examples in Sìděng zhòngqīnglì Even tone

dān

Liaised as dū gān qiān xián

zhān yán

diān

tiān

平聲

擔

都甘反

鵮

咸

霑

敁

添

dān

Liaised as duō hán

tán

shān

zhān xiān

diān

xiān

鹽

丹

多寒反

譠

山

邅

仙

顛

先

Rising tone

gǎn

Liaised as gē hàn

jiǎn

chǎn

jiǎn

xiǎn

jiǎn

xiǎn

上聲

𦼮 歌旱反 mǎn Liaised as mò bàn

簡

產

蹇

獮

蠒

銑

mǎn shān

miǎn xuǎn

miǎn xiǎn

滿

莫伴反

矕

潸

免

選

緬

獮

Liaised as wū huò

yǎn

kǎn

yǎn

yǎn

yǎn

yǎn

ǎn

（1） （2）

（3）

（4）

（5）

埯

烏惑反

黤

檻

掩

琰

魘

琰

Departing tone

gàn

Liaised as gǔ àn

jiàn

[jiàn]

jiàn

yuàn

jiàn

xiàn

去聲

旰

古案反

諫

願

見

霰

Liaised as bù pàn

bàn

[諫] [jiǎn]

建

bàn

biàn

xiàn

biàn

[xiàn]

（7）

（8）

半

布判反

扮

線

遍

lè

Liaised as láng dé

què

[襇] mài

變

Entering tone

lì

zhí

lì

[線] xī

入聲

勒

郎德反

礐

麥

力

職

歷

錫

kè

Liaised as kǔ dé

kè

mài

xì

mò

chī

xī

刻

苦德反

緙

麥

喫

錫

Liaised as tú dé

zhái mò

𨻶 zhí

陌

tè

zhí

dí

xī

特

徒德反

宅

è

餩

陌

直

職

狄

錫

Liaised as wū dé

mò

yì

zhí

yì

xī

烏德反

陌

憶

職

益

昔

（6）

（9）

（10）

（11）

in the Sìděnglì they were placed together in one rhyme table as in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, as is shown in examples (1) and (5) above. It is especially worth noting that in the Sìděnglì, the sinograms of entering tone of the gēng (庚), gēng (耕), qīng (清), and qīng (青) rhymes are all combined with the sinograms of entering tone of the zhēng (蒸) and dēng (登) rhymes. (See all examples of entering tones in the Sìděnglì. Examples (8), (9), (10), and (11) were chosen to illustrate this case.) However, as far as I know, in the actual speech sounds and those recorded in written materials, the gěng (梗) and céng (曾) rhyme gatherings were not mixed. (See some materials of speech sounds in the Táng and Five dynasties, Table 6 of this book.) It was in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú that the gěng (梗) and céng (曾) rhyme gatherings were mixed. Therefore, it is better to say that the Sìděnglì shed light on the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú than that it shed light on the Yùnjìng. The major difference between these two books was just that, in the Sìděnglì, it was hard to determine whether the entering tone had been classified as yīn or yáng and whether linguals had been classified as apical alveolars or dorso prepalates.

88  When Was the Rhyme Table Born? Zhōu Zǔmó stated, “The divisions of each rhyming sinogram listed in this volume of the Sìděng zhòngqīnglì are exactly the same as those in the Yùnjìng that was passed down from the Sòng dynasty, as if they were recorded according to an extant rhyme table.”1 From what has been analyzed above, what was recorded in the Sìděng zhòngqīnglì was not rhyme tables like those in the Yùnjìng, but rhyme tables like those in the Qièyùn Zhǐzhǎngtú (Zhǐzhǎngtú for short). According to the time when rhyme tables were born and developed, it can be inferred that rhyme tables that were closely related to the Qièyùn, such as the Yùnjìng, must have come first, and subsequently rhyme tables and rhyme gathering were merged, such as in the Zhǐzhǎngtú. The Sìděnglì was based on a kind of rhyme table that combined the rhyme gatherings of the Yùnjìng. It was written later than those rhyme tables. Quite a long time passed between its birth and the compilation of the prototype of the Yùnjìng.

Note 1 Zhōu Zǔmó (周祖謨), Táng wǔ dài yùnshū jícún (唐五代韻書集存), A collection of rhyme dictionaries from the Táng and Five dynasties, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1983. 960.

Part II

The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged

10 How Was the Question Proposed?

How were the rhyme tables of middle Chinese (600–​1200 CE) arranged, especially the two earliest extant sets of rhyme tables, the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè? What principles were they based on? How did they come into the current form of four divisions and 43 rhyme tables? The study of these questions will help us understand the nature and value of rhyme tables, which is of great significance in the study of Chinese historical phonology. Several theories have been proposed to answer these questions. The first was proposed in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú and Sìshēng děngzǐ, the two earliest sets of rhyme tables known to the ancients. In the preface to the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, Dǒng Nányī (董南一) states: Just as Sīmǎ Guāng, a great historian in the Northern Sòng dynasty, stated, 20 rhyme tables were listed by using 36 sinogram initials to cover 384 sounds. These tables were divided by identifying the kāihé (開闔), unrounded and rounded, to distinguish qīng ((輕), light) and zhòng ((重), heavy) and examining qīngzhuó ((清濁), voiceless and voiced) to distinguish xū ((虚), deficient) and shí ((實), excessive). The tables fully exhibited various tonalities and rhythms in verse and revealed the differences among initials and rhymes … If one looks for 206 rhyming sinograms by using the tables, one will have no trouble pronouncing the sound entries that lack corresponding sinograms, not to mention the sinograms with both sounds and graphic forms.1 What was written in the preface to the Sìshēng děngzǐ was almost the same as what was written in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú. The only difference is that the five-​type initials in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú were replaced by the seven-​type initials in the Sìshēng děngzǐ. Therefore, the Sìshēng děngzǐ was composed after Zhèng Qiáo had written the preface to the Qīyīn lüè (see section 5.4 of the second part of this book). The preface of the Sìshēng děngzǐ was copied and edited according to the preface of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, as follows: A total of 20 rhyme tables were made using 36 sinogram initials to cover 384 sounds. These tables were divided into four types. The kāihé of four tones DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-12

92  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged was examined to distinguish qīng and zhòng. The qīngzhuó of seven categories was identified to distinguish xū and shí. The tables fully exhibited various tonalities and rhythms in verse and revealed the differences among initials and rhymes … If one looks for 206 rhyming sinograms by using the tables, he will have no trouble pronouncing the sinograms with sounds yet without graphic forms, not to mention the sinograms with both sounds and graphic forms. Therefore, the qīng ((輕), light) and qīng ((清), voiceless) sounds of the Wú (吳) and Chǔ (楚) areas were tender but consonant with musical rhythms, and the zhòng ((重), heavy) and zhuó ((濁), voiced) sounds of the Yān (燕) and Zhào (趙) areas were solemn but free from doubtful expressions, which could be described as good and beautiful.2 According to what was written in the two prefaces, it seemed that rhyme tables were produced by matching 36 sinogram initials with 206 rhymes. However, this theory is problematic. First, using 36 sinogram initials to cover a total of 384 sounds needs to be further studied. What did the 384 sounds refer to? How could 384 sounds be produced by matching 36 sinogram initials with 206 rhymes? If 384 sounds referred to initials such as jiàn (見), xī (溪), qún (羣), and yí (疑), then theoretically there would be 720 sounds if the 36 sinogram initials were multiplied by 20 rhyme tables. Even if sound entries without corresponding sinograms in the rhyme tables were excluded, there would still be over 500 sounds. The number was apparently not 384. The 384 sounds could not refer to rhymes because the Jiǎnlì: biàn zìmǔ cìdì lì (檢例·辨字母次第例), Examples of distinguishing the sequence of sinogram initials in the Jiǎnlì, attached to the Zhǐzhǎngtú, also stated that “36 zìmǔ (sinogram initials) would generate 384 sounds because the zìmǔ were the productive mother of the Chinese characters.”3 However, it is known that only 206 rhymes existed, which is much less than 384 sounds. If “384 sounds” not only referred to rhymes but also to sinograms in the rhyme tables that were classified according to rhymes and divisions, then there would be only 320 sounds because every rhyme table had four tones, namely 16 divisions, and 20 rhyme tables existed. Therefore, the number 384 cannot be reached whatever the hypotheses are. Those who studied the two prefaces always avoided mentioning the number 384, or they thought that the number only indicated a general amount. But if this issue was discussed in the historical background of rhyme tables and the Yùnjìng was examined through the principle that “regards every sinogram present at each division of a rhyme as one sound,” there would be 397 sounds for 43 rhyme tables. The number 397 is close to 384. Apparently, the extant Yùnjìng has been supplemented. Perhaps the number of sounds approximated 384 in the earlier version.4 If this were true, the key part in the two prefaces would be “to cover”. Because 384 sounds were not present in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú or the Sìshēng děngzǐ, the key phrase “to cover” proves that these rhyme tables were the combination of those made by their predecessors. Neither the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú nor the Sìshēng děngzǐ

How Was the Question Proposed?  93 were the earliest form of rhyme tables. Instead, the “old tables” mentioned several times in the Jiǎnlì of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú were most likely the early form of rhyme tables that included 384 sounds. Therefore, neither the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú nor the Sìshēng děngzǐ could reveal the methods of arranging rhyme tables in their prefaces. In addition, the arranging method with such merged rhyme tables cannot be inferred. In particular, the prefaces mentioned that Sīmǎ Guāng had “identified kāihé,” “examined qīngzhuó,” and added terms of sinogram initials in the process of merging rhyme tables, but he did not propose the principle of making divisions. The 384 sounds included sinograms classified into divisions in the rhyme tables. Sīmǎ Guāng placed 384 sounds into the 20 rhyme tables. Compared with the number, the total number of sounds in his own book decreased. He did not provide any explanation about this, perhaps because he could not give one. Otherwise, why were rhyme gatherings, rhymes, and tables of the Yùnjìng and the like merged in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, whereas the arrangement of divisions remained the same as in the old one? The arrangement of divisions is the key to the study of the method by which rhyme tables were arranged. Because the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú and the like were of no great help in understanding the method of arranging rhyme tables, the second hypothesis was proposed. This second hypothesis was proposed by Pān Lěi of the early Qīng dynasty, as follows: The 36 sinogram initials should be listed in one table and made into four divisions of unrounded articulations, rounded articulations, [i]‌ articulations (rhymes pronounced with teeth aligned), and [ü] articulations (rhymes pronounced with lips rounded and whistling). In this way, rhymes and initials could be clearly classified and used, and ménfǎ rules would not need to be established. Those who made rhyme divisions found that sometimes there were only rhyme gatherings with unrounded pronunciations such as those in the xiè (蟹), xiào (効), liú (流), shēn (深), and xián (咸) rhyme gatherings or rhyme gatherings with only rounded pronunciations such as those in the yù (遇) rhyme gathering, or rhyme gatherings with only unrounded wide pronunciations such as those in jiāng (江) and guǒ (果) rhyme gatherings. As a result, they thought two divisions were enough to classify these sinograms. However, if 36 sinogram initials were placed into 36 columns, then the table would be too densely arranged. And if they were put into two divisions, then the table would be too sparsely arranged. Therefore, the zhī (知), chè (徹), chéng (澄), and niáng (娘) initials were placed below the duān (端), tòu (透), dìng (定), and ní (泥) initials, respectively. The fēi (非), fū (敷), fèng (奉), and wēi (微) initials were placed below the bāng (帮), pāng (滂), bìng (並), and míng (明) initials, respectively. The zhào (照), chuān (穿), chuáng (牀), shěn (審), and shàn (禪) initials were placed below the jīng (精), qīng (清), cóng (從), xīn (心), and xié (邪) initials, respectively. In this way, the 36 sinogram

94  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged initials were narrowed into 23 columns with four divisions arranged horizontally. Four tones—​the even, rising, departing, and entering tones—​ were added to four divisions, making a four-​by-​four grid. Because the table needed to be arranged with the right density, the 23 initials from jiàn (見) and xī (溪) to lái (來) and rì (日) were placed into the upper section, including divisions Ⅰ and Ⅳ, and the 13 initials from zhī (知) and chè (徹) to shěn and shàn (禪) were placed into the lower section, including divisions Ⅱ and Ⅲ. If one or two articulations in each rhyme were present, one rhyme table was made. If three or four articulations in each rhyme were present, two rhyme tables were made. This was his original intention in producing the rhyme tables.5 Pān Lěi’s explanation involved the principle of making divisions, which is a great advance compared to previous studies,6 but he did not explain why the 36 sinogram initials could be divided into upper or lower sections. Later, Huáng Kǎn (黃侃), based on Pān Lěi’s theory and the findings of historical phonology in the Qīng dynasty, proposed theories such as the “original rhyme in archaic Chinese,” “rhyme variants in the Táng and Sòng dynasties,” “original initials in archaic Chinese,” and “current varied initials,” making up for the deficiencies of Pān Lěi’s theory. Unfortunately, when Pān Lěi checked the rhyme tables against his own theory, he found mistakes in nearly every rhyme table. He thought that this might be because of the imperfect methods of rhyme divisions leading to confusing cases. However, the following literati held that his theory was incorrect for rhyme tables. Subsequently, a third hypothesis was proposed. According to the third hypothesis, the study of rhyme tables was equal to modern phonetics and rhyme tables were essentially Chinese phonological tables. Because the horizontal rows of rhyme tables represented different initials, the vertical columns of four divisions could represent different finals. The matching of initials and finals not only reflected the phonological system of the rhyme dictionaries of the Qièyùn series, but also reflected the actual phonological systems of middle Chinese. This point of view was first proposed by Jiāng Yǒng, a scholar in the Qīng dynasty. Jiāng Yǒng stated, “Rhymes have four divisions. Division I features large apertures and division II features secondary large apertures. Both division III and division IV feature small apertures and division IV features even smaller apertures. It was not easy for scholars to identify the differences.”7 Jiāng Yǒng’s theory was an untested hypothesis at his time. After the introduction of modern methods by Karlgren and the theory of vowel aperture in Western phonetics, a complete set of theories of four divisions with large to small apertures gradually came into being. This theory was very popular and still has great influence. However, this theory contains several intractable contradictions. Firstly, the concept of “division” became unwieldy, as is discussed in the preface of this book. Secondly, in this case, a phonological system would be created

How Was the Question Proposed?  95 that is unbelievably large. Scholars had some further doubts, which are as follows: (1) On what basis were rhyme tables made? Were they based on the rhyme dictionaries of the Qièyùn series or on actual pronunciations? The Qièyùn was composed in the Suí dynasty and reflects the pronunciations of the Northern and Southern dynasties. Rhyme tables were produced in the Táng dynasty. Quite a long time existed between the birth of rhyme tables and the time when the Qièyùn was made. Some people thought that rhyme tables were produced in the Sòng dynasty. In that case, a longer time gap would be present. From the available phonological literature of Middle Chinese, no phonological system was as complicated as that of the Qièyùn.8 As for the phonological system of the common language in the Northern Sòng dynasty, according to the textual research done by Zhōu Zǔmó, the rhyme categories were only equal to the 13 rhyme gatherings of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú. The initial categories were almost the same as that in the Zhōngyuán yīnyùn. The voiced initials had disappeared and rhymes ending with the entering tone had been mixed. The initial sounds only had four articulations, namely unrounded, rounded, [i]‌, and [y] articulations.9 The phonological system became much simpler than the system of the Qièyùn. After the comparison was made, a question was raised about whether rhyme tables were produced based on rhyme dictionaries or on actual pronunciations. If rhyme tables were based on rhyme dictionaries, then when actual pronunciations had gone through great changes. How did the author of the rhyme tables know the pronunciation of each rhyme in the rhyme dictionary? And how did the author analyze the rhymes in a more detailed way than a rhyme dictionary did? (According to the research of modern scholars, if 206 rhymes were classified based on rounded and unrounded articulation, together with big and small apertures, the number of rhyme categories would range from 289 to 339, as compared with the 384 sounds in the rhyme tables.) If rhyme tables were produced based on actual pronunciations, how could the “Table of Pronunciation” made by literati of the Táng and Sòng dynasties according to their spoken language be aligned with the Qièyùn and be used to consult a rhyme dictionary? If this were true, would it not mean that from the Suí to the Sòng dynasties, pronunciations not only remained unchanged but also followed only the phonological system of the Qièyùn in both chanting and speaking? Some held that the Qièyùn further adopted some dialectal pronunciations and archaic Chinese pronunciations (from the Western Zhōu (西周) to the Hàn dynasties) based on a certain phonological system. If so, then the alignment of rhyme dictionaries and rhyme tables would indicate that the scholars who studied historical phonology from the Suí to the Sòng dynasties had not only reached an agreement on the fundamental dialectal pronunciations taken as the basis but also on which kinds of dialectical pronunciations

96  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged and ancient Chinese pronunciations should be adopted. This hypothesis is hard to believe. (2) How should the dental column be understood? The most basic principle of phonological tables is to arrange initials vertically and rhymes horizontally. In columns, initials should be aligned with each other whereas, in rows, finals should be aligned with each other. If a rhyme table were a sophisticated phonological table, it would have to take this form. However, the columns of dentals in the rhyme tables violate this principle. In the rhyme tables, a final was made of three groups of dentals, resulting in a situation where rhymes with the same final were not in the same horizontal row but rhymes with different initials were in the same vertical column, which violated the principle of the phonological table. Why was that? Such a situation could not be explained by the third theory or the first or second theories. (In the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, ménfǎ rules were introduced to explain this, but the explanation was not convincing enough. Literati such as Pān Lěi only focused on the defective points, even claiming that the rhyme tables were wrong in themselves.) Moreover, these three hypotheses all failed to explain why the total number of rhyme tables happened to be 43. Of course, the third hypothesis could explain this question partly by holding that the finals were different, but it could not explain why sinograms with the same rhymes and the same unrounded or rounded articulation had to be listed in two separate tables, such as the jì (祭), xiān (仙), xiāo (宵), qīng (清), and yán (鹽) rhymes. Therefore, the methods by which rhyme tables were arranged remain an unsolved problem that requires further discussion.

Notes 1 See Sī Mǎguāng (司馬光), Dǒng Nányī xù (董南一序), Preface by Dǒng Nányī to the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1985. 1–​2. 2 Sìshēng děngzǐ (四聲等子), Rhyme tables of four tones, in the Cóngshū jíchéng, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1985. 5. 3 See Sī Mǎguāng (司馬光), Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú: jiǎnlì (切韻指掌圖·檢例), The guidelines of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1985. 7. 4 After a preliminary examination, it is known that at least eight such sounds were supplemented in the extant Yùnjìng. They are the zhú (燭) rhyme (division II), hāi (咍) rhyme (division III), hài (駭) rhyme (division II, with rounded articulation), xiè (蟹) rhyme (division II, with rounded articulation), zhěn (軫) rhyme (division II), gē (歌) rhyme (division III with rounded articulation), yǎng (養) rhyme (division II with rounded articulation), and mò (陌) rhyme (division III with rounded articulation). If the yǎn (儼) and yàn (釅) rhymes (which were not in the original Qièyùn) were added as two sounds, the fèi (廢) and mò (陌) rhymes with unrounded articulations were added, and the hǎi (海) rhyme of division III was added, then the total number of sounds would be exactly 384. However, this is just a coincidence.

How Was the Question Proposed?  97 Most likely, the number 384 was used because that number has significance in the Yìjīng (易經), The classic of changes. In the Zhōuyì (周易), The Zhōu book of changes, 64 guà ((卦), hexagrams) are present, and each guà has 6 yáo (爻), broken and unbroken lines making up hexagrams, amounting to 384 yáo. Therefore, the use of 384 could produce a sense of mystery. 5 Pān Lěi (潘耒), Děngyùnbiàn: túshuō (等韻辨·圖說), Explanations for the tables in a study on rhyme divisions, in volume 2 of Lèiyīn (類音), The categories of sounds, Suìchūtáng (遂初堂), 1712. 16. 6 Before Pān Lěi, some scholars such as Yuán Zǐràng (袁子讓) and Yè Bǐngjìng (葉秉敬) also analyzed the situation of a single rhyme table with two divisions, but they did not discuss the problem as clearly as Pān Lěi did. 7 Jiāng Yǒng (江永), Yīnxué biànwēi in the Cóngshū jíchéng chūbiān (叢書集成 初編), The first edition of the collection of series of ancient Chinese books, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1940. 37. 8 See Table 5 and Table 6. Again, the criticism in Lǐ Fú’s Kānwù (刊誤), Critical textual research, in the Táng dynasty also proved that speech sounds at that time were quite different from those in the time of the Qièyùn. 9 Zhōu Zǔmó (周祖謨), Sòngdài biànluò yǔyīn kǎo (宋代汴洛語音考), A study of the spoken pronunciations of Biànliáng and Luòyáng in the Sòng dynasty), in volume 2 of the Wèn xué jí (問學集), A collection of commentaries and questions on learning, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1966. 654.

11 The Concept of Division and the Birth of Rhyme Tables

In the last chapter, when the theory of four divisions with large-​to-​small apertures was discussed, a question was asked: were rhyme tables produced based on rhyme dictionaries or on spoken pronunciations? This question cannot be answered using the theory of four divisions with large-​to-​small apertures. The biggest obstacle to answering this question might have been division (děng (等)). If division had not been invented, the phonological table could have been produced much earlier. The reason why division might have been an obstacle was that it was regarded as a feature of sounds such as initials, rhymes, and tones, and it was taken for granted that division was regarded as the premise of the birth of rhyme tables. As noted, the primary mark of the birth of rhyme divisions was the concept and theory of division. Without the birth and use of the concept of division, there would have been no study of rhyme divisions. A phonological table that was not produced based on the concept of division cannot be counted as a typical rhyme table.1 We should not rush to a conclusion about whether the concept of division must precede rhyme tables. There should indeed be a guiding principle for compiling rhyme tables but taking this guiding principle as the concept and theory of division was derived from the notion that division was a critical part of rhyme tables, which reversed the order of cause and effect. The theory of four divisions with large-​to-​small apertures arises from this reversed logic. To avoid this dilemma, we must try to answer the following question: did the concept of division exist before the time when rhyme tables were compiled, or did it come into being at that time? People in the Qīng dynasty already thought that the concept of division had existed before the time when rhyme tables were compiled. For example, Dài Zhèn (戴震) said, Zhèng Qiáo’s Qīyīn yùnjiàn produced the table of inner and outer zhuǎn. In the Yuán dynasty, the rhyme tables in Liú Jiàn’s Qièyùn zhǐnán were classified as Division I, II, III, or IV according to the degree of large-​ to-​small aperture; therefore, these kinds of rhymes were called rhyme divisions … After this was established by later scholars, the 206 rhymes were in fact studied based on this theory. Terms such as hū (articulation, DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-13

The Concept of Division and the Birth of Rhyme Tables  99 (呼)) and děng (division, (等)) followed the old terminology of the Suí and Táng dynasties. People in later generations studied them and made them the terms of a specialized discipline.2 Qián Dàxīn also stated, “When Lù Fǎyán classified the 206 rhymes, he identified divisions I, II, III, and IV as well as unrounded and rounded articulation in a very detailed way.”3 Before Dài Zhèn and Qián Dàxīn, Jiāng Yǒng stated, At that time [I believe this refers to the time of Shěn Yuē], the theory of four tones was newly established. People took it seriously when they dealt with the phonological defects. In addition, the study of sinographic liaison was very popular in the Southern and Northern dynasties. Rhyme divisions and sinogram initials were gradually introduced from Serindia and were developed in the hands of monks … If a group of the same rhymes had different divisions, such as the gōng (公) and gōng (宫) rhymes, the same initials but different articulations, such as the jī (饑) and jūn (龜) rhymes, or the same pronunciation but different sinograms, such as the qí (歧) and qí (奇) rhymes, their sinographic liaison would all be differentiated so as to not be confused. The sinographic liaison and rhyme divisions were determined at that time and things were made clear.4 It seemed that Dài Zhèn and Qián Dàxīn both thought that Lù Fǎyán examined and determined the 206 rhymes based on the four divisions. Jiāng Yǒng studied further and thought that the basis should include rounded and unrounded articulation together with large-​to-​small aperture and even chóngniǔ doublets. In terms of the number of the determined rhymes, Dài Zhèn and Qián Dàxīn gave an accurate result, namely, 206, whereas Jiāng Yǒng’s result was about 320. However, they all failed to reach the result of 384 mentioned in the Zhǐzhǎngtú and Sìshēng děngzǐ, which included the sinograms that were put in “pseudo Division II” and “pseudo Division IV” (Jiāng Yǒng noted that sinograms having a zhào (照) initial that were put in Division II and sinograms having a jīng (精) initial that were put in Division IV should have been put in Division III). In other words, they only included sinograms that appeared in the rhyme tables but did not include sinograms that were liaised in the Qièyùn. On this basis, it was not sufficient to assert that the concept of division had already existed at that time. It is well established that rhyme tables were born in the middle and late periods of the Táng dynasty. In all the phonological materials before the middle period of the Táng dynasty, including rhyme dictionaries, lexicographic works, works on the pronunciation and meaning of the Tripitaka, or works on the transliteration of Sanskrit, no records of division have been found. Later scholars who studied the phonological materials of this period did little besides drawing similarities with the rhyme tables. Only Huáng Cuìbó mentioned the changes of division in his “Huìlín yíqiè jīng yīnyì fǎnqiè kǎo,”

100  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged which seemed to prove that division had already existed at that time. He held that Huìlín’s (慧琳) liaison system granted us two things through the sound evolution from archaic to middle times. One was that the sinograms of four divisions generated many other sinograms.5 The other was that the labials are divided into light and heavy. Huang said: The SL initial of the rhyming sinograms of qí (齊) the 12th rhyme of level tone I6, xiān (先) the 1st rhyme of even tone II, xiāo (萧) the 3rd rhyme of even tone II, qīng (青) the 15th rhyme of even tone II, and tiān the 25th rhyme of even tone II of the Guǎngyùn (including other uneven tonal rhymes) and the rhyming sinograms of the so-​called rhymes of Division I and II, namely the jiā (佳), jiē (皆), huī (灰), and hāi (咍) rhymes, belong to the same category. In ménfǎ’s yīqiè jīng yīnyì, they were all converted to sinograms of Division IV.7 The categories of the SL initials listed by Huáng Cuìbó seemed to be correct. However, he made a mistake in his textual research. He conducted textual research on the initial and rhyme categories separately. However, he neglected the influence of the rhyme categories when he dealt with the initial categories and vice versa. After conducting textual research on the rhyme categories, he stated: The jì (霽) rhyme includes the jì (祭) and fèi (廢) rhymes … the yóu (尤) and yōu (幽) rhymes can be merged … the xiāo (蕭) and xiāo (宵) rhymes can be merged … half of the xiān (仙) and yuán (元) rhymes can be merged, and the other half of the xiān (仙) and xiān (先) rhymes can be merged. The qīng (清) and qīng (青) rhymes belong to the same category. The yán (鹽), tiān (添), and yán (嚴) rhymes all belong to the same category. And rhymes in this category were classified into one rhyme.8 Therefore, these so-​called definite Division IV rhymes in the Qièyùn, such as the qí (齊), xiān (先), xiāo (蕭), qīng (青), and tiān (添) rhymes, were all merged into rhymes of Division III in the Huìlín yīqièjīng yīnyì. If the Division IV rhymes did not exist, would it not be contradictory to say that taking the sinograms of these rhymes as SL initials would lead to an increase in Division IV rhymes? Apart from Huáng Cuìbó’s theory, the categorization of SL initials and finals of the Qièyùn was used to prove that the concept of division had already existed. Is division the categorization of SL initials and finals? The answer is no. It is true that the categorization of SL initials and finals became the basis for compiling rhyme tables later and was the condition for the birth of division, but the categorization was not division itself. Many theories exist on the number of categories of SL initials, ranging from 33 to 51. If they were categorized into “five-​type initials” or “seven-​type initials,” then every type would include one, two, or three sets, but they could not have four sets.

The Concept of Division and the Birth of Rhyme Tables  101 Therefore, four divisions could not arise merely from the SL initials. What about the SL finals? The SL finals of each rhyme could be classified into one, two, three, or even four types. If the SL finals were categorized based on aperture, they could be categorized into two kinds at most, which could not reflect four divisions either. The differences between the large-​to-​small apertures of each rhyme, which involve the largest, second largest, small, and smaller apertures as mentioned by later scholars, could not be reflected by the SL final either. Other scholars suggested that, instead of using the SL initial or the SL final separately, the SL initial and the SL final should be used together. This suggestion is correct, but if they are used together, they would have to be made into a table. In this way, does it happen to prove the reverse argument, that is, that division came after the birth of rhyme tables? Consequently, that the SL initials and the finals in a rhyme dictionary could be categorized does not prove that the concept of division existed before rhyme tables were born. In 1983, Lǐ Xīnkuí argued that the concept of division had existed before rhyme tables were born in his Hànyǔ děngyùnxué (漢語等韻學), The study of Chinese rhyme divisions, and he discussed the origin and development of the concept of division. His conclusion was that: Division in ancient rhyme tables originated from initial categories. Different divisions were initially termed “light,” “voiceless,” “heavy,” and “voiced” (afterwards, other terms for different divisions were also invented by Shào Yōng, such as “starting,” “growing,” “declining,” and “ending”). In the early stages, the classification of division for initial categories mainly took different manners of articulation as the criterion. Later (or at the same time), it also took different places of articulation as the criterion. Dividing initial categories would inevitably involve rhyme categories because the syllable structure of Chinese is noticeably integrated. A certain type of initial can only match a certain type of rhyme. The division of initials should correspond to the division of rhymes. Therefore, the conception of division changed from initial categories to rhyme categories. Initials and rhymes could both be made into several divisions. The division of initials and rhymes was correspondingly embodied mainly in the places of the articulation of initials, to make the manner of articulation less important than the method of division. Divisions were made mainly according to the places of the articulation of initials and the articulation of vowels in finals (the vowel-​opening degree, that is, large-​to-​small aperture, as well as the existence of the medial vowel in a final).9 In Lǐ Xīnkuí’s opinion, the concept of division had existed before rhyme tables were made. The term division was originally used for initials. At the very beginning, it was used for the manner of articulation (such as the divisions of “voiceless,” “second-​voiceless,” “voiced,” and “second-​voiced” proposed by Shěn Kuò (沈括), with examples such as diān (颠), tiān (天), tián (田), nián (年),

102  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged bāng (邦), pāng (胮), tián (龐), and máng10 (庬)). Afterward, it was used indicating the manner of articulation (such as the divisions of “heavy,” “middle heavy,” “light,” and “middle light” proposed by Shěn Kuò and the examples of “tongue-​head and retroflex” by Lǐ Xīnkuí). Later, it was used to refer to rhymes when the matching relationship between initials and rhymes needed to be explained. This view is also problematic. If based on the manner of articulation, it is true that several of the five-​type initials could be classified into four categories, but this has nothing to do with division. If based on the places of articulation, as has been discussed above with the categorization of the SL initial, none of the five-​type initials could be classified into four categories. As for the matching between initials and rhymes, because it came after the origin of rhyme tables, it could not prove that the concept of division had existed before rhyme tables were made. Perhaps Lǐ Xīnkuí also noticed the deficiencies of this theory. Shortly after he stressed that the concept of division came into being before rhyme tables (see page 49 of his book quoted in the preceding context), he refuted his theory in the same book. He stated: The concept of division appeared after the theory of rhyme divisions had been proposed. The sounds of sinograms were classified into divisions in rhyme tables and therefore rhymes were also made into various divisions … The fact reflected in sinographic liaison is that categories were not only for rhymes but also for initials. These categories provided an objective basis for the subsequent division classification. Division is in fact the standard and consequence of differentiating a sound category.11 This point of view is more reasonable. Another case can also prove that the concept of division did not exist in rhyme dictionaries. Some people believed that some unnecessary and clumsy extra work had been done in rhyme tables. For example, Chén Lǐ stated: The liaisers in the Guǎngyùn include those for a rhyme of one category and those for a rhyme of two, three, or four categories. If similar rhymes are counted together, a rhyme could be classified into 13 or 14 categories. Literati studying the Děngyùn defined four divisions. If the rhymes were classified into rounded and unrounded articulations, then those literati would define four divisions for each of those two kinds of articulations … If so, why did the ancients bother to classify rhymes? Why did they categorize the rhymes of the SL final? This was a defect of defining four divisions.12 Many modern scholars have agreed with Chén Lǐ. They thought that it was wrong that all the rhyme tables were unanimously made into four divisions, resulting in much unnecessary and clumsy extra work. Chén Lǐ was not the first to criticize the deficiencies of rhyme tables. Literati studying the Děngyùn

The Concept of Division and the Birth of Rhyme Tables  103 in the Míng and Qīng dynasties (such as Pān Lěi) already noted that the principle of rhyme divisions was not sufficient and made this study chaotic. Because rhyme dictionaries and rhyme tables are rather inconsistent in terms of division, division in the present sense did not exist in rhyme dictionaries. So far, we have clarified the point that the concept of division did not exist in rhyme dictionaries in the time of the Qièyùn. If it is agreed that rhyme tables were compiled based on rhyme dictionaries or to supplement rhyme dictionaries, then rhyme tables should not be based on division. In that case, the only possibility is that rhyme tables were not compiled based on rhyme dictionaries. They were compiled based on the principle of division, which was independent of rhyme dictionaries. This theory has been noted before. For example, when Chén Lǐ held that the categorization of liaison was meant for the division made later, he also said, “The sinogram initials and rhyme divisions are based on the speech sounds of the Sòng and Yuán dynasties. They could not be used to discuss traditional phonology before the Táng dynasty.”13 Huáng Cuìbó put it more directly, “We … advocated that a border must be clarified between the system of the Qièyùn and that of rhyme divisions. They should never be mixed.”14 However, not many people accepted this view. This view denies the connection between rhyme tables and rhyme dictionaries. Although the trouble of seeking explanations for the incompatibilities in rhyme tables and rhyme dictionaries is avoided, the view makes rhyme tables less persuasive at explaining rhyme dictionaries. Ultimately, this view brings fewer benefits. Therefore, those who advocated that rhyme tables be compiled based on division were conservative and did not completely deny the link between rhyme tables and rhyme dictionaries. However, whether the link is completely or partially denied, it is improper to think that the compilation of rhyme tables is based on a given theory of rhyme divisions. The most persuasive evidence is that, so far, nobody has given a satisfactory explanation of division. Numerous scholars have thought that division was like initials, rhymes, and tones, reflecting certain phonological features, but nobody made a definite statement about what features it reflected. If division referred to the degree of aperture of the coda, sometimes it would be related to the existence of the medial vowel in a final. If division referred to the existence of the medial vowel, it would only result in two divisions instead of four divisions. If division referred to the medial vowel as well as the coda, sometimes the reason why rhyme tables are listed in different divisions would merely be attributed to initials. Therefore, division seemed to become a peculiar concept beyond reach and definition in the history of Chinese phonology. This complexity reminds us that the nature of division should be discussed differently. If the issue still concerns the priority of initials or rhymes, it will be unsolvable. If division is taken as the principle when compiling rhyme tables, it will have to be a standard that can serve for all rhyme tables. It would be unacceptable that in one rhyme table one standard is used while in another rhyme table a different standard is used, or in still another rhyme table a third standard is used. Too many standards imply no standard. Although using

104  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged many standards to explain rhyme tables is highly convenient, it proves to be subjective and arbitrary in practice. Furthermore, it only reflects the superficial features of rhyme tables and turns out to be unscientific and vulnerable. Most of those who proposed that the concept of division came into being before rhyme tables believed that division was the product of analyzing speech sounds in a detailed way. If so, the rhyme tables based on such a theory of division should have reflected phonological rules more scientifically, but they did not. As for what was indicated in the last chapter, the most basic principle of compiling phonological tables should have been initials in vertical columns and rhymes in horizontal rows. In vertical columns, initials would have been aligned with each other. In horizontal rows, finals would have been aligned with each other. In this way, all the items in the table would have reflected the structure of syllables. The Xītán zhāng, the model of rhyme tables, took this very method. However, in rhyme tables, the column of dentals violates this basic principle. Initials in vertical columns are not categorized into one kind. They have three kinds, so initials are not aligned with one another. Because of this, horizontal rows are not aligned with each other. The sinograms of the same final are sometimes listed separately in three rows. If division was made when speech sounds were analyzed in a detailed way, but rhyme tables produced based on division turned out to violate the basic principle of phonological tables, could it be reasonable that such a theory of division had existed before rhyme tables were made? We can understand this from the perspective of ménfǎ. One of the comprehensive works on ménfǎ was the twenty ménfǎ rules recorded in monk Zhēnkōng’s Yùyàoshi ménfǎ. Among the twenty ménfǎ rules, apart from yīnhé (completely matched liaison) and kāihé (unrounded and rounded), the remaining 18 ménfǎ rules are all related to division. Some of the ménfǎ rules determine division by initials and others determine division by rhymes to solve the problem of the disagreement between liaison in rhyme dictionaries and division in rhyme tables. Some ménfǎ rules such as chuànglì yīnhé (new rule of labial sound matching), Jìzhèng yīnhé (new rule of true dental sound matching, a ménfǎ rule relating to the zhào (照) initial group), and máyùn bùdìng (undetermined má (麻) rhyme) came later, whereas many other ménfǎ rules, such as zhènjiù (rescue), zhèngyīn píngqiè (the SL final is categorized by the division of the SL initial when the initial belongs to the zhào (照) initial group), jìyùn píngqiè (a ménfǎ rule that, when the SL initial is a Division III sinogram of the zhào (照) initial set, the sinogram liaised should be categorized into Division III whether the SL final belongs to the rhyme of Division I or Division IV), rìjì píngqiè (a ménfǎ rule relating to the rì (日) and zhào (照) initials), and yùxià píngqiè (the SL final categorized by the division of the SL initial when the initial is yù (喻)) as well as tōngguǎng (connection and broadness, the phenomenon of a sinogram of Division III connecting with a sinogram of Division IV), nèiwài (inner zhuǎn table and outer zhuǎn table), and lèigé (crossing category, when a Division I or Division IV rhyme makes use of a sinogram of the zhī (知) rhyme set or a Division II or Division III rhyme makes use of a sinogram of

The Concept of Division and the Birth of Rhyme Tables  105 the duān (端) rhyme set) were in tune with early rhyme tables. Here, a question occurs: because ménfǎ rules reflect disagreement between the liaisons in rhyme dictionaries and divisions in the rhyme tables, were the rhyme tables made based on rhyme dictionaries, or were the rhyme tables made based on the theory of division? If the concept of division existed in rhyme dictionaries, then no difference should exist between the theory of rhyme dictionaries and the theory of division. However, in the preceding part of this book, it was proven that division did not exist in rhyme dictionaries. Here ménfǎ rules just provide another proof for this conclusion. If rhyme tables were made completely based on the theory of division, then they could ignore the liaison of rhyme dictionaries. Strictly following the theory of division would be enough. In this way, ménfǎ rules would become redundant. Because ménfǎ rules reflect the disagreement between the liaisons in rhyme dictionaries and divisions in rhyme tables, if the concept of division had existed then, at least the author of the rhyme tables must have considered division together with the rhyme dictionaries. In that case, why did the author of the rhyme tables choose two contradictory things as references? Could they succeed in crafting the rhyme tables under these contradictory guidelines? Could they make the rhyme tables at all? In addition, if the author had realized that the references were contradictory when they were making the rhyme tables, they could not have concealed this from readers, or readers would not understand or accept it. In that case, the ménfǎ rules would not need to wait for several hundred years to be established after rhyme tables were made. Rhyme tables and rhyme dictionaries should agree since table makers do not need ménfǎ rules. Because rhyme dictionaries lack division, division cannot exist beyond rhyme dictionaries. Furthermore, many phenomena in rhyme tables cannot be explained by the theory of division. Two examples are “pseudo Division II” and “pseudo Division IV.” Division, which involves the main vowel, medial vowel, and initial, was complicated enough. However, division was further split into “true” division and “pseudo” division. It is hard to understand how some division was said to be true while other division was said to be pseudo even though they are in the same position in the rhyme table. How could the author choose such a complex standard? As another example, Division III and IV rhymes, such as the jì (祭), xiān (仙), xiāo (宵), qīng (清), and yán (鹽) rhymes, could be put into different rhyme tables. If division—​the product of detailed phonological analysis—​had existed before or while rhyme tables were being made, this kind of arrangement would also be unimaginable. For instance, the sinograms in Division III of the xiān (仙) rhyme could form a set of four divisions from large to small apertures with sinograms in the hán (寒), shān (删), and xiān (先) rhymes. The sinograms in Division IV of the xiān (仙) rhyme could form another set of four divisions from large to small apertures with sinograms in the shān (山) and yuán (元) rhymes. The phenomenon is hard to explain unless the xiān (仙) rhyme was agreed to have two rhymes. No modern scholars think that the sinograms in divisions III and IV of the xiān (仙) rhyme belong to two rhymes. This also proves that rhyme

106  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged tables were not made based on division that was produced through phonological analysis. After the notion division came into being, what it referred to was initially uncertain. The example of the “cases of four divisions with heavy and light tones” taken by the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn was from the rhyme tables that modern scholars describe as “perfectly equipped with four divisions.” (The case of the gěng (梗) and céng (曾) rhyme gatherings being merged to produce a rhyme table was also regarded as “perfectly equipped with four divisions.”) The division here seemed to refer to rhyme. However, the “in the nine sinograms of jīng (精), qīng (清), cóng (從), xīn (心), xié (邪), shěn (審), chuān (穿), shàn (禪), and rán (然) (I think the rán (然) should be zhào (照)], there were only two divisions of ‘heavy and light’ ” recorded in the second section of the Cánjuàn,15 which seemingly indicates that division referred to the place of articulation of initials. Until the Sòng dynasty, this was still the case. In the Mèngxī bǐtán (夢溪筆談), Brush talks from dream brook by Shěn Kuò in the Sòng dynasty, Shěn Kuò mentioned initials and rhymes. He said, “Each initial has four divisions. They are the voiceless, second-​voiceless, voiced, and second-​voiced initials. For example, diān (顛), tiān (天), tián (田), nián (年), bāng (邦), pāng (胮), páng (龐), and páng (庬).”16 Division here refers to the manner of articulation of initials. However, he continued, “Sinograms had heavy, middle heavy, light, and middle light tones. Lèigé is when the initials of this division were categorized into another division because of their unassignable features. Although the divisions were different, they could be regarded as being in the same category. For example, the labials and labial category and the dentals and dental category.”17 Division here now referred to the place of articulation of initials. He added, “The rhymes belonged to this division. For example, the initials of dōng (冬) and dōng (東) both belonged to the duān (端) initial. The initial of dōng (冬) was Division I of the duān (端) initial and thus dōng (冬) took dōu (都) as its SL initial and zōng (宗) as its SL final. Zōng (宗) was the rhyme of the first category.”18 Now division refers to rhyme. Apart from Shěn Kuò, in Zhù Mì’s Huángjí jīngshì jiě qǐshùjué which was written in the Southern Sòng dynasty, division referred to the manner of articulation of initials as well. Just as with Shěn Kuò, in Shào Guāngzǔ’s (邵光祖) Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú: jiǎnlì (切韻指掌圖·檢例), The guidelines of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú; henceforth Jiǎnlì, written in the Míng dynasty, sometimes division refers to the manner of articulation of initials, and sometimes division refers to what scholars discuss in modern times. The division that scholars often talk about in modern times had different names in the past. In the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn and Shào Guāngzǔ’s Jiǎnlì, it is called division. In the Yùnjìng: guīzìlì (韻鏡·歸字例), Examples of sinogram categories in the Yùnjìng, it is called “position.” In the Sìshēng děngzǐ: xù (四聲等子·序), Preface to the Sìshēng děngzǐ, it is called “category.” In Shào Yōng’s Huángjí jīngshì: shēngyīn chànghétú (皇極經世·聲音倡和 圖), A rhyme table reflecting the dialectal pronunciations of Biànliáng and

The Concept of Division and the Birth of Rhyme Tables  107 Luòyáng of the Sòng dynasty in the Huángjí jīngshì, it is called “start, grow, decline, end.” It also had other names such as “the heavy of heavy, the light of heavy, the light of light, the heavy of light.”19 While division could have many different meanings, the division that scholars often talk about in modern times had different names in the past. What did the chaotic concept of division mean? Does it prove, like many scholars have advocated, that division referred to initials as well as rhymes? I do not think so. On the contrary, this simply proved that division referred to neither initials nor rhymes. It was just a synonym for “category.” If division is not thought to be mysterious and complicated, as has been quoted before, the words of scholars such as Shěn Kuò will be made much clearer by substituting “division” for “category.” Perhaps it was just because division was used as the title of the Sìshēng děngzǐ and the book became increasingly popular thanks to Liú Jiàn’s (劉鑑) recommendation20 that later scholars gradually used division to mean the four rows in rhyme tables of the Sòng and Yuán dynasties. Chén Lǐ stated, “The Mèngxī bǐtán says, ‘The tones in vertical lines had four divisions. For example, bāng (帮), pāng (滂), bàng (傍), and máng (茫). The four divisions here are not those that scholars who studied rhyme divisions talked about. Then did they come into being after Shěn Kuò’s time?”21 His assumption was quite reasonable. The fact was that it was not division that led to the birth of rhyme tables. It was rhyme tables that led to the birth of division. Because division had not existed before the birth of rhyme tables and did not exist when rhyme tables were being arranged, when the arrangement of rhyme tables is studied, the concept of division can be ignored to study how ancient authors of rhyme tables converted rhyme dictionaries into rhyme tables to meet their needs. At the same time, how division came into being in the process of making rhyme tables can be explored.

Notes 1 Lǐ Xīnkuí (李新魁), Hànyǔ děngyùnxué (漢語等韻學), The study of Chinese rhyme divisions, Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company (中華書局), 1983. 49. 2 Dài Zhèn (戴震), Dàizhèn jí (戴震集). A collection of Dài Zhèn’s works, Shanghai: Shànghǎi Gǔjí Chūbǎnshè (上海古籍出版社), Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House, 1980. 94. 3 Qián Dàxīn (钱大昕), Volume 15 of Qiányántáng jí (潜研堂集), A collection written in the Qiányán hall, Shanghai: Shànghǎi Gǔjí Chūbǎnshè (上海古籍出版 社), Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House. 248. 4 Jiāng Yǒng (江永), Gǔyùn biāozhǔn: lìyán (古韻標準·例言), Examples according to the standard of ancient rhymes, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1982. 3. 5 Huáng Cuìbó (黄淬伯), Huìlín yíqiè jīng yīnyì fǎnqiè kǎo (慧琳《一切經音義》反 切考), A study of the sinographic liaison of Huìlín’s Yíqiè jīng yīnyì, Taipei: Guólì Zhōngyāng Yánjiūyuàn Lìshǐ Yǔyán Yánjiūsuǒ (國立中央研究院歷史語言研究所), The Institute of History and Philology Academia Sinica, 1931. 32. 6 Because of the large number of even tone rhymes in Guǎngyùn, they are divided into two sections, namely even tone I and even tone II.

108  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged 7 Ibid., 32. 8 Ibid., 69. 9 Lǐ Xīnkuí (李新魁), Hànyǔ děngyùnxué, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1983. 60–​61. 10 Here, the pronunciations of 田, 龐, and 庬 were deliberately changed in order to show the voiced and voiceless features of the four divisions mentioned by Shěn Kuò. 11 Ibid., 158. 12 Chén Lǐ (陳澧), Qièyùn kǎo: wàipiān: juànsān, Beijing: Zhōngguó Shūdiàn (中國書 店), 1984. 12. 13 Ibid., 18. 14 Huáng Cuìbó (黄淬伯), “Qièyùn yīnxì de běnzhì tèzhēng” [切韻音系的本質特征), Essential characteristics of the phonological system of the Qièyùn, (南京大學學 報(人文科學)), Journal of Nanjing University (Humanities Edition), nos. 3 & 4, 1964, 106. 15 Zhōu Zǔmó (周祖謨), Tángwǔdài yùnshū jícún, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書 局), 1983. 804. 16 Shěn Kuò (沈括), Volume 15 of the Mèngxī bǐtán, (夢溪筆談), An encyclopedia written by Shěn Kuò in the Sòng Dynasty, Shanghai: Wénmíng Shūjú (文明書局), 1915. 267. 17 Ibid., 267. 18 Ibid., 269. 19 The theory of Wú Jìshì (吳繼仕) of the Míng dynasty in the Yīnshēng jìyuán (音聲 紀元), A book with more discussions of initials, rhymes, and tones, quoted from Lǐ Xīnkuí’s Hànyǔ děngyùn xué, p. 27. 20 Liú Jiàn (劉鑒), Jīngshǐ zhèngyīn qièyùn zhǐnán: xù, (經史正音切韻指南·序), The preface to the proper pronunciation of the sinograms in the canons and histories, Shìsīyí (释思宜), 1496. 1. 21 See Chén Lǐ (陳澧), Qièyùn kǎo: wàipiān: juànsān, Beijing: Zhōngguó Shūdiàn (中國書店), 1984. 19–​20.

12 The Nature of the Phonology of the Qièyùn

Because rhyme tables were produced based on a certain principle of rhyme dictionaries, before the arrangement of rhyme tables is studied, the nature of rhyme dictionaries needs to be understood. The nature of the Qièyùn was constantly debated in the field of Chinese phonology. In the early 1960s, a heated debate was held. The records of that debate were saved for reference. I do not want to list scholars’ different theories and views in detail in this book but only want to share my view after summarizing the main argument of each party. About the nature of the Qièyùn, two views exist: Firstly, that it is a unitary work of a certain time and place. Secondly, that it is a cumulative work of different times and places. The former was termed the “single system” theory and the latter the “comprehensive system” theory. However, the two pairs of terms are not synonymous because the reconstruction result of a comprehensive system of different times and places might be an inclusive system (with 206 rhymes partially reconstructed), but it could also be a single system (with 206 rhymes completely reconstructed). If the views on the nature of the Qièyùn are put together with the results of Chinese phonological reconstruction, three kinds of views on the Qièyùn can be summarized: (1) Single system: the hypothesis of a single time and place plus all different sound reconstructions; (2) Comprehensive system: the hypothesis of different times and places plus sound reconstructions with the same sound yet different rhymes; (3) Inclusive system: the hypothesis of different times and places plus all different sound reconstructions. I coined the last term, and it is explained in my paper “Lùn zǒnghé tǐxì” (論總和體系), On an inclusive system.1 Phonological reconstruction is related to the use of the theory of rhyme divisions, which will be discussed later. The difference between the hypothesis of a single time and place and the hypothesis of different times and places will now be compared. The hypothesis of a single time and place was established by Karlgren. Later, it was improved upon by scholars such as Chén Yínkè, DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-14

110  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Zhōu Fǎgāo, Gě Yìqīng, and Lǐ Róng and was incorporated into the Cháng’ān system, the hypothesis of a standard pronunciation in the royal institution of Luòyáng, the hypothesis of the pronunciation of a living Luòyáng dialect, and so on. Their reasons were as follows: (1) A single phonologic system can be described in detail, but for different phonologic systems, only corresponding relations can be established. They should not be mixed to establish a complete phonological system. (2) Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn xù states that light sounds are a deficiency of the Wú and Chǔ dialects and heavy sounds are features of the Yān and Zhào dialects; the Qín and Lǒng dialects take the departing tone as the entering tone, and the Liáng and Yì dialects pronounce the even tone like the departing tone. This comment criticizes various dialects, indicating that Lù believed the pronunciation of Luòyáng to be the orthodox pronunciation. (3) Yánshì jiāxùn: yīncípiān (顏氏家訓·音辭篇),The part of discussing sound and speech in the Yánshì jiāxùn, mentions the standard of authentic pronunciation. It states, “After negotiation, only the pronunciations of Luòyáng and Jīnlíng belong to the class of orthodox pronunciation.” However, because officials living in the North moved to the South, the phonological systems of the two places were similar for high officials and literati. (4) The liaison systems of certain lexicographic works, rhyme dictionaries, and pronunciation and meaning books near the time of the Qièyùn, after they were redesigned, were like the liaison system of the Qièyùn. (5) The system of finals of certain modern dialects were also complicated and therefore we cannot say whether the sound values were unreliable because the sounds reconstructed in the Qièyùn were difficult to pronounce. (6) Because the system of initials in the Qièyùn was unitary, the system of finals was unitary as well. The notion of a comprehensive system from different times and places was popular among traditional phonologists, but as a view or a theory, it came into being later than the hypothesis of a single time and place and was the opposite of this hypothesis. Many scholars who advocated the hypothesis of different times and places were earlier advocates of the hypothesis of a single time and place. Representatives included Zhāng Bǐnglín (章炳麟), Táng Lán (唐蘭), Luó Chángpéi, Wáng Lì, Huáng Cuìbó, Zhōu Zǔmó, and Shǐ Cúnzhí. Their main reasons were as follows: (1) Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn xù made it very clear that the Qièyùn was made to discuss the sounds of different times and places by referring to various rhyme dictionaries and lexicographic works. (2) The annotations under the rhyme headings of Wáng Rénxù’s Kānmiù bǔquē qièyùn clearly indicated that Lù Fǎyán preferred further

The Nature of the Phonology of the Qièyùn  111

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

differentiated rhymes to integrated rhymes when he made use of his predecessors’ rhyme dictionaries to compile his own rhyme dictionary. The Yánshì jiāxùn: yīncípiān notes that the policy of making various rhyme dictionaries was to study the sounds of different times and places by focusing on the pronunciations in royal capital areas and referring to dialects and spoken language. The contemporary categorization of the rhymes of the transliteration of Chinese in foreign languages such as the Japanese Wú dialect (Go-​on), the Japanese Hàn dialect (Kan-​on), Korean, and Vietnamese are not as refined as that in the Qièyùn, which is another proof for the hypothesis of different times and places provided by phonetic languages. According to the results of the study, all the other phonological works between the Southern and Northern dynasties and the Sòng dynasty, including literati’s usage of rhyme in poetry, turned out to be simpler or even much simpler than the Qièyùn–​Guǎngyùn system. In fact, the reconstructed sounds based on the hypothesis of a single time and place could hardly be pronounced. They did not exist in any phonological system.

These reasons were gradually clarified by the two sides in different ways, with some presented directly and others established by way of counterargument. By comparison, the hypothesis of different times and places was usually presented directly because this view was made later, and much evidence needed to be found to prove it. The hypothesis of a single time and place was usually established by means of counterarguments because it was made earlier and therefore if it managed to overturn the arguments of the hypothesis of different times and places, it made sense. This is quite clear when the arguments of the two sides are compared. At the same time, this feature also makes the arguments from both sides very specific, often directed to counter a specific position of the opposing side, so it is easy to see a tug-​of-​war situation. The same material or same fact could be used as evidence by both sides. For example, the paragraph in the Yánshì jiāxùn: yīncípiān was used by both parties to strengthen their arguments. One side thought that it proved the hypothesis of different times and places while the other side thought that it criticized “dialects” and endorsed the pronunciations of Luòyáng and Jīnlíng. Various phonological materials at that time were also used by both parties. One party emphasized that some of these materials are categorized in a very detailed way and could be taken as proof for the Qièyùn in which the rhymes are categorized in a detailed way. The other side stressed that various materials are not categorized in such a detailed way as those of the Qièyùn, which proves the inclusiveness of the Qièyùn. Judging which side is correct would be hard. Some people even continued wondering whether the sound reconstructions for the Qièyùn were pronounceable or not, which left the problem unresolved for a long time.

112  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged I think that to learn the nature of the Qièyùn, one must focus on the key points of fundamental problems instead of arguing over trivialities. Once the fundamental problems are solved, the details will be easy to deal with. However, discussing these fundamental problems requires closely linking the historical background with the features of Chinese. I think two sets of questions should be discussed in advance. Firstly, what is the principle of phonological study in the time of the Qièyùn? Is it the same as the principle that modern scholars follow? Secondly, is the method of “combining” different phonological systems feasible? Is it necessary? These questions will be discussed in the following paragraph. (1) What is the phonological principle in the time of the Qièyùn? Whenever the historical questions are studied, we should first discard prejudice and think from the perspective of the ancients. We should never take it for granted that our way of thinking is the same as that of the ancients; in fact, it is quite different. Social conditions have changed from ancient times to modern. Ancient people could not think like us due to the limitations of their historical conditions. This is the most fundamental historical attitude we should have when we are studying historical questions. In terms of studying actual pronunciations, a correct historical attitude is also presumed. The current understanding of studying spoken pronunciation involves two aspects: phonetics and phonemics. Phonetics requires the ability to analyze phonemes in detail, identifying even the smallest differences. For example, the vowel a can be classified into the front vowel [a]‌, the middle vowel [A], the back vowel [ɑ], the long vowel [ɑ:], and the short vowel [a]. The consonant k can be classified based on palatalization and labialization. Phonemics, on the other hand, emphasizes commonality, and small differences that do not influence meaning are neglected. That is, only the most significant difference in the smallest range (the discriminative range) is taken into consideration. For example, [a], [A], and [ɑ] can be written in the form of /​a/​, and the palatal or labial [k] can all be written in the form of /​k/​if such assimilation does not bring about a difference in meaning. The study of phonology requires the integration of phonetics and phonemics. This principle arises from the conditions provided by modern science. A century ago, such conditions were not yet possible. Therefore, how did the ancients understand the study of phonology? Firstly, the ancients were not capable of detailed phonological analysis. The reasons are as follows: (1) There was no concept of “phoneme” or “sound element” in ancient times. Phonological analysis needs to take the analysis of phonemes as its basis. However, the ancients did not know phonemes. Even Jiāng Yǒng of the Qīng dynasty and Huáng Kǎn of modern times could only

The Nature of the Phonology of the Qièyùn  113 describe the pronunciations of 36 sinogram initials vaguely or metaphorically. The ancient methods for the analysis of pronunciation, as far as I know, only included alliterated disyllables, rhymed disyllables, and sinographic liaison. Alliterated disyllables, rhymed disyllables, and sinographic liaison might share some aspects of phonetic analysis, but they are not phonetic analysis. It is unwise to overestimate the capabilities of the ancients. (2) The ancients lacked systematic knowledge of dialects. Strictly speaking, detailed phonological analysis is not necessary within one language unless such analysis is taken as the basis for establishing phonemes. This method becomes important only when several languages or dialects are compared. Although the ancients had realized the differences among dialects since the Pre-​Qín period and although Yáng Xióng of the Western Hàn dynasty even collected and sorted out dialectal vocabularies, they did not conduct systematic research on dialects, especially on dialectal pronunciations. The ancients, even experts such as Lù Fǎyán, only had a vague understanding of dialectal pronunciations. This is indicated by their use of descriptive terms such as, “light and shallow” and “heavy and voiced” or “changing a departing tone into an entering tone” and “an even tone similar to a departing tone.” It is impossible to conduct a detailed analysis of the phonological system of the Qièyùn with these vague understandings. (3) The ancients did not have technical instruments for phonological transcription. Sinograms do not represent pronunciations. The same sinogram can have different pronunciations at different times, in different places, and by different speakers. The same sinogram can even have different pronunciations by the same speaker on different occasions. Lù Fayán could not make his rhyme dictionary into a good example at that time by using a certain sinogram to represent a fixed pronunciation or using two sinograms that could not be distinguished in speech to manifest subtle differences in voice quality (such as, dōng (東) and dōng (冬) or shān (删) and shān (山)). Still, with the relatively dramatic change in spoken pronunciation, the author of rhyme tables, who was born many years after Lù Fǎyán, could not completely understand the phonological value of the sinograms chosen by Lù Fǎyán or manage to make divisions. Because ancients could not conduct phonetic analysis, they could only conduct phonemic analysis. In this respect, ancient China was the same as other countries before the nineteenth century. Phonemic analysis refers to determining the main phonological categories. As Fāng Xiàoyuè (方孝嶽) said, “The main categories should be kept in the original order although details might differ. These main categories are the most important in the history of Chinese phonology.”2 However, it is known that phonetic analysis can be done in several languages whereas phonemic analysis can only be done

114  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged in one language, and therefore it is only suited to the features of a specific dialect. Qièyùn’s time was characterized by dialectical diversity, with major differences between dialects. At that time, not only the pronunciations of the past and present but also dialects from the South to the North were mixed, which led to many misunderstandings. If phonological analysis was performed based on a single dialect, the result would not be easily accepted across the country. (In particular, we should not forget that even though China was unified by the Suí regime, which held the political advantage, the cultural center was still in the South. It was inconvenient for the Suí regime to regard the pronunciation of the South as the orthodox pronunciation, but they could also not force the entire country to adopt the pronunciation of the North. The dialects of both areas were bound to be valued together. In the Táng dynasty, the dialects of the North began to take priority.) Furthermore, conditions did not allow the dialects of various places to be integrated to conduct phonological analysis. In that case, how could this problem be solved? A good idea that surfaced involved leveraging the fact that sinograms do not represent specific pronunciations. The idea was to synthesize ancient and current dialectal phonological categories under basic dialectal phonemic categories. The Yánshì jiāxùn: yīncí piān states: Rhyme dictionaries were compiled based on the pronunciations of the royal capitals. Furthermore, the authors also took ancient and dialectal pronunciations for reference so that the phonological categories were not biased (towards a single dialect). After extended deliberations, only the pronunciations of Jīnlíng and Luòyáng were suitable.”3 This quotation displays this intention to synthesize ancient and current dialectal phonological categories under basic dialectal phonemic categories. This paragraph has been quoted by both parties in their arguments. However, as far as I am concerned, their quotations were somewhat selective. One party emphasized that “the authors also took ancient, colloquial, and dialectal pronunciations for reference so that the phonological categories were not biased” but seemed to ignore the fact that “rhyme dictionaries were compiled based on the pronunciations of the royal capitals” and “after mature deliberations, only the pronunciations of Jīnlíng and Luòyáng were suitable,” whereas the other party stressed that “only the pronunciations of Jīnlíng and Luòyáng were suitable” but ignored the earlier words. I think the paragraph should be understood in its entirety. It is vital because it reflects the principles of studying phonology and compiling rhyme dictionaries. In my opinion, the pronunciations of the royal capitals were the basis of phonological analysis and the material for the major categories of rhyme dictionaries. The statement “The authors also took ancient and dialectal pronunciations for reference so that the phonological categories were not biased” implies that the integration of phonological categories, according to the major phonological categories,

The Nature of the Phonology of the Qièyùn  115 were based on the pronunciations of dialects from the past to their time. The part after “mature deliberations” indicated that after Yán Zhītuī had studied these rhyme dictionaries, he thought that the phonological basis (or main categories) of the integration of phonological categories only had two possibilities: the pronunciations of Jīnlíng and the pronunciations of Luòyáng (these two areas were both royal capitals at that time). Therefore, although the division of the rhymes was different, the main categories were similar. As for differences in the division of the rhymes in various rhyme dictionaries, this was because different people had their own understandings and choices about the pronunciations of different times and places. Therefore, the study of phonology by contemporary scholars, from phonetic analysis to phonemic analysis, is based on the description of phonological values, whereas the study by ancients of actual pronunciations, whether phonological analysis of basic dialects or the phonological integration of various dialects, is based on the division of phonological categories. Phonemic analysis of a certain dialect must take spoken pronunciation as its basis, but the phonological integration of various dialects can only be based on phonological categories rather than on phonological values. It can be concluded that the Qièyùn, and five other rhyme dictionaries before it, were all written based on this principle. The ancients repeatedly emphasized that “dialectical pronunciation” should be excluded, which could also be taken as evidence for this conclusion. Because the ancients highlighted the division of phonological categories when they were studying spoken pronunciations, they developed an understanding that the one who could divide the categories in more detail was more capable. A more detailed division meant a higher level in phonological study. A less detailed division meant the opposite or the study was influenced by dialectal pronunciations. The Yánshì jiāxùn: yīncípiān expresses this when it states that “people mocked each other on account of their dialectal pronunciations.” These words do not suggest that the rhyme dictionaries were compiled based on dialectal pronunciations, as many literati thought. Otherwise, phrases such as “rhyme dictionaries were compiled based on the pronunciations of the royal capitals” or “mature deliberations” would not be explained well, and the phrase “people mocked each other” would be groundless. “Mocking” implies a common standard. If the standards for rhyme dictionaries differed and people could compile rhyme dictionaries based on their own dialectal pronunciations, how could they “mock” each other? Let us take an example from modern dialects. If a Cantonese speaker compiled a Cantonese rhyme dictionary and a Shanghainese speaker compiled a Shanghainese rhyme dictionary, would the Shanghainese mock the Cantonese for not compiling the correct rhyme dictionary? The information that should be revealed in this sentence is that some phonological categories could be divided whilst others could not be divided, even though the integration of phonological categories was based on the major phonological category of the royal capitals in these rhyme dictionaries.

116  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged The undividable categories often reflected dialectal pronunciations. Today, I still find cases in which some people who are influenced by their dialectal pronunciations cannot distinguish between the Chinese consonants “l and n” or “n and ng.” They are mocked because of this. Lù Fǎyán’s rhyme dictionary took various rhyme dictionaries for reference. In his book, divisible phonological categories were all fully divided, resulting in the disappearance of “dialectal pronunciations.” Some people thought that Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn represented the standard pronunciation in his period. Could it be true that, if the rhyme categories were divided more finely, the divided result would be closer to that of the standard pronunciation? Could it be certain that the pronunciations of “the royal capitals” were more complicated than the pronunciations of other dialects? Obviously not. Because of wide communication between the capital and other areas, the fact was often the other way round. It was because the division of phonological categories was taken as the standard that the most detailed division was regarded as the greatest achievement. Lù Fǎyán’s rhyme dictionary conformed to this standard and therefore the rhyme dictionaries of the Qièyùn system were influential in Chinese academia for over a thousand years. The division of phonological categories in these books was unchanged despite the constantly changing spoken pronunciations. The rhyme dictionaries or views that were based on phonologies of a specific place were not valued most of the time because they did not conform to the standard of the traditional study of actual pronunciations. Therefore, various rhyme dictionaries of modern times recording the pronunciations of the North were regarded as not sufficiently authoritative. Moreover, what was recorded was devalued as “dialectal pronunciations” by those who were in favor of orthodox pronunciations. For example, Jiāng Yǒng gave his criticisms. He said: Those who studied rhyme divisions in ancient and modern times did not understand division very well. Their theories about sinogram initials turned out to be reckless and rough. They failed to study spoken pronunciations carefully. Instead, they indulged in the trifles of dialectal pronunciations. Sometimes they made up their own sinographic liaison system that was logically flawed, even though they mocked the sinogram initials invented by their predecessors. They thought that certain sinograms were repetitive and should be merged, or a certain sound was lacking and should be supplemented, or a certain sentence was out of order and should be restructured. But, in fact, there was no standard in their mind. They just did whatever they wanted randomly and blindly. In this way, how could they make correct judgments and arrangements for over ten thousand sinograms?4 Huáng Tíngjiān’s (黄廷鑑) criticism of rhyme dictionaries such as the Yùnhuì (韻會), A collection of rhymes with brief annotations in the past and

The Nature of the Phonology of the Qièyùn  117 the present, Yùnlüè Yìtōng (韻略易通), A summary of rhymes with a new guiding style, Děngqiè yuánshēng (等切元聲), On the original pronunciations of rhyme divisions, and Lèiyīn (類音), On the classification of rhymes, was even more fierce. He said: Their understandings were all restricted to their dialectal pronunciations or confused by different pronunciations of the same sinogram. Their tongues were not nimble enough to pronounce varied and difficult sounds, so they doubted the existence of this pronunciation in the world because they did not have such pronunciation in their dialects and just regarded their own dialectal pronunciation as the universal one. They changed the rhyme dictionary personally by adding or reducing sinograms based on their own opinions, resulting in much confusion for later learners. No wonder the study of the Qièyùn almost became impossible.5 The constant exclusion of dialectal pronunciations from the Southern and Northern dynasties to the Qīng dynasty was another proof that the Qièyùn was not compiled based only on the phonological system of a specific time and place or even on the phonological system of royal capitals. Zhāng Shìlù (張世祿) said, The Qièyùn widely incorporated dialectal pronunciations from the South and North as well as some early ancient pronunciations. This rhyme dictionary was significant both geographically and historically. Although the various masterpieces of the Táng dynasty after the Qièyùn such as Sūn Miǎn’s Tángyùn and Lǐ Zhōu’s Qièyùn more or less changed the number or sequence of rhymes on the basis of the Qièyùn, they did not change the general principle of Lù Fǎyán’s accommodation theory. Because, psychologically, the Chinese people were fond of universality, Lù Fǎyán’s rhyme dictionary accommodating the phonological categories of ancient and modern times in both the South and North was the most suitable one for the Chinese people. Most literati of the Táng dynasty took Lù Fǎyán’s rhyme dictionary as the blueprint. Some literati advocated that the Luòyáng pronunciation or the pronunciation of the Qín area should be taken as the standard, but they were not influential and not given much attention until the end of the Sòng dynasty. Because the Guǎngyùn of the Sòng dynasty was compiled based on the Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn and the Tángyùn, the rhyme dictionaries of the Guǎngyùn series had taken precedence for over a thousand years in China.6 Zhāng Shìlù’s psychological analysis of the ancients deserves attention. The above discussed the conditions for studying spoken pronunciation in the time of the Qièyùn. It was held that the ancients could only do two kinds of work: the phonological analysis for a specific dialect and the integration of phonological categories for several dialects. This conclusion is compatible

118  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged with both the hypothesis of a single period and place and the hypothesis of a comprehensive system from different times and places. However, after the analysis of the paragraph in the Yánshì Jiāxùn: Yīncípiān, it was found that rhyme dictionaries could only be compiled based on the integration of phonological categories. Therefore, the following words in the Qièyùn xù could be regarded as a commentary on or extension of Yán Zhītuī’s words. The phonological categories in rhyme dictionaries such as Lǚ Jìng’s (呂靜) Yùnjí; Xiàhóu Gāi’s (夏侯該) Yùnlüè; Yáng Xiūzhī’s (陽 休之) Yùnlüè; Zhōu Sīyán’s (周思言) Yīnyùn (音韻), Sounds and rhymes; Lǐ Jìjié’s (李季節) Yīnpǔ (音譜), Phonological spectrum; and Dù Táiqīng’s (杜台卿) Yùnlüè were all different. The use of rhymes in Jiāngdōng and Héběi were different as well. These literati talked about the differences in the pronunciations of early antiquity and middle antiquity and the dialects from the South to the North. They chose appropriate sounds for divisions and discarded unsuitable sounds to establish a reasonable system of sinographic liaison. From the perspective of historical development, the Qièyùn was bound to be produced. In the Suí dynasty, the regime that had separated into Southern and Northern dynasties was reunified. Political reunification could not be stable without cultural reunification. This “reunification” just referred to the fondness for universality and the accommodation theory mentioned by Zhāng Shìlù. The “accommodation theory” was adopted by Lù Fǎyán. However, without him, it would have been adopted anyway by somebody else in the course of history. In the Southern and Northern dynasties when China was separated, political power and military power were dominant in the North whereas cultural power was dominant in the South. The four tones and poetic rhyme were first invented in the South and then spread to the North. Even though the regime in the North leveraged its political and military power, it could not force people in the South to accept its culture. However, it did not allow people living in the South to behave in their own cultural way either. Therefore, cultural communication between the North and the South was expected to be evident in the culture of the South. Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn was exactly what people wanted in this circumstance, and therefore, in Lù’s book, the pronunciations of the South and North were integrated. Furthermore, in the process of phonological integration, Xiāo Gāi (蕭該) and Yán Zhītuī of the South “made more decisions” than other literati, which fully revealed the phonological categories of the South. It was through this accommodation theory that the rhymes in the Qièyùn were defined as the official rhymes of the Táng dynasty. In the Táng dynasty, China had unprecedented power in political and military terms due to its reunification, which involved more unification of culture. Under these circumstances, rhyme dictionaries that recorded dialects, either those of the Southern dynasty or those indicating the Qín dialectal pronunciation, were

The Nature of the Phonology of the Qièyùn  119 not desired anymore, despite their inclusivity. The regime could attempt to force people to adopt the Qín dialectal pronunciation, but this would never succeed. Even today, despite an enthusiastic campaign propagating the use of Mandarin around the nation and the help of modern technology, Mandarin adoption is still limited. Therefore, under these historical conditions, if the regime had asked people to study the Qín dialectal pronunciation to attend the imperial examination, this requirement would have been tantamount to ending the examination. However, when the Qièyùn was used for the examination, not only could the rhymes of the literary tradition be inherited, but it would also be convenient for literati to compare the Qièyùn with the phonological categories of their own dialects so that they would not forget those phonological categories. This was a truly brilliant idea. A further question to be asked is, was the “integration theory” feasible? This is the question: was the “integration of phonological categories” feasible? Some scholars said: Different phonological systems could be compared to analyze their differences and similarities and determine the rules behind them, but they should not be cut randomly into pieces and reorganized into a well-​ structured system that not only conforms to dialect A but also conforms to other dialects, such as dialects B, C, or D. An example is if the Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangdong (Cantonese) dialects all had their own phonological systems and could not be integrated into one phonological system. If they were intentionally integrated into one phonological system, that phonological system would certainly be damaged. The new one would conform to neither the Beijing dialect, the Shanghai dialect, nor Cantonese.7 This argument is quite reasonable. However, these people had a very narrow understanding of “integration.” “Integration” was explained merely as the accumulation of the phonological values of various dialects, and therefore the result was something like the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) instead of a new phonological system. What they did not know is that there could still be such a method as the “integration of phonological categories” besides the “accumulation of phonological value,” which was in fact the method adopted in rhyme dictionaries such as the Qièyùn. It featured Chinese people’s way of doing things. The study of historical Chinese phonology must obviously consider the features of the Chinese language. However, since the introduction of science from the West after the May Fourth Movement, some issues have suffered from undue negligence. The most important problem concerns the unique features of sinograms. If the phonological features of sinograms were neglected when a series of theories from Western linguistics based on alphabetic phonemic scripts were copied, some mistakes would be made even if the original theories were correct and reasonable.

120  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged The phonological features of sinograms are that every sinogram has both phonological value and a sound category. A sinogram does not represent a certain pronunciation strictly and specifically. Instead, its pronunciation can vary from time to time, from place to place, and from person to person. Among different dialects, sinograms can help people communicate with each other without being pronounced. In Western languages, although occasional inconsistency might exist between the pronunciation and written form of a word, this phenomenon is not as systemic as it is with sinograms. Sinograms notably feature both phonological categories and phonological values. In certain dialects, phonological categories and values are the same, but in different dialects, phonological categories and values differ in the following ways: (1) Sinograms of the same category are pronounced differently in various places. For example, sinograms of the same category represented by kàn (看) could be pronounced as [kan], [kɔn], [kεn], [kε], [ki], [kœ], and [hɔn] in standard Mandarin and in different dialects. (2) The sinograms of a certain category in place A fall into several categories in place B. For example, sinograms pronounced with [-​an] in standard Mandarin fall into several categories in which the pronunciations end with [-​œ], [-​ε], [-​i], and [-​y] in the Shanghai dialect (such as hán (寒), shān (删), xiān (先), and yuán (元)). In this case, the sinograms classified into four phonological categories have five phonological values. If the two cases mentioned above are analyzed, the number of phonological categories and the number of phonological values differ, but they are the same within specific dialects. (3) The sinograms of three phonological categories—​I, II, and III—​would fall into two groups (groups I and II and group III) in place X, where the phonological value of group I and II is A and that of group III is B. At the same time, they would fall into another two groups in place Y (group I and groups II and III), where the former phonological value is C and the latter D. For example, the sinograms of three categories represented by hán (寒), shān (山), and kāi (開) fall into two groups in standard Mandarin, with the first group including hán (寒) and shān (山) and the second group including kāi (開), where the rhyme of the former is pronounced [-​an] and the latter [-​ai]. However, they fall into two different groups in the Shanghai dialect, with the first group including hán (寒) and the second group including shān (山) and kāi (開), where the rhyme of the former is pronounced [-​œ] and the latter [-​ε]. In this case, the sinograms classified into three phonological categories have four phonological values, and the number of phonological categories and phonological values are different even in specific dialects. Under this circumstance, two methods can be used to integrate several dialects in Chinese. The first is to add phonological values, which is easy to do nowadays. For example, phonological values can be easily calculated

The Nature of the Phonology of the Qièyùn  121 in the above-​mentioned cases (1), (2), and (3) and then presented in some way. However, this might introduce several problems. First, it would disrupt the phonological system of each dialect. The result would be something like today’s IPA, which would be of no use in uniting the rhyme usage in poetry in the time of the Qièyùn. Second, the condition of doing this would be to discard sinograms and only use phonetic transcription instruments like the IPA. If sinograms are still in use, such work is possible. For example, among the pronunciations of rhymes such as [-​an],[-​ɔn], [-​ε], [-​i], and [-​œ], which pronunciation does kàn (看) represent? Does shān (山) represent the pronunciation of the rhyme [-​ an] in standard Mandarin, or does it represent the pronunciation of the rhyme [-​ ε] in the Shanghai dialect? Even if Lù Fǎyán gave the source of each pronunciation, would it be acceptable? For example, under the rhymes of dōng (東), dōng (冬), zhōng (鐘), and jiāng (江), he gave annotations that “dōng (東) had the Chá zhōng (鐘) had the Jínlíng dialectal pronunciation, and jiāng (江) had the Eastern Hàn dialectical pronunciation.” Therefore, the method of adding phonological values was impracticable and unnecessary in the time of Lù Fǎyán because it did not consider the features of Chinese. Only one method remains, namely, to integrate the phonological systems of each dialect based on their phonological categories instead of their phonological values. Likewise, the above-​mentioned three cases are employed again for discussion. Case (1) is classified into one category that is represented by kàn (看); case (2) is classified into four categories that are represented by hán (寒), shān (删), xiān (先), and yuán (元); and case (3) is classified into three categories that are represented by hán (寒), shān (山), and kāi (開). The strength of this method is that the phonological system of each dialect is well preserved. Everyone can accept it because the phonological system of their own dialect is included in it. The weakness is that the integrated sound category cannot be pronounced properly without the help of phonological values. For example, in case (1), the pronunciation of the rhyme kàn (看) cannot be determined. In case (2), people speaking standard Mandarin cannot tell the difference among the pronunciations of the sinograms in the four phonological categories represented by hán (寒), shān (删), xiān (先), and yuán (元). In case (3), neither people speaking standard Mandarin nor those speaking the Shanghai dialect can differentiate shān (山) from hán (寒) or kāi (開). Fortunately, this was not a major problem at the time because the unification of literary rhymes in poetry was only a requirement for writing. The language used by literati in the Táng and Suí dynasties in composing poems and essays differed from the spoken language. They could choose to follow one standard in writing and another in speaking. (This phenomenon still exists today. Even those who speak standard Mandarin strictly obey Píngshuǐyùn when they are writing pre-​Táng-​style poetry.) In addition, because the original phonological system is preserved in the integrated result, people living in different places could still use this new system based on their own phonological habits. By comparison, because it contains more strengths

122  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged than weaknesses, this method might be the only feasible and best method of uniting rhyme usage in written poetry under the circumstances of the existence of diverse dialects and the lack of phonetic transcription instruments. By making use of the characteristics of Chinese and sinograms, ancient Chinese phonologists made an outstanding contribution to phonological study in the world. Lù Fǎyán’s work is based on this method. His process is manifested by the annotations under the rhyme headings of the Wángyùn. Here is an example to show how each set of rhymes in the shān (山) rhyme gathering was dealt with in the Qièyùn (to use the even tone to represent the rising, departing, and entering tones of a rhyme): Table 12.1 Shān (山)rhyme gathering in the Qièyùn QY

Lǚ Jìng

Xiàhóu Yǒng

Yáng Xiūzhī

Lǐ Jìjié

Dù Táiqīng

切韻

呂靜

夏侯詠

陽休之

李季節

杜台卿

hún/​hén (魂痕) yuán 元 hán 寒 shān 刪 shān 山 xiān 先 xiān 仙

Although the division of each set of rhymes formed a new system, the systems of five rhyme dictionaries were preserved in it and, therefore, the advocates of five rhyme dictionaries could still accept the new system. The method of “taking ancient and dialectal pronunciations for reference so that the phonological categories are not biased” was so brilliant that no other method could surpass it. In fact, this method was not only used in the Qièyùn but is also employed to study dialectal pronunciations nowadays. Let us look at the following table:8

newgenrtpdf

Table 12.2 A phonological table contrasting the dialects in 11 locations in Northern China Rhyme tables Rhyme table Sinograms Locations

2. Shenyang 3. Jinan 4. Zhengzhou 5. Taiyuan 6. Xi'an 7. Lanzhou 8. Chengdu 9. Kunming 10. Hankou 11. Nanjing

zhī

zhí

bā

dī

dí

zhū

pǔ

pú

dú

sú

yú

jú

bā

bá

jiā

jiǎ

guā

guā

資

知

直

八

低

敵

豬

普

僕

讀

俗

魚

菊

巴

拔

家

甲

瓜

刮

The Nature of the Phonology of the Qièyùn  123

1. Beijing

zī

124  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged This table is taken from the Hànyǔ fāngyán gàiyào (漢語方言概要), An outline of Chinese dialects. It is part of a table comparing 11 representative phonological aspects of Northern dialects. The IPA letters in the table are omitted for convenience. If the horizontal rows and the vertical lines were replaced, the table would look more like the former table. Such tables are the modern embodiment of the principles of the Qièyùn. The 19 sinograms represented by zī (資), zhī (知), and zhí (直) form an inclusive system integrating 11 kinds of dialects. The significance and function of these sinograms are in line with those of the rhyme headings of the Qièyùn. This reveals the special role of sinograms in the description of dialectal pronunciation. Those who thought that integration theory is impossible might have forgotten the actual practices that they are engaged in every day. Based on this analysis, I think that because of the requirements and conditions of the historical period, Lù Fǎyán had no choice but to invent an inclusive system for the sake of the unification of the nation. He would not and could not invent a unitary system. The integrated result was bound to be a system of phonological categories. In the whole system, the division of each sound category was based on the phonological values of different dialects, but for each person who spoke a specific dialect, they would find that the pronunciation of the same sinogram in the standard language had different rhymes in different dialects. Just as the 19 sinograms in the above table could not be reconstructed with the corresponding 19 phonological values, the 206 rhymes did not have as many different phonological values. Understanding the nature of the Qièyùn is of great importance to the study of the arrangement of rhyme tables.

Notes 1 Pān Wénguó (潘文國), “Lùn zǒnghé tǐxì: qièyùn xìngzhì de zàitàntǎo,” (論總和體 系——《切韻》性質的再探討), On the adding-up system: a further study on the nature of the Qièyùn), Huádōng Shīfàn Dàxué Xuébào (Zhéxué Shèhuì Kēxué Bǎn) (華東師範大學學報(哲學社會科學版) Journal of East China Normal University (Philosophy and Socical Sciences), no. 4, 1986. 89–​96. 2 Fāng Xiàoyuè (方孝嶽), “Lüèlùn hànyǔshǐshàng gòngtóng yǔyán hé fāngyán de guanxi—​fùtán duì Dàizhèn de yīnyùnxué de píngjià,” (略論漢語歷史上共同語語 音和方音的關係), On the relationship between the common language and dialects in Chinese history: commentaries on Dài Zhèn’s phonological studies, Zhōngshān Dàxué Xuébào (中山大學學報), Journal of Sun Yat-​sen University, no. 4, 1960: 36–​47. 3 Yán Zhītuī (顔之推), Wáng Lìqì (王利器). Yánshì jiāxùn jíjiě (顏氏家訓集解), Collected commentaries on the Yánshì jiāxùn, Shanghai: Shànghǎi Gǔjí Chūbǎnshè (上海古籍出版社), Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House, 1980. 473. 4 Jiāng Yǒng (江永), “Yīnxué biànwēi,” in Cóngshū jíchéng chūbiān, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1940. 10.

The Nature of the Phonology of the Qièyùn  125 5 Huáng Tíngjiān (黃廷鑑), “Yīnxué biànwēi: Chángshú huángtíngjiān sānshíliù zìmǔ biàn,” (常熟黄廷鑑三十六字母辨), The identification of 36 sinogram initials made by Huáng Tíngjiān of Chángshú, in Cóngshū jíchéng chūbiān, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1940. 1. 6 Zhāng Shìlù (張世禄), Yīnyùnxué (音韻學), The study of phonology, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1947. 51–​52. 7 Wáng Xiǎn (王顯), “Zàitán qièyùn yīnxì de xìngzhì,” (再談切韻音系的性質), A further study on the nature of phonology in the Qièyùn, Zhōngguó Yǔwén (中國語文), Chinese Language, no. 12, 1962: 540–​548. 8 Yuán Jiāhuá (袁家驊), Hànyǔ fāngyán gàiyào (漢語方言概要), An outline of Chinese dialects, Beijing: Wénzì Gǎigé Chūbǎnshè (文字改革出版社), 1960. 26.

13 The Conditions Satisfied When Rhyme Tables Were Arranged

Now it is time to discuss the mode in which the rhyme tables were arranged. First, let us study how many conditions were satisfied when the rhyme tables were arranged. It took us a whole part to discuss the question of when the rhyme tables were designed. This was a necessary premise for studying the mode of arranging the rhyme tables. This is because rhyme tables were produced in certain historical periods. In other words, rhyme tables were influenced and restricted by various historical conditions. The authors of the rhyme tables could not surpass their times. The specific historical period not only determined the guiding principles for arranging rhyme tables but also provided the necessary conditions for producing rhyme tables distinct from earlier and later tables. What conditions were fulfilled at the time that the authors of the rhyme tables lived? Firstly, the rhyme dictionaries of the Qièyùn series in the Táng dynasty laid the foundation for the rhyme tables. The rhyme tables were produced based on a rhyme dictionary, meaning that authors designed rhyme tables within the scope of the available rhyme dictionary, reflecting the phonological system of that rhyme dictionary. Therefore, the temporal modifier “in the Táng dynasty” for the Qièyùn is of critical significance once the time of the rhyme tables is fixed. Traditionally, we regarded the rhyme dictionaries of the entire Qièyùn series, neglecting the inner differences that occurred in the process of their development, which is rather irresponsible. In fact, the Qièyùn in the Suí and Táng dynasties is completely different from the Guǎngyùn and the Jíyùn in the Sòng dynasty. The differences are as follows: (1) The total numbers of rhymes are different. The rhyme dictionaries in the Táng dynasty had many different numbers of rhymes, such as 193 rhymes, 195 rhymes, or 205 rhymes, whereas those in the Sòng dynasty almost all had 206 rhymes. This is an apparent feature that can be easily noticed. However, because in the process of arranging rhyme tables, the rhymes were further divided into rounded and unrounded articulation and large and small aperture, the total number of rhyme categories greatly surpassed both 193 and 206. Therefore, this difference is not that important. DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-15

The Conditions Satisfied When Rhyme Tables Were Arranged  127 (2) The total number of initial categories is different. Ever since Chén Lǐ, a literatus in the Qīng dynasty, first determined that the Guǎngyùn had 40 initial categories, many different theories were proposed, such as the 41-​initial-​category theory, 47-​initial-​category theory, 51-​initial-​category theory, 33-​initial-​category theory, and 36-​initial-​category theory. Most scholars merely regarded the rhyme dictionaries of the entire Qièyùn series, and only several scholars distinguished the Qièyùn from the Guǎngyùn. For example, Professor Zhōu Zǔmó, in the manuscripts of his lectures at Peking University, introduced the initial and rhyme categories of the Qièyùn and the Guǎngyùn. Professor Lǐ Róng focused only on the initial and rhyme categories of the Qièyùn in his study of the Qièyùn yīnxì. We hold that there must be a clear boundary between the Qièyùn and the Guǎngyùn when the arrangement of rhyme tables is to be studied. What needs to be reflected by the rhyme tables is just the initial and rhyme categories of the Qièyùn. Generally, I agree with Lǐ Róng’s idea on the division of initial categories in the Qièyùn, but I don’t think the division of the zhī (知), chè (徹), and chéng (澄) initials is necessary. I hold this for two reasons. Firstly, much confusion still exists in sound liaison with regard to apicalalvelar and dorsoprepalatal plosives, which can still be found in the Guǎngyùn and even more so in the Qièyùn. This means that it is in the Guǎngyùn instead of the Qièyùn that the trend of division between the apicalalvelar and dorsoprepalatal plosives is found. Secondly, lèigé (crossing categories, a ménfǎ principle relating the duān (端) and zhī (知) initial groups) is mentioned in the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn at the end of the Táng dynasty. The Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn regards labial and lingual sounds as the same. This means that in the written material that people at that time used, lèigé in the lingual sound and lèigé in the labial sound were the same thing, which is very noticeable, and this reflected the confusion about apical alveolar plosives and dorso prepalatal plosives. Of course, it can be determined from other historical resources that by the time of the Táng dynasty, the lingual sound had already begun to be distinctive, but this conclusion is not as reliable as that from written materials. Therefore, the Qièyùn has a total of 33 initial categories (taking the zhī (知), chè (徹), and chéng (澄) initials away from the 36 initial categories by Lǐ Róng)1 (3) The total numbers of minor rhymes are different. Although the number of minor rhymes in the original version of the Qièyùn by Lù Fǎyán is unknown, the Qièyùn by Wáng Rénxù in the Táng dynasty has more than 3,600 minor rhymes, the Guǎngyùn has more than 3,800 minor rhymes, and the Jíyùn has more than 4,400 minor rhymes. These numbers tend to be neglected in our research, but in fact they were crucial when the minor rhyme tables were being arranged. This is because the purpose of the rhyme tables was to reflect rhyme dictionaries, so all the minor rhymes of minor rhyme dictionaries needed to fit in rhyme tables. Therefore, the number of minor rhymes directly influenced the design of rhyme tables.

128  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged This is the first condition affecting the author of rhyme tables. What the author wanted to consider was such factors as initial categories, rhyme categories, and rhyme dictionaries with minor rhymes of such numbers. The second condition is that the Yùnquán by Wǔ Xuánzhī was available to them. The original version of the Yùnquán is not available now, but according to our study in the first part of this book, the Yùnquán was like the Sìshēng yùnpǔ by Liáng Sēngbǎo in the Qīng dynasty. The Yùnquán is most likely a transitional form between rhyme dictionaries and rhyme tables. Thirdly, some basic knowledge and categorization of initial categories and further division for groups of the same rhymes must exist if the rhyme tables are to be arranged. As was mentioned above, this work had already been finished after the compilation of the Yùnquán, the Tángyùn and the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng. Fourthly, the appearance of the concept of “16 rhyme gatherings”. This condition can be seen from several perspectives, as follows: (1) It can be concluded from the perspective of phonological study. We already know that the principle of phonological study for ancients is phonemic analysis and the combination of sound categories based on such analysis. Zhōu Zǔmó said, “although Southern and Northern rhyme dictionaries differ from each other in the number of their rhymes, the general categories turn out to be similar.”2 This “general category” is in fact the most fundamental phonological system of the “royal capital area.” Both Jīnlíng and Luòxià fall into the category of royal capital areas, but according to the study of previous literati, it is known that the dialects of literati in Jīnlíng and Luòxià did not differ much. According to the study of the phonological materials in the Qièyùn, Táng, and Five Dynasties periods, such general categories that all rhyme tables share correspond to those of the 16 rhyme gatherings (see Tables 13.1–13.4). The Chinese phonological system was almost unchanged in the Qièyùn period and the Táng dynasty, which indicates its steadiness. The most remarkable difference between these two periods is that, in the Qièyùn period, the yuán (元) rhyme belonged to the zhēn (臻) rhyme gathering, whereas in the Táng dynasty, the yuán (元) rhyme belonged to the shān (山) rhyme gathering. The rhyme tables categorize the yuán (元) rhyme into the shān (山) rhyme gathering due to the 16 rhyme gatherings in the Táng dynasty. Such categorization might not conform to the Qièyùn. This is another proof that the making of rhyme tables was restricted by the historical period of the author. (2) It can be concluded based on the rhymes that were employed by the literati in their poetry. From the materials listed in Tables 13.1–13.4, the literati’s poetry (mainly non-​regulated style poetry) used rhymes that generally fall into the category of 16 rhyme gatherings. And the differences between the former and latter periods all follow the same pattern.

The Conditions Satisfied When Rhyme Tables Were Arranged  129 Table 13.1 Selected phonological texts in the period of the Qièyùn (shined tone)

130  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Table 13.2 Selected phonological texts in the period of the Qièyùn (shaded tone)a

a All the identical sinogram initials in Divisions A and B indicate the rhyme gatherings commonly used by literati.

Notably, rhyme usage in the poetry of those literati varied greatly. Those loosely obeying rhyme restrictions chose to just follow the general rules of 16 rhyme gatherings, whereas those strictly following the rhyming restrictions chose to completely follow the rules of the Qièyùn. This is because the rhyme usage of those literati’s poetry was not only confined by the pronunciation of their dialect but also was influenced by the traditions, habits, and fashions of their times. It is the habit of ancient Chinese literati to follow the fashion of elegance in their time. Therefore, they generally preferred the orthodox or classic

The Conditions Satisfied When Rhyme Tables Were Arranged  131 Table 13.3  Selected phonological texts in the Táng and Five dynasties periods (shined tone)a

 

132  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Table 13.4 Selected phonological texts in the Táng and Five dynasties periods (shaded tone)

Compared with Table 13.1 and 13.2, which uses the rhyme headings of the Qièyùn, this table uses the rhyme headings of the Tángyùn, which are slightly different. (1) The materials in Tables 13.1, 13.2, 13.3 and 13.4 are all quoted and simplified from the extant literature and published academic papers. The references are as follows: The first five kinds of rhyme dictionaries of the pre-Qièyùn period: according to the small annotations under the rhyme headings of the Wángyùn, the rhyme dictionaries can be found in the Collection of Rhyme Dictionaries of the Five Dynasties and Táng Dynasty by Zhōu Zǔmó. The relevant studies are “The Nature of the Qièyùn and Its Phonological Foundations” written

The Conditions Satisfied When Rhyme Tables Were Arranged  133 by Zhōu Zǔmó from Wènxuéjí Volume 1 and the Ancient Chinese Rhyme Dictionaries appendix written by Zhào Chéng (趙誠). Shěnshì sìshēng kǎo [沈氏四聲考 A study of the four tones by Shěn Kuò] is based on the Shěngshì sìshēng kǎo (Cóngshū Jíchéng version) edited by Jǐ Yún (紀昀). Yánshì jiāxùn [顏氏家 訓 Yán’s family motto]: see Luó Wěiháo (羅偉豪), “Cóng yánshì jiāxùn: yīncípiān lùn qièyùn” [從《顏氏家訓·音辭篇》論《切韻》 On the Qièyùn from the Yánshì jiāxùn: yīncípiān], Zhōngshān Dàxué Xuébào 中山大學學報 Journal of Sun Yat-sen University, 1963 (1–2). Nánběicháo shīrén yòngyùn [南北朝詩人用韻 On the rhyming usage of the poets of the Southern and Northern dynasties]: see Wáng Lì, “Nánběicháo shīrén yòngyùn kǎo” [南北朝 詩人用韻考 Study on the use of rhymes by the poets of the Southern and Northern dynasties] from the Hànyǔshǐ lùnwénjí [漢語史論文集 A paper collection on the history of the Chinese language]. Qíliángchén shīwén [齊梁陳詩文 Poetry in the Qí, Liáng, and Chén dynasties]: see Zhōu Zǔmó, “Qièyùn de xìngzhì jíqí yīnxì jīchǔ” [切韻的性質及其音系基礎 The nature of the Qièyùn and its phonological foundations] from the Wèn xué jí [問學集 A collection of commentaries and questions on learning], Volume 1. Jīngdiǎn shìwén [經典釋文 Annotations and explanations of the ancient classics]: see Wáng Lì, “Jīngdiǎn shìwén fǎnqiè kǎo” [經典釋文反切考 A study of the sinographic liaison of the Jīngdiǎn shìwén] from the Yīngyùnxué yánjiū [音韻學研究 The study of Chinese phonology], Volume 1. “Suí yùnpǔ” [隋韻譜 Rhyme spectrum of the Suí dynasty]: see Chāng Hòu (昌厚), “Suí yùnpǔ” [隋韻譜 Rhyme spectrum of the Suí dynasty], Zhongguo Yuwen [中國語文], 1961 (10– 11), 1962 (1–2). Japanese Wú dialect (Go-on), Japanese Hàn dialect (Kan-on): see Shǐ Cúnzhí, Yīnyùnxué jiǎngyì [音韻學講義 Lecture notes on Chinese phonology], mimeographed teaching material by East China Normal University. Yùnquán: see Wáng Guówéi, Guāntáng jílín [觀堂集林 An anthology of the academic works by Wáng Guówéi], Volume 8. Gānlù zìshū [干祿字書 Sinographic dictionary for position and wealth]: see Wáng Xiǎn (王 顯), “Duì gānlù zìshū de yīdiǎn rènshì” [對《干祿字書》的一點認識 Comments on the Gānlù zìshū], Zhōngguó Yǔwén 中國語文 Chinese Language, 1964 (4). Wǔjīng wénzì [五經文字 A book for distinguishing sinograms in the five Chinese classics]: see Shào Róngfēn (邵榮芬), “Wǔjīng wénzì de zhíyīn hé fǎnqiè” [《五經文字》的直音和反切 On sinographic homophones and sinographic liaisons in the Wǔjīng wénzì], Zhōngguó Yǔwén 中國 語文 Chinese Language, 1964 (3). Huìlín yīnyì [慧琳音義 Huìlín’s Yīqiè jīng yīnyì]: see Huáng Cuìbó (黄淬伯), Huìlín yíqiè jīng yīnyì fǎnqiè kǎo [慧琳《一切經音義》反切考 A study of the sinographic liaison of Huìlín’s Yíqiè jīng yīnyì] (Taipei: Guólì Zhōngyāng Yánjiūyuàn Lìshǐ Yǔyán Yánjiūsuǒ 國立中央研究院 歷史語言研究所 the Institute of History and Philology Academia Sinica, 1931). Táng wǔ dài xīběi fāngyīn [唐五代西北方音 Dialectal pronunciations of the Northwestern areas in the Táng and Five Dynasties]: see the literature on the Qiānzìwén [千字文 A thousand words], Vajracchedika-sutra [金剛經], Amitabha sutra [阿彌陀經], and Dàchéng zhōngzōng qǐjiě [大乘中宗起解 Explanations on the Chinese sects of the Mahayana Sutra] from the Táng wǔ dài xīběi fāngyīn collected by Luó Chángpéi. Wànxiàng míngyì [萬象名義 On the names and meanings of all the manifestations of nature]: see Zhōu Zǔmó, “Wànxiàng míngyì zhōng zhī yuánběn yùpiān yīnxì” [《萬象名義》中之原本 《玉篇》音系 On the phonological system of the original version of the Yùpiān collected in the Wànxiàng míngyì], Wènxuéjí, Volume 1. Poetry of seven famous literati in the Táng dynasty: see Shǐ Cúnzhí, “Cóng táng qījiāshī de yòngyùn qíngkuàng kàn qièyùn de xìngzhì” [從唐七家詩的用韻情況看《切韻》的性質 On the nature of the Qièyùn from the use of rhymes in the poetry of seven famous literati in the Táng dynasty], Hànyǔshǐ yǔyīnpiān cānkǎo zīliào [漢語史語音篇參考資料 Reference material on phonological studies in the history of Chinese], printed teaching material of Fudan university; also see Shǐ Cúnzhí, Hànyǔ yīnyùnxué gāngyào [漢語音韻學綱要 A syllabus on Chinese phonology], pp. 34–36. Secular literature of Dūnhuáng: see Shào Róngfēn, “Dūnhuáng súwénxué zhōng de biézì yìyì hé tángwǔdài xīběi fāngyīn” [敦煌俗文學中的别字異義和唐五代西北方音 On the misspelt sinograms and different meanings in the secular literature of Dūnhuáng and the dialectal pronunciation of the northwestern area in the Táng dynasty and Five Dynasties], Zhōngguó Yǔwén 中國語文 Chinese Language, 1964.

134  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Zhū Áo (朱翱): see Zhāng Shìlù, “Zhū áo fǎnqiè kǎo” [朱翱反切考 A study on sinographic liaison by Zhū Áo], Shuōwén xuékān [說文學刊 The journal of Shuōwén] Volume 4, 1944. Xuányìng yīnyì [玄應音義 Xuán Yìng’s Yīqiè jīng yīnyì]: see Zhōu Fǎgāo (周法高), “Xuányìng fǎnqiè kǎo” [玄應反切考 A study on Xuán Yìng’s sinographic liaison] in Zhōngyāng yánjiūyuàn lìshǐ yǔyán yánjiūsuǒ jíkān [中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊 Collected papers of the Research Institute of History and Language in Academia Sinica], Book 20, Volume 1. Hànyuèyǔ [漢越語 Chinese Vietnamese words]: see Wáng Lì, “Hànyuèyǔ yánjiū” [漢越語研究 A study on Chinese Vietnamese words], from Hànyǔshǐ lùnwénjí. (2) All the materials used have been summarized. Because some materials are not consistent in the tones they assign to sinograms, which makes them hard to annotate, we used materials with integrated rhyme gatherings. The groups of the same rhymes that do not mention division and integration are regarded as divided rhymes. (3) In the process of reading the materials, it was determined that it is very hard to be completely objective in the interpretation of the literature because the articles are often subjective and, in some cases, strongly so. Especially when it comes to the question of the division and integration of groups of the same rhymes, when facing the same material, authors who prefer more density or less density would generally come to quite different conclusions. Therefore, I do not fully agree with some of the conclusions of the academic papers. However, because most of them are employed to analyze the general trend of the development of phonology in this period, the subjectivity in the papers was disregarded.

pronunciations that were distinguished by their elegance rather than dialects with local or indigenous features. Chén Yínkè (陳寅恪) once talked about rhyme usage by the literati of the Southern dynasty in the Eastern Jìn period: According to the records of the historical literature mentioned above, except for the folklore that was not revised by the literati, all of the poetry by aristocrats and ordinary literati in the Eastern Jìn and the Southern dynasty period used classical rhymes instead of Wú dialects even though these writers were in fact indigenous to the Wú area (what is now Sūzhōu). This is because, for the people who belonged to the gentry class in the Wú district in the Eastern Jìn and the Southern dynasties, the language they used in the royal court or in communication was the standard official language instead of the Wú dialect. Therefore, how could they choose to use the dialect instead of the classic and elegant rhyme languages when they were using rhymes in poetry? As for those commoners of the Wú district, when they were trying to make use of the classical and elegant rhyme languages, they would try to imitate fashion and choose to use the Northern dialect so that they could also be regarded as gentry, so understandably they would try to avoid the use of the Wú dialect. That is why nowadays there are so many poems and essays written by gentry and commoners in the Southern dynasty of the Eastern Jìn, but we cannot use them as a reference to study the Wú dialect of the Southern Dynasty of the Eastern Jìn to determine the difference between the Wú dialect and the Northern dialect or to study other problems such as the division of rhymes and the integration of rhymes.3 Literati in the past were known to prefer a classical style. Therefore, they generally chose not to violate the regulations stipulated by their ancestors, which

The Conditions Satisfied When Rhyme Tables Were Arranged  135 is best illustrated in their usage of poetic rhymes. Li Fú, a royal literatus in the Táng dynasty, said, And the nation has not found an effective way of pacifying the people and nation and now chooses to select officials by means of their knowledge of poetic rhymes. How absurd is this? The officials in charge will determine the candidates merely based on a poem or an essay while the rhymes do not follow the original rhymes and the sounds do not follow the original sounds. The government chooses the candidates of the officials in this way. And that is why Lù Fǎyán’s work is so popular at present.4 From these words, it can be inferred that Lù Fǎyán’s Qièyùn that was applied in the Táng dynasty was in fact not in accordance with the spoken pronunciation at that time. And the pronunciation after the Táng dynasty deviated further from that Qū Yuán book. For thousands of years from the Táng dynasty to the Qīng dynasty, spoken pronunciation experienced several changes, but the tradition of poetic rhymes did not fade away. This is true even though such literati as Lǐ Fú made appeals since the Táng dynasty, for example: “The reason why the chanting of poems can be popular for poetic rhymes is that they can be easily chanted orally. If people can follow the ancient rhyming tradition, they can make their own chanting or singing.”5 Here the “ancient rhyming tradition” refers to the rhymes that were used in the old-​style poetry, which is close to the spoken pronunciation. In fact, they made an appeal to make rhymes according to the spoken language. However, such an appeal could not resist the power of tradition, and for the sake of tradition, literati preferred to abandon their spoken language. Different periods made different choices with respect to fashion. According to our study, the usage of rhymes in literati’s poetry before and after the Qièyùn turned out to be like the shape of a waist drum. At the very beginning, more and more rhymes were used until the appearance of the Qièyùn, which was a climax in the number of rhymes. Later, the rhymes used became fewer and fewer until there were only 16 rhyme gatherings (only 13 rhyme gatherings were kept in the Sòng dynasty). Does this mean that spoken pronunciation also experienced this “dense–​loose–​dense” rising and falling process? I am afraid this is not the case. This judgment must be linked with the historical background of that period. There are three linguistic features of the Southern and Northern dynasties. The first feature is that poetry gradually deviated from music and the rhyming of poetry did not follow spoken rhymes (see the above quotation from Chén Yínkè). The second feature is that the theory of four tones gradually became popular and was followed by literati and scholars who held this to be the new fashion in literary creations. Fēng Yǎn stated, In the period of Yǒngmíng, Shěn Yuē was famous for his profound and subtle literary writings and was also a master of musical

136  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged melody. He wrote such books as the Sìshēngpǔ and the Wénzhāng bābìng, including the introduction of parallel head, consonant end, wasp waist, and crane knee. He held that ever since the famous poet Qū Yuán (屈原) in the Warring States period, such problems in the rhyming of poetry were not identified by people. At that time, Wáng Róng (王 融), Liú Huì (劉繪), and Fàn Yún (范雲), who were famous for their literary talents, all followed Shěn Yuē’s theory of four tones and used them in the rhyming of their poetry. From then on, the literati writing essays and poetry told this theory to others and applied it in their own writings, which made this rhyming theory very popular … Ever since the rise of literary defects in poetry, poetic writing had to follow its regulations, and this undermined the styles of essays from then on.6 From the last two sentences, it can be inferred that Fēng Yǎn took a negative attitude towards this theory. However, this was just his opinion at the time, whereas in the period when Shěn Yuē was alive, it is highly possible that literati were enthusiastic about this fashion of writing. The third feature is the appearance of rhyme dictionaries. At that time, many different kinds of rhyme dictionaries existed, and literati would choose to follow some strictly while neglecting others. Therefore, the rhyming of literati in the same period and place turned out to be quite different. Due to the features mentioned above, the rhyming of poetry in the Southern and Northern dynasties turned out to be more and more strict. When it came to the Táng dynasty, the situation was quite different. In this period, curiosity about the newly proposed four tones and rhyme dictionaries had passed away together with the enthusiasm for fashion in literary writing and competition in poetic writing. At the same time, the government stipulated the Qièyùn as the official rhyme dictionary and took it as the admission standard for the examination of the ritual ministry, which implies that people had to follow the rhyming system of this book, and this naturally brought about a sort of rebellious psychology among people. People hoped that the rhyming system could approach the spoken language and develop into a broader rhyming system. When it came to the rhyming standard of the ritual ministry, such pleading that the rhymes might be merged into a simpler system also existed from the minister Xǔ Jìngzōng (許敬宗). Therefore, the actual usage of the rhymes turned out to contrast with that dictated by the Qièyùn. This is plausible from a psychological perspective. Therefore, when we are studying the use of rhymes in the poems and essays of literati in the Southern and Northern dynasties, as well as in the Suí and Táng dynasties, we do not need to pay too much attention to those strict rhymes, because the writer might have been trying to show his knowledge of poetic meter. Instead, perhaps we should pay more attention to the merging rhyming phenomenon that was unconsciously used in literati’s poems or essays because it is highly possible that this was the reflection of the spoken pronunciation at the time.

The Conditions Satisfied When Rhyme Tables Were Arranged  137 (3) Study from transliterations from abroad. If it is rather difficult to determine the major categories of rhymes from rhyme dictionaries that are quite different from each other, it would be easier to survey the rhymes of large amounts of poetry, and it would be much easier to survey transliterations from abroad. From a phonemic perspective, this is easy to understand. However, because transliterations from abroad would generally be influenced by foreign phonological systems, the original Chinese pronunciation would need to be restored. The transliterations from abroad in Tables 5 and 6 were based on materials restored to the original Chinese pronunciation. From these transliterations, it can be found that the major categories of the 16 rhyme gatherings were generally correct. (4) We can also turn for proof from the extant literature. Generally, people held that the name “16 rhyme gatherings” originated from the Jīngshǐ zhèngyīn qièyùn zhǐnán by Liú Jiàn. However, the actual origin was much earlier than this book, which is also mentioned in Liú Jiàn’s book. There is a poem on “adaptive rhyming” at the end of the Jīngshǐ zhèngyīn qièyùn zhǐnán. It states, The gěng (梗) and céng (曾) rhyme gatherings are similar to the tōng (通) rhyme gathering. The zhǐ (止) rhyme gathering partially overlaps with the xiè (蟹) rhyme gathering. The jiāng (江) and dàng (宕) rhyme gatherings are similar to each other, and the liú (流) and yù (遇) rhyme gatherings are mutually replaceable. All these rhyme gatherings are either mutually replaceable or complementary.7 What can be found in this poem is the emergence of rhyme gatherings from the spoken language. The gěng (梗) and céng (曾) rhyme gatherings are not separated from each other and are similar to the tōng (通) rhyme gathering, the jiāng (江) and dàng (宕) rhyme gatherings cannot be clearly distinguished, the liú (流) and yù (遇) rhyme gatherings are similar to each other, and part of the zhǐ (止) and xiè (蟹) rhyme gatherings are similar to each other. Furthermore, this poem also rhymes using the zhǐ (止) and xiè (蟹) rhyme gatherings. If the author arranged the rhyme gatherings according to the spoken language, they would unavoidably merge these rhyme gatherings just as in the arrangement in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú. However, they did not refer to the spoken language in the arrangement of rhyme gatherings, which means that the rhyme gatherings followed tradition and had to be based on other rhyme dictionaries. What is more, the Jiǎnlì: biàn nèiwàizhuǎn lì (撿例·辨內外轉例), Examples of distinguishing between inner turn and outer turn in the Jiǎnlì, of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú states, “The old rhyme tables used tōng (通), zhǐ (止), yù (遇), guǒ (果), dàng (宕), liú (流), shēn (深), and céng (曾) to represent the 67 rhymes of the inner pattern and used jiāng (江), xiè (蟹), zhēn (臻), shān (山), xiào (效), jiǎ (假), xián (咸), and gěng (梗) to represent the 139 rhymes of the outer pattern.”8

138  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged No names of rhyme gatherings are mentioned in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, but the 20 rhyme tables were separated into 13 rhyme gatherings. However, the Jiǎnlì contains many discussions about the 16 rhyme gatherings that are irrelevant to the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú. It is no surprise that Shào Guāngzǔ (邵 光祖) regarded the Jiǎnlì as completely contrary to the meaning of the rhyme tables in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú.9 Actually, the Jiǎnlì was not written for the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú. Instead, it was written for the old rhyme tables. In that case, what is an “old rhyme table”? So far, this question has not been definitively answered. If the hypothesis is reliable that the table of 384 sounds was from rhyme tables such as the Yùnjìng, the old tables obviously were such rhyme tables. It can be inferred that in the prototype of the Yùnjìng, the names of the 16 rhyme gatherings were already given. And this can be proven by what Zhāng Línzhī mentions in the Yùnjìng xù, that the 16 rhyme tables of the inner and outer patterns were made.10 What deserves our attention is the sequence of these 16 rhyme gatherings. The 16 rhyme gatherings that are usually mentioned at present include tōng (通), jiāng (江), zhǐ (止), yù (遇), xiè (蟹), zhēn (臻), shān (山), xiào (效), guǒ (果), jiǎ (假), dàng (宕), gěng (梗), céng (曾), liú (流), shēn (深), and xián (咸), which obviously follows the sequence of rhyme headings in the Guǎngyùn. If the 16 rhyme gatherings were divided into inner and outer patterns, then the inner pattern would include the eight rhyme gatherings tōng (通), zhǐ (止), yù (遇), guǒ (果), dàng (宕), céng (曾), liú (流), and shēn (深) and the outer pattern would include the eight rhyme gatherings jiāng (江), xiè (蟹), zhēn (臻), shān (山), xiào (效), jiǎ (假), gěng (梗), and xián (咸). If such an arrangement were compared with the sequence mentioned in the Zhǐzhǎngtú: jiǎnlì (指 掌圖·檢例), Guidelines in the Zhǐzhǎngtú, it would be found that the position of the céng (曾) and xián (咸) rhyme gatherings were different. If the 16 rhyme gatherings in the Zhǐzhǎngtú: jiǎnlì were arranged in a linear sequence, it would be: tōng (通), jiāng (江), zhǐ (止), yù (遇), xiè (蟹), zhēn (臻), shān (山), xiào (效), guǒ (果), jiǎ (假), xián (咸), dàng (宕), gěng (梗), liú (流), shēn (深), and céng (曾). This sequence is simply the sequence of the Qīyīn lüè’s rhyme table as well as the rhyme headings of the rhyme dictionaries of the Qièyùn series in the Táng dynasty. Therefore, it can be concluded that when the rhyme tables were arranged, the concepts of 16 rhyme gatherings not only appeared but also were given a name. Furthermore, the names of the 16 rhyme gatherings were adopted in the arrangement of rhyme tables. All of these are the conditions that contributed to the origination of rhyme tables in that historical period. As for conditions mentioned in other books such as the occurrence of the concept of division, the theory of vowel aperture, the four articulations theory, and knowledge about archaic Chinese phonology, we do not think that these conditions exist because no supporting evidence for them can be found in history.

The Conditions Satisfied When Rhyme Tables Were Arranged  139

Notes 1 Wāng Shòumíng (汪壽明) and Pān Wénguó (潘文國), Hànyǔ yīnyùnxué yǐnlún (漢語音韻學引論), A preliminary introduction to Chinese phonology, Shanghai: Huádōng Shīfàn Dàxué Chūbǎnshè (華東師範大學出版社), East China Normal University Press, 1992. 86. 2 Zhōu Zǔmó (周祖謨), “Qièyùn de xìngzhì hé tāde yīnxì jīchǔ” (切韻的性質和它的 音系基礎), The nature of the Qièyùn and its phonological foundations, Volume 1 of Wèn xué jí, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1966. 458. 3 Chén Yínkè (陳寅恪), Jīnmíngguǎn cónggǎo èrbiān, (金明館叢稿二編), Jīnmíng Hall Collection II, Shanghai: Shànghǎi Gǔjí Chūbǎnshè (上海古籍出版社), Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House, 1980. 271. 4 Lǐ Fú (李涪), Lǐfú Kānwù Èrjuàn, (李涪刊誤 二卷), Two volumes of Lǐ Fú’s critical textual research for the Qièyùn, Volume 2, Wú Cípéi (吴慈培), 1912. 7. 5 Ibid., 8. 6 Fēngyǎn (封演), Shēngyùn in the Fēngshì wénjiànjì in the Cóngshū Jíchéng, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1985. 15. 7 Liú Jiàn (劉鑒), Jīngshǐ zhèngyīn qièyùn zhǐnán, (經史正音切韻指南), A guide to the proper pronunciation of the sinograms in the canons and histories, Shìsīyí (释 思宜), 1496. 35. 8 See Sī Mǎguāng (司馬光), Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú: jiǎnlì, (切韻指掌圖·檢例), The guidelines of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1985. 8. 9 See Sī Mǎguāng (司馬光), Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú: jiǎnlì, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中 華書局), 1985. 40. 10 Zhāng Línzhī (張麟之), Yùnjìng: Diàoyùnzhǐwēi, (韻鏡·調韻指微), On the tones and rhymes in the Yùnjìng, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1936. 6.

14 The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables

The study of the method of arranging the rhyme tables is a study of how the writer of the rhyme tables managed to change the rhyme dictionaries into the form of the rhyme tables we see today, within the conditions provided by history and in accordance with the writers’ phonological principles and compilation intentions. One of the most important methods in this study is research on the historical conditions at the time that the writer of the rhyme tables lived, which follows the attitude of historicism. However, the proponents of the several theories mentioned at the beginning of this section consciously or unconsciously forgot this principle of historicism and did not study the rhyme tables from the historical period when the rhyme tables appeared. Instead, they merely studied the present features of the rhyme tables, or the superficial phenomenon reflected in the rhyme tables by using current phonological study methods and theories to infer the methods of arranging the rhyme tables. Such theories, from the two divisions and four exhalations theory of Pān Lěi (潘耒) to the present popular theory of four divisions with large and small apertures, all fall into this category. After an elaboration and explanation of the ancients’ theories following their own logic, these scholars would naturally feel surprised to learn that the phonological studies of the ancients could be so intelligent. However, it is unsurprising because such research methods are themselves subjective and somewhat modern. I do not want to adopt such a detective method in this book. Instead, I want to follow the route that I took in the first part of this book. I plan to start from historical conditions and editorial intention to see if it is possible to reproduce the whole process by which rhyme tables were arranged so that the rhyme tables that I derive from these historical conditions can be completely consistent with the rhyme tables I find nowadays. If this method proves to be successful, then the conclusions made based on this method will be somewhat more reliable than the conclusions made through the “confusion of cause-​and-​effect” method. As has been mentioned, rhyme tables were made based on the rhyme dictionaries of the Qièyùn series (likely the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng) and these rhyme dictionaries were written at the same time as the Tángyùn. However, because the Tiānbǎo yùnyīng is lost and the Tángyùn is incomplete, I can only make use of the extant complete rhyme dictionaries edited in the Táng dynasty—​Wáng DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-16

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  141 Rénxù’s Kānmiù bǔquē qièyùn with Sòng Lián’s afterword—​to conduct the experiment of rhyme table arrangement. It is taken that the liaisers in the Wángyùn have all been divided according to articulation (rounded and unrounded) and aperture (large and small), which is, of course, in accordance with the standard of the Táng dynasty reflected in the rhyme tables later on. Therefore, largely, I make use of Lǐ Róng’s Dānzì yīnbiǎo (單字音表), The rhyme table of single sinograms, designed based on the historical conditions mentioned in Part One of this book.1 After experimentation, I infer that the arrangement of rhyme tables experienced the following steps:

14.1  Preparatory work (1) The form of the rhyme dictionaries changed following the Míngyìlì of the Yùnquán. The rhyme tables made in this way are like those of the Sìshēng yùnpǔ by Liáng Sēngbǎo, which can be found nowadays. In these rhyme tables, each table is comprised of rhymes with four tones (even tone, rising tone, departing tone, and entering tone). Every rhyme takes a line in each table and no detailed division of the rhyme categories is found. As for the initial categories, despite their vertical arrangement, the sequence of initials fails to follow a reasonable order. A total of 57 rhyme tables like this are found in the Wángyùn, and the form of each table is like Table 3 in the first part of this book. (2) For every minor rhyme, only the first sinogram of the minor rhyme and the liaisers are kept, with the deletion of homophones and annotations. This method enables rhyme tables independent of rhyme dictionaries and provides the foundation for the specific study of the old Chinese phonological system. (3) The SL initials are classified according to five-​type initials (chún (唇) labial, shé (舌) lingual, chǐ (齿) dental, yá (牙) velar, and hóu (喉) guttural). According to the application of this theory, the concepts “voiceless” and “voiced” that originally belonged to the features of rhymes were later allocated to the SL initial to make voiceless and voiced initials. One of the major characteristics of rhyme tables was to assign the features of “voiceless” and “voiced” to the initial categories, and this was also a great step in the study of ancient Chinese phonology. Before this, the terms “voiceless” and “voiced” were used to describe the rhymes (in fact the tones of rhymes), that were represented by the SL final. After the appearance of rhyme tables, “voiceless” and “voiced” were usually used to describe the features of initials, which were represented by the SL initial, while the names for the tones were gradually replaced by other names such as yīn and yáng. The categorical name of such initials as míng (明), ní (泥), yí (疑), yù (喻), lái (來), and rì (日) changed from “voiceless” and “voiced” to “neither voiceless nor voiced” and then to “second voiced,” which is a good example of this process of change.

142  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged

14.2  Division of unrounded and rounded rhymes As for the difference between the concepts of unrounded and rounded rhymes, some scholars held that this is determined by the occurrence of the medial vowel [u]‌in the rhyme. The rhymes with [u] are open rhymes and those without [u] are closed. Other scholars held that the difference between unrounded and rounded articulations is determined by the labialization of the initials. Both theories are questionable because, theoretically speaking, none of them can prove if the ancients were already able to differentiate voice quality in detail. Neither are they in accordance with the real situation of the rhyme tables and the rhyme dictionaries. For example, the theory of initial determination cannot explain the fact that unrounded and rounded articulations belong to the same phoneme in rhyme dictionaries. And the theory of rhyme determination cannot answer the question of the zhǐ (止) rhyme gathering as closed articulation with a small aperture. Should the zhǐ (止) rhyme gathering be marked by [i] +​[u] or [u] +​[i]? The [u] +​[i] pattern means that it is not a small aperture rhyme, and the [i] +​[u] pattern means that it is not a closed articulation because [u] is no longer the medial vowel in this situation and is instead the major vowel. Therefore, the unrounded and rounded articulations cannot be simply defined and compared with any theory of modern linguistic phonology. Sometimes it might be a good idea to study these concepts by using the ancient method. The contemporary scholar Wáng Guójù’s (王國琚) explanation in his book Dú děngyùn bìng fǎnqiè ménfǎ héjiě (讀等韻並反切門法合解), The union of the explanations for rhyme division and ménfǎ for sinographic liaison, might be close to the ancients’ understanding of unrounded and rounded articulation. He states: Open articulation (unrounded articulation) implies that if a sinogram is to be pronounced, one has to open their mouth and exhale. A closed articulation (rounded articulation) implies that if a sinogram is to be pronounced, one has to first close their mouth and then make an exhalation to finish this pronunciation. That is why it is called closed articulation. In this process of pronunciation, the exhalation has to be made and the only difference is if one’s mouth is unrounded or rounded. This is how the articulation can be distinguished. And this explains why the rhymes can be divided into unrounded and rounded rhymes, but the closed rhymes are always accompanied by open rhymes.2 When one tries to pronounce the same sound with his mouth first open and then closed, he will know that Wáng Guójù’s idea is correct. Phonologically speaking, closed articulation indeed features a labialized initial or the occurrence of the medial vowel “u.” However, it seems that the ancients did not think so. They just held that such rhyme groups as gāng (岡) and guāng (光) or kàn (看) and kuān (寬) both feature alliterated disyllables and rhymed disyllables and the only difference between these pairs of sinograms lies in

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  143 their manner of exhalation. Therefore, the sinograms of rounded articulation in the zhǐ (止) rhyme gathering, from the ancients’ point of view, still belonged to the sound of the small aperture, which needs to be pronounced with a closed mouth. Technically speaking, the pronunciation of unrounded and rounded articulation is determined by the action of the mouth before pronunciation, and therefore it seems that it should relate to initials. However, because the ancients paid more attention to rhyme categories, the results of studying the pronunciation of unrounded and rounded sounds were usually reflected in sinographic liaison. Because of this, some sinograms in sinographic liaison were difficult to categorize as unrounded or rounded articulation. But when it comes to the period of the occurrence of rhyme tables, it is generally believed that the author of rhyme tables had already differentiated unrounded and rounded articulations based on the sinographic liaison in rhyme dictionaries and other literature as well as their own pronunciation. Among the qualities of unrounded and rounded articulation, labial sounds are the most controversial. According to this explanation, all labial sounds should use a closed articulation. If labial sounds were taken as the SL initial, it would be easy to take either the unrounded or rounded sound as the SL final. This would not be a problem in rhyme dictionaries, but it would be a problem for arranging rhyme tables. This is because in rhyme tables, open articulations must be separated from closed articulations and usually it is the SL final that determines whether the articulation is unrounded or rounded. If all the labial sinograms took closed articulation sinograms as the SL finals and could all be arranged into the rhyme tables of closed articulations, that would be ideal. However, when sinographic liaison was first stipulated, such a situation was not considered, and many labial sounds in rhymes took SL finals with open articulations. In some rhymes, only part of the labial sinograms had open articulations, whereas in other rhymes, nearly all the labial sinograms had open articulations. The categorization of labial sounds became a problem when the rhyme tables were made. If the labial sinograms were put into the table of open articulations, this would contrast with the definition of unrounded and rounded articulations. And if the labial sinograms were put into the table of closed articulations, it would be inconvenient for people to use sinographic liaison to check the rhymes in the rhyme tables. If labial sinograms were put into the tables of both unrounded and rounded articulations, this might introduce confusion about the nature of labial sounds. Because of these contradictions, the categorization of labial sounds was not settled in the earlier rhyme tables, which can be inferred from the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè. The categorization of unrounded and rounded articulations of the labial sinograms in the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè was studied and made into a table (Table 14.1). Table 14.1 reveals that the labial sounds are categorized rather haphazardly. Some of the labial sounds are categorized as open articulations, some as closed, some as either unrounded or rounded,

newgenrtpdf

Rhyme SL final system in WY

YJ

QYL

Rhyme

SL final system in WY

YJ

QYL

Rhyme

SL final system in WY

zhī

unrounded & rounded

unrounded

unrounded

zhì

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

zhǐ

unrounded-​ unrounded rounded

unrounded

unrounded & rounded

unrounded

unrounded

寘 zhī

unrounded-​ rounded

unrounded

unrounded

旨 zhì

unrounded-​ unrounded rounded

unrounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

脂 mò

unrounded & (unrounded) rounded & rounded

rounded

至 yàng

unrounded & rounded

unrounded

unrounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

unrounded

unrounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

末 shān 刪 shān

rounded

rounded

rounded

unrounded & rounded

unrounded

unrounded

未 tài

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

潸 jiàn

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

泰 qí

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

諫 xiá

unrounded & rounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded & rounded

unrounded

unrounded

支 zhǐ 紙 wēi 微 wěi 尾 wèi

齊 jì 霽 jì

unrounded

鎋 shān 山 jiǎn

unrounded & rounded rounded

unrounded-​ rounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

漾 yào 藥 táng 唐 dàng 蕩 dàng 宕 duó 鐸 gēng

YJ

QYL

144  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged

Table 14.1 The categorization of unrounded and rounded labial sounds in YJ and QYL

祭 jiā

unrounded

unrounded

襇 xiá

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

黠 xiān

蟹 guà

unrounded unrounded & rounded

unrounded unrounded & rounded

unrounded unrounded & rounded

卦 jiē

unrounded

unrounded

皆 guài

unrounded

怪 guài

unrounded-​ rounded

(unrounded) & rounded

庚 gěng

unrounded & rounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded & unrounded-​ rounded rounded

unrounded

梗 jìng

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

先 xiǎn

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

敬 mò

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

銑 xiàn

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

陌 gēng

unrounded

unrounded & rounded

unrounded & rounded

unrounded & rounded

rounded

霰 xiè

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

耕 zhèng

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

屑 xiān

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded & (rounded)

unrounded & rounded

unrounded

unrounded

夬 fèi

rounded

unrounded & rounded

rounded

仙 xiǎn

麥 qīng

unrounded

unrounded

Unrounded

廢 zhēn

unrounded

unrounded rounded & (rounded)

清 jìng

unrounded

unrounded

Unrounded

獮 xiàn

unrounded & unrounded rounded

unrounded

unrounded & unrounded & rounded rounded

unrounded & rounded

諍 mài

(continued)

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  145

佳 xiè

unrounded-​ rounded

newgenrtpdf

Rhyme SL final system in WY

YJ

QYL

Rhyme

unrounded & rounded

unrounded

unrounded

綫 xuē

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

薛 gē 歌 gě

質 yuán

rounded

rounded

rounded

哿 gè

元 ruǎn

rounded

rounded

(unrounded) & rounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

unrounded & rounded

rounded

rounded

真 zhěn 軫 zhèn 震 zhì

阮 yuàn 願 yuè 月 hán

箇 má 麻 mǎmǎ 馬 mà 禡 yáng

SL final system in WY

YJ

QYL

Rhyme

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

靜 jìng

unrounded

rounded

rounded

unrounded & rounded rounded

rounded

勁 xī 昔 qīng

unrounded & rounded rounded

rounded

青 jiǒng

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

迥 jìng

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

徑 xī 錫 zhí 職 dēng

SL final system in WY

YJ

QYL

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded & rounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

146  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged

Table 14.1 Cont.

unrounded & rounded unrounded & rounded

unrounded & rounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

rounded

rounded 養

陽 yǎng unrounded

unrounded

unrounded 德

登 dé unrounded

unrounded

unrounded

[Annotation] In the Wángyùn, “開、合” (kāi and hé) means that both unrounded and rounded articulations of the SL final are involved. “開合” (kāihé) refers to the labial sounds that are liaised with each other and difficult to differentiate. In the rhyme tables, “開、合” (kāi and hé) means that some rhymes belong to the category of 開 (kāi, open or unrounded), and some belong to the category of 合 (hé, closed or rounded. “開合” (kāihé) means the same rhyme recurs in the table. The sinograms with parentheses refer to the complementary sinograms in the rhyme table.

翰

旱 hàn

寒 hàn

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  147

148  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged and some as the recurring rhymes of both unrounded and rounded articulations. For example, in the Yùnjìng, the sinogram fèi (廢) of the fèi (廢) rhyme appears in the 9th and 10th rhyme tables; the sinogram bài (拜) of the guài (怪) rhyme appears in the 13th and 14th rhyme tables; the sinogram biān (邊) of the xiān (先) rhyme appears in the 23rd and 24th rhyme tables; the sinograms bā (八), bá (拔), and mà (㑻) of the xiá (黠) rhyme appear in the 23rd and 24th rhyme tables; and so on. Perhaps this is just a faithful reflection of the author’s contradictory intentions that they wanted to categorize the labial sounds by referring to not only the SL finals but also to the nature of the labial sounds.3 However, a detailed study of the distribution of the labial sounds in these two rhyme tables may indicate two preferences. The first preference is for the categorization of labial sounds to be mostly determined by the unrounded and rounded features of the SL final4 to reflect the principle of quoting without rewriting. The second preference is for the unrounded and rounded features of every rhyme in the rhyme tables to accord with each other to show the uniformity of the rhyme tables, which is reflected in the recurring rhymes. This question of the chaotic categorization of labial sounds remained unsolved until the occurrence of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, which dramatically merged rhyme tables based on their spoken pronunciation. (According to the analysis in the first part of our book, this trace was found in the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn, which cannot be taken as solid proof for a lack of rhyme tables with distinctive unrounded and rounded articulations.) The Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú categorized all the labial sounds except for the gěng (梗) and céng (曾) rhyme gatherings according to the nature of closed articulations. Labial sounds were also categorized into open articulation in the xiè (蟹) rhyme gathering because of the careless arrangement of recurring rhymes. This text not only differentiates the unrounded and rounded articulations of the rhymes but also differentiates rhymes like dōng (東), gēng (庚), and má (麻) according to their aperture. When the rhyme tables were first arranged, rhymes with different apertures may have been categorized into different rhyme tables. However, because it cannot be inferred from the extant rhyme tables I have, I can only suppose that they were not separated at that time. A total of 85 rhyme tables were obtained after the rhymes with unrounded and rounded articulations in the rhyme dictionaries were separated and including the independent rhymes without unrounded and rounded articulations. The forms of these rhyme tables are illustrated in Table 8.

14.3  Occurrence of four divisions (děng (等)) Through the steps mentioned in the first section, the author of the rhyme tables produced a frame for the rhyme tables. And through the steps mentioned in the second section, the author finished the detailed categorization of the rhymes in rhyme dictionaries and ensured that every rhyme category was reflected in the rhyme tables. Therefore, the next question that the author needed to

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  149 consider was the initial categories. The author needed to ensure that each initial category in the rhyme dictionaries was reflected in the rhyme tables. More significantly, the author needed to reveal the matching relationship between initial categories and rhyme categories in the rhyme tables. The rhyme features illustrated in Table 8 show that those initials, the five-​ type initials, were divided among five major categories. But the inner relationship between these five-​type initials is complicated. If all the initials can be classified into voiceless, second-​voiceless, voiced, and second-​voiced initials, then the categorization of the labial, lingual, velar, and guttural initials would be simpler, and they could be categorized into 17 groups based on such a standard of classification. The dental initials are quite distinctive. The dental initials comprise 16 categories, accounting for nearly half of the total number of initials. And each of the major categories can be further divided into three subcategories. Therefore, the illustration of the 16 initial categories that belong to the dental initial group would become a major problem in the categorization of initials when the rhyme tables were being arranged. In that case, how could the three initial groups that are subordinated to the dental initials be illustrated? It is obviously not feasible to illustrate them as follows: Table 14.2 Original arrangement of initial groups Labial

Lingual

Velar

Dental

Guttural

Such an illustration only reveals the major categories of the five-​type initials and neglects the distinction of the three initial groups subordinate to the dental initials. What if the initials were categorized as shown in the following table? Table 14.3 Initial groups with further classification of dental initials Labial

Lingual

Velar

Dental (1) Dental (2) Dental (3) Guttural

This does not work either. The reason is that although the three dental initial groups are illustrated, the categorical boundaries of the five-​type initials are confused. The author of the rhyme tables could only have arranged the rhymes in the following way, illustrating both the five-​type initials and the inner distinction among dental initials, as is presented in Table 14.4. Table 14.4 Initial groups arranged by the author of rhyme tables Labial

Lingual

Dental

Dental（1） Dental（2） Dental（3）

Guttural

150  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged This is the situation I found from the study of the extant rhyme tables. However, this arrangement violates the principle of vertical initials and horizontal rhymes. And this fact provides very good evidence that fully illustrating the categories of initials and rhymes is the priority in the process of arranging rhyme tables. However, such an arrangement is not perfect because it only illustrates the initial and rhyme categories in the rhyme dictionaries and does not reveal the matching relationship between the categories. Originally, in the Qièyùn rhyme dictionary that was still available at that time, several rules governed the matching of initial and rhyme categories, which were mainly reflected in the dental sounds. If the rhymes are categorized according to those dental sounds, then the rhymes in the Qièyùn can be classified into four types. The first type includes only the jīng (精) initials in the rhyme set, as is illustrated by the táng (唐) rhyme set in Table 14.5.1. The second type includes only the zhuāng (莊) initials in the rhyme set, as is illustrated by the jiāng (江) rhyme set in Table 14.5.2. The third type includes the jīng (精), zhuāng (莊), and zhāng (章) initials in the rhyme set, as is illustrated by the yáng (陽) rhyme set in Table 14.5.3. The fourth type includes none of the dental initials in the rhyme set, as is illustrated by the wén (文) rhyme set in Table 14.5.4 which are in the following pages (of course the jīng (精), zhuāng (莊), and zhāng (章) initials are the titles borrowed from modern terms that would not be present at that period. These terms are to be used in subsequent examples). The rhymes can also be categorized by articulation (rounded and unrounded) and aperture (large and small). If the rhymes were categorized based on articulation, then there would be three categories, namely, rounded articulation, unrounded articulation, and neither (“neither” does not mean that there is no spoken pronunciation when it comes to the rounded and unrounded standard), which is illustrated through the division of rhyme tables. If the rhymes were categorized according to aperture, there would also be three categories, namely, large aperture, small aperture, and neither (“neither” does not mean that there is no aperture in the spoken pronunciation). Among these, the rhymes of large and small aperture would both include the jīng (精) rhyme set of dental initials. Therefore, from the matching between initial categories and the large and small aperture rhymes, all the rhymes in the Qièyùn can be divided into five categories. An example of the first rhyme category is the táng (唐) rhyme, which only includes the jīng (精) set of dental initials from initial categorization and belongs to the large aperture rhyme from the perspective of rhyme categorization. An example of the second rhyme category is the xiān (先) rhyme, which also only includes the jīng (精) set of dental initials and belongs to the small aperture rhyme category. An example of the third rhyme category is the yáng (陽) rhyme, which includes all three kinds of dental initials and belongs to the category of small aperture rhymes. An example of the fourth rhyme category is the jiāng (江)

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  151 rhyme, which only includes the zhuāng (莊) set of dental initials and belongs to neither aperture (most of the modern pronunciations of that dialect which are different in their aperture fall into this category). An example of the fifth rhyme category is the wén (文) rhyme, which does not include any dental initials and belongs to neither aperture (most of the light labial initials later on fall into this category). According to these conditions, the author of the rhyme tables further processed the rhyme tables based on the final arranging method. The author put the jīng (精) initial set into two positions. One position is on the top line of the first rhyme category and another is on the bottom line of the second rhyme category. There, the zhuāng (莊) and zhāng (章) initial sets were placed on the second and third lines, respectively. Because no rhyme category contains only the zhāng (章) initial set and any rhyme category containing the zhāng (章) initial set is generally the small aperture rhyme containing the jīng (精) initial set, the zhāng (章) initial set was placed on the third line, second from the bottom, to demonstrate the shared small aperture quality. This is the position of the third rhyme category. Therefore, the zhuāng (莊) initial set at the second line naturally became the position of the fourth rhyme category. As for the fifth rhyme category, because it does not include any dental initials and is contrary to and complementary to the third rhyme category, it was put on the third line. Therefore, the following pattern was produced. This is the arrangement of initials and rhymes in the extant rhyme tables of the Sòng and Yuán dynasties. This arrangement indicates that the author of the rhyme tables tried to illustrate the categories of initials and rhymes in the rhyme dictionaries, reflecting their elaboration on the matching of initials and rhymes. The four-​row pattern was formed during the arranging process and was not the product of detailed phonological analysis. When later scholars found such a tidy pattern and did not know its origin, they made various guesses, such as “dividing according to initials” and “dividing according to rhymes” because they found different rhyme apertures and different initial sets on different rows. Unfortunately, however, because none of these hypotheses are supported by all the rhyme tables, they are not persuasive enough. However, our hypothesis that the four-​ row pattern is derived from a different matching relationship between dental initials and rhymes that allows the other rhyme categories to be placed on rhyme tables according to the dental initials that they include, applies to all the rhyme tables. At the same time, because all the rhyme groups can be classified into four-​row rhyme tables according to this standard, the question of why the rhyme table has just four rows can be answered. This question has been the subject of a long controversy between “literature-​based study” and “spoken pronunciation–​based study.” The four rows are neither the result of the four tones of Chinese nor the product of a “procrustean tendency in method.” Instead, it is the most

152  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Table 14.5 Form of rhyme tables before division was used Table 14.5.1  Táng (唐) unrounded

economic arrangement that can fully illustrate the initial and rhyme categories of different levels in the rhyme dictionaries. The only exception that needs further explanation is the gēng (庚) and má (麻) rhyme sets. Like the condition of the dōng (東) rhyme, the má (麻) rhyme can also be classified by aperture. Since the large aperture of the má (麻) rhyme is linked with the dental zhuāng (莊) initial set, it cannot be placed on the first line. Both large and small apertures of the gēng (庚) rhyme are linked to the dental zhuāng (莊) initial set. Because the zhuāng (莊) initial set cannot be separated into two lines, the large aperture of the gēng (庚) rhyme is placed in the zhuāng (莊) initial set and the small aperture of the

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  153

gēng (庚) rhyme is placed on the third line as the fifth rhyme category having no dental initials. Coincidentally, most of the rhymes in the third line are small apertures that correspond to the small apertures of the gēng (庚) rhyme. Despite such exceptions, some special adjustment is acceptable in any strictly designed scientific work, especially when the whole system is at risk of confusion without such adjustment. The inference of this categorizing step in the process of arranging rhyme tables demonstrates that děng (等) is in fact the synonym of lèi (類), as was mentioned. However, because the terms děngyùn (等韻) and sìděng (四等) have long been fixed expressions, I will continue to use these terms in the awareness that they are different in their connotations.

154  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Table 14.5 Cont. Table 14.5.2  Jiāng (江)

14.4  Independence of the lái (來) and rì (日) initials and the division of the yù (喻) initial Two questions need to be discussed in the process of arranging rhyme tables. 14.4.1  Independence of the lái (來) and rì (日) initials After the rhyme tables were divided into different rows (divisions), the pattern of 33 rows and 4 columns (indicating even tone, rising tone, departing tone, and entering tone) in Table 8 was changed to a pattern of 23 rows and 16 columns. This pattern not only fully illustrates the initial and rhyme categories and the matching between them in rhyme dictionaries but also makes the rhyme tables neat, symmetrical, and beautiful. This is an unexpected result. By this time, in the four rows of dental initials, there were five initials in lines one, two, and four but six initials in line three of the zhāng (章) initial set. An extra “second-​ voiced” category is present that looks

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  155

rather unnatural. Furthermore, compared with the labial, velar, and guttural sets, there is also one more “second-​ voiced” initial in the lingual set. The author of the rhyme tables ultimately took these two special initials out, designated a special column besides five-​type initials, and named it the chǐyīnshé (齒音舌) (dental lingual initial). The term chǐyīnshé (齒音舌) has two meanings. If read from the right side, this term is read as shéyīn (舌音) (lingual initial) and if read from the left side, this term is read as chǐyīn (齒音) (dental initial). They indicate respectively the lái (來) initial and the rì (日) initial. The lái (來) and rì (日) initials are obviously independent from lingual and dental sounds, respectively. Wáng Lì stated, “In the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, circles are marked in the pigeonholes of xiá (匣) Division Ⅲ, yù (喻) and qún (羣) Division I and II, shàn (禪) Division II, and xié (邪) Division I, which is quite different from rì (日) Divisions I, II and IV where circles are not marked in the pigeonholes.”5 So it is when I study the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú in the Yīngyùnxué cóngshū (音韻學叢 書), The series of Chinese phonology, edited by Yán Shìhuì (嚴式誨). In

156  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Table 14.5 Cont. Table 14.5.3  Yáng (陽) unrounded

this book, the second and third lines of the duān (端) and jīng (精) initial sets are blank; the first and fourth lines of the zhī (知) and zhào (照) initial sets are blank; and the first, second, and fourth lines of the fēi (非) initial set are blank. These blanks obviously indicate the traces from where the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú dismantled the 23-​ line “old table” according to 36 sinogram initials. And it also indicates that the rì (日) initial indeed resulted from the 16 dental initials classified into three categories with 5 initials each. The arrangement of the minor rhymes of the Jíyùn also reveals that the rì (日) initial was originally categorized into the zhāng (章) initial set and was irrelevant to the jīng (精) and zhuāng (莊) initial sets. This explains why there are neither sounds nor sinograms on these three lines. In the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú of the Cóngshū jíchéng, rì (日) Divisions I, II and IV are all marked with circles in the pigeonholes, which is wrong. Even in the Yùnjìng, rì (日) Division I, II and IV are marked with circles in the pigeonholes. All these mistakes should be corrected by referring to the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú from the Yīngyùnxué cóngshū edited by Yán Shìhuì in the Sòng dynasty. It can be inferred from this fact that the “four divisions” of the rhyme tables are truly based on the dental initials as a pivot. Here the five-​type initials and

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  157

seven-​type initials also need to be discussed. The Yùnjìng classified the lái (來) and rì (日) initials as chǐyīnshé (齒音舌) (dental lingual initials), which can be read as chǐyīn (齒音) (dental initial) from the left and shéyīn (舌音) (lingual initial) from the right. This is good because this method maintains the traces of where these two initials came from. In the Yùnjìng, although the lái (來) and rì (日) initials are listed independently, five types of initials remain. Unfortunately, the reading method of these three sinograms (齒音舌), chǐyīnshé, has long been misunderstood by later generations. Zhāng Línzhī’s description is quite typical: Five types of initials exist, including labial, dental, guttural, lingual, and velar sounds. Among them, lingual and dental sounds are often interacting and co-​dependent. Therefore, some dental sounds are often accompanied by lingual sounds and vice versa. The ancients proposed the lái (來) and rì (日) initials as dental lingual sounds complementary to each other. Because the lái (來) initial is pronounced first as the lingual and then as the dental, it is named a lingual dental initial; because the rì (日) initial is pronounced first as the dental and then as the lingual, it is

158  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Table 14.5 Cont. Table 14.5.4  Wén (文)

named a dental lingual initial. And both of them together with the other five types of initials amount to seven types of initials.6 In other kinds of rhyme tables besides the Yùnjìng, the names for the columns of lái (來) and rì (日) are problematic. In the former part of the Qīyīn lüè, they are respectively called half-​zhǐ (徵) and half-​shāng (商), whereas in the rhyme tables they are written as 半 商徵 (shāng zhǐ). In the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, they are written as 半商舌齒半徵 (half shāng lingual dental half zhǐ). In the Sìshēng děngzǐ, they are named “dental-​lingual sounds.” Later scholars studying rhyme divisions generally called the lái (來) initial a half-​lingual sound and the rì (日) initial a half-​dental sound. In this way, the five-​type initials became seven-​type initials. The theory of seven-​type initials, of course, is useful for understanding the nature of the lái (來) and rì (日) initials. However, it does not help us understand the occurrence of rhyme tables, nor is it useful for answering questions in the study of archaic Chinese rhymes. Five-​ type and seven-​ type initials are concepts from different historical periods. The theory of

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  159

seven-​type initials was proposed by Zhèng Qiáo. Before him, there was only the theory of five-​type initials when people were talking about the study of initials. Ever since it was first proposed by Sūn Miǎn, the theory of five-​ type initials could be found in the following works: Shén Gǒng’s table of the Sìshēng wǔyīn jiǔnòngtú, “On Five-​type Initials” at the end of the Yùpiān, “A Method of Five-​type Initials” at the end of the Guǎngyùn, the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn and the Chóngwén zǒngmù xùnshì (崇文總目訓釋), The explanation of the Chóngwén zǒngmù, written by Ōuyáng Xiū (歐陽修). Although Shěn Kuò’s Mèngxī bǐtán mentioned “two dental-​lingual initials,” when talking about the initials as a whole, he held that there were a total of 36 initials categorized into five types and no exceptions beyond this categorization.7 Not long after Zhèng Qiáo’s time, Hán Dàozhāo wrote the Wǔyīn jíyùn in the Jīn dynasty. Furthermore, in the Jīngshǐ zhèngyīn qièyùn zhǐnán written by Liú Jiàn, Liú states, “in paired rhymes like dōng (東) and dōng (冬), zhī (脂) and wēi (微), and zhēn (真) and yīn (殷), the nature of the five-​type initials was studied, including voiced and voiceless initials, light and heavy initials, and the division of initials.” In the Jiǎnlì of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú,

160  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Table 14.6 The arrangement of 精莊章 initial sets in rhyme tables

First line Second line Third line Fourth line

Dental

Labial, lingual, velar, guttural

Jīng (精) inital set Zhuāng (莊) inital set Zhāng (章) inital set Jīng (精) inital set

First rhyme category Fourth rhyme category Third and fifth rhyme categories Second rhyme category

the term “five-​type initials” was often mentioned. And even the classification of minor rhymes in the Jíyùn took the five-​ type initials as the standard. It could be found that the rì (日) initial is always accompanied by the zhāng (章) initial set and the lái (來) initial is always combined with the duān (端) or zhī (知) initial sets. The best evidence for this can be found in the prologue to the Yùnjìng. In the prologue and the Guīzìlì (歸字例), Examples of sinogram categories, written by Zhāng Línzhī in 1161, only the term “five-​type initials” is frequently mentioned. In the epilogue and the Diàoyùn zhǐwēi (調韻指微), Guide for sinographic liaison, written in 1203, the term “seven-​type initials” is discussed at length. Many paragraphs were copied from the Qīyīn xù written by Zhèng Qiáo. Therefore, the inventor of the term “seven-​type initials” was likely Zhèng Qiáo. The above paragraph quoted from the Yùnjìng hòuxù is Zhāng Línzhī’s explanation of the rhyme tables of the Yùnjìng. After Zhāng read Zhèng Qiáo’s book and accepted his theory of seven-​type initials, he applied it to rhyme tables which had neither the terms “seven-​type initials” nor the terms “half-​ dental, half-​lingual” nor “half-​zhǐ (徵), half-​shāng (商)” in the rhyme tables of the Yùnjìng. Because Zhèng Qiáo was a famous scholar in the Southern Sòng dynasty, it is natural that Zhāng Línzhī was influenced by his ideas. For the same reason, the term “seven-​type initials” was also discussed in the Sìshēng děngzǐ. One of the differences between the prologues of the Sìshēng děngzǐ and the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú is that one talked about “five-​type initials” and the other talked about “seven-​type initials.” Therefore, the prologue of the Sìshēng děngzǐ was likely written after Zhèng Qiáo’s Qīyīn lüè, copying the prologue of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú. It can also be inferred that Zhāng Línzhī, Zhèng Qiáo, and the writer of the prologue of the Sìshēng děngzǐ did not know the reasons why the lái (來) and rì (日) initials were listed in an independent column. Zhāng Línzhī studied the Yùnjìng for 50 years, but he chose to accept the paradoxical theories of seven-​ type initials by Zhèng Qiáo. All of these indicate that the occurrence of rhyme tables was in fact much earlier than the time these literati lived in. The compiling principle was already a problem even for those experts. This also means that the study of rhyme tables should not be confined simply to the theories of Zhèng Qiáo or Zhāng Línzhī. Instead, more historical literature needs to be collected, analyzed, and compared so that reasonable conclusions can be made based on rigorous literary analysis.

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  161 14.4.2  The division of the yù (喻) initial It was proven to be true by the studies of scholars such as Zēng Yùnqián (曾運乾), Luó Chángpéi, Zhōu Zǔmó, Lǐ Róng, and Gěi Yìqīng that yù (喻) Division III belongs to the xiá (匣) initial category in the period of the Qièyùn. Zhōu Zǔmó noted that in the third section of the Qièyùn, the xiá (匣) and yú (于) initials (namely yù (喻) Division III) were not differentiated, taking as examples “yún (雲), liaised as hù (户) fēn (分),” “yuè (越), liaised as hù (户) fá (伐),” “yú (于), liaised as hú (胡) jù (俱),” and so on.8 This provides further evidence that in the version of the Qièyùn that the author of the rhyme tables referred to, these two initials belonged to the same category. In the rhyme tables that are available nowadays, the yú (于) initial is not in xiá (匣) Division III. Instead, it is in yù (喻) Division III. Based on this evidence, it is held that rhyme tables were designed according to 36 sinogram initials. However, the question might be more complicated. This is because the sinograms in yù (喻) Divisions III and IV are not arranged neatly in the rhyme tables. There is evidence indicating that the arrangement of the yù (喻) initial is the result of adjustment. I postulate that when the rhyme tables were first arranged, the yú (于) initial was in the position of yù (喻) Division III, which is on the third line of “voiced” gutturals, and yú (喻) Division IV was placed on the third line of “second-​voiced” gutturals. It is the author of the rhyme tables who deliberately adjusted the position of these two initials when arranging the rhyme tables. This phenomenon can be inferred from the current Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè. In these two books, the sinograms of the yú (于) initial were moved from the third line of “voiced” to the third line of “second-​voiced”, and sinograms of yù (喻) Division IV were moved from the third line of “second-​voiced” to the fourth line of “second-​ voiced.” The two books are the same in that each has 35 sinograms belonging to the former category and 46 sinograms belonging to the latter. But the two books also have differences, which are illustrated in Table 14.7. Table 14.7 reveals that the Qīyīn lüè has more missing sinograms and the Yùnjìng has more additive sinograms. Another interesting phenomenon is that the yú (于) initial sinograms that should originally have been put on the third line of “second-​voiced” and the yù (喻) Division IV sinograms that should have been put on the fourth line of “second-​voiced” were not put in those positions in these two books. Those sinograms are yù (欲), yǐ (以), yú (余), yíng (蠅), yùn (孕), and dié (殜) in the Yùnjìng and yí (飴), yìn (酳), and yǐng (郢) in the Qīyīn lüè. This is an obvious piece of evidence that the rhyme tables were adjusted. These sinograms were neglected when the author of the rhyme tables was dealing with the yù (喻) initial. Some were noticed in the Yùnjìng and some in the Qīyīn lüè, but both books left some sinograms uncategorized. What is the purpose of such adjustment? The answer can be found from the sinogram xióng (雄), liaised as yǔ (羽) lóng (隆), which can be found on the third line of the “voiced” guttural initial of the dōng (東) rhyme in the first table of the Yùnjìng and Qīyīn lüè. According to the rules mentioned above,

162  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Table 14.7 Different placements of the yù (喻) initial in the YJ and QYL 匣xiá 喻yù III III dōng 東

xióng róng 雄 肜 QYL xióng 雄 YJ

wū

YJ

屋

QYL

jìng

YJ

鐘

QYL

zhú

YJ

燭

QYL

zhǐ

YJ

紙

QYL

zhī

YJ

脂

QYL

zhī

YJ

之

QYL

zhǐ

YJ

止

QYL

xiàn

YJ

線

QYL

xiàn

YJ

線close

QYL

yáng

YJ

陽

QYL

yòu 囿 yòu 囿 róng 容

喻yù IV

Remark

róng 融 róng 融

1. Please notice that xióng (雄) is not categorized into Division III of the yù (喻)initial in either work. 2. Tóng (肜) is an added sinogram. Yù (育)is absent in the QYL.

yù 育 yōng 庸 róng 容

yù 欲 wěi 蔿 wěi 蔿 wéi 帷 yí 飴 yǐ 以 yǐ 矣 xiàn 羨 xuán 縣

yuàn 瑗 yuàn 瑗 yáng 羊

yù 欲 yì 䓈 wéi 惟 wéi 帷 yí 飴

yǎn 衍 yǎn 衍 yuàn 掾 yuàn 掾 yáng 陽 yáng 陽

In the YJ, 容 róng is not moved to Division IV and 庸 yōng is added. In the QYL, 容 róng is placed in the correct poistion. Yù (欲) is correctly placed in the QYL but not in the YJ. In the QYL, yì (䓈)is absent.

In the YJ, wéi (帷) is absent.

Yí (飴) is placed correctly in the YJ and incorrectly placed in the QYL. In the YJ, yǐ (以) is not moved to Division IV so there is no place for yǐ (矣); in the QYL, yǐ (以) is absent. In the YJ, xiàn (羨) is added according to the JY. In the YJ, the placement of xiàn (縣) is the result of a misarrangement from the xiàn (霰) rhyme. In the QYL, the rhymes are correctly placed. Yáng (羊) is an added sinogram to Division III.

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables 163 Table 14.7 Cont. 匣xiá 喻yù III III gēng

YJ

庚

QYL

qīng

YJ

清

QYL

mò

YJ

陌

QYL

jìng

YJ

靜

QYL

yú

YJ

魚

QYL

yǔ

YJ

麌

QYL

zhěn

YJ

軫

QYL

zhǔn

YJ

準

QYL

zhèn

YJ

震

QYL

zhì

YJ

質

QYL

喻yù IV

Remark

róng 榮

In the YJ, róng (榮) is displaced by yíng (營), as indicated in the following line. In the QYL, it is correctly placed. In the YJ, yíng (營) is displaced by róng (榮), as indicated in the previous line. In the QYL, it is correctly placed. Mò(陌)is incorrectly placed in both works. In the QYL, it is wrongly placed into Division II of the yù (喻)initial. In the YJ, it is absent. Yǐng (郢)is incorrectly placed in both works. In the QYL it is not moved to Division IV. In the YJ, it is absent. In the QYL, yú (余) is correctly placed. In the YJ, it is incorrectly placed.

róng 榮 yíng 營 yíng 營

yǐng 郢 yú 余 yǔ 羽 yǔ 羽 yǔn 隕 yún 愪

yǔn 隕

yú 余 yǔ 庾 yǐn 引

yǐn 尹 yǐn 尹 yǐn 酳

yìn 酳 yù 䫻 yù 䫻

yì 逸 yì 逸

In the QYL, yǔ (庾) is absent.

Yǔn (隕)and yún (愪) belong to the category of closed sounds. They are put here according to the GY. In the QYL, yǐn (引) is absent. In the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty, zhěn (軫) and zhǔn (準) are the same rhyme. The QYL might be following this tradition or referring to the JY to add the yǔn (隕) here. In the YJ, yìn (酳) is correctly placed. In the QYL, it is incorrectly placed. Yù (䫻) belongs to the category of closed sounds. It is placed here according to the GY.

(continued)

164  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Table 14.7 Cont. 匣xiá 喻yù III III shù

YJ

術

QYL

yù 䫻

yǒu

YJ

有 qǐn

QYL yǒu 有 YJ

yǒu 有 yǒu 酉

寢

QYL

yǎn

YJ

琰

QYL

zhēng

YJ

蒸

QYL yíng 蠅

zhèng

YJ

證

QYL

yè

YJ

業

QYL

喻yù IV

Remark

yù 聿 yù 驈

1. Yù (䫻) is placed here according to the QY because open and closed sounds are differentiated in the QY. 2. yù (聿) and yù (驈) have the same pronunciation. In the QYL, both sinograms are wrongly placed into the previous divisions. In the YJ, they are placed correctly. In the QYL, tán (潭) is added according to the JY.

yǒu 酉

tán 潭 yǎn 琰 yǎn 琰

xiàn 鼸

yíng 蠅

yùn 孕 yùn 孕 dié 殜

In the YJ, xiàn (鼸) is mistakenly moved here from the tiǎn (忝) rhyme. In the Kanei version of the YJ (1628), xiàn (鼸) is correctly placed. Both works are incorrect here. In the YJ, yíng (蠅) is not moved to Division IV whereas in the QYL, yíng (蠅) is wrongly placed into Division III of the xiá (匣) initial. In the QYL, yùn (孕) is correctly placed. In the YJ, it is incorrectly placed. In the YJ, dié (殜) is added according to the arrangement of the GY, but it should have been placed into Division IV of the yù (喻) initial.

this sinogram should be moved to the third line of second-​voiced initials, but neither of these two books moved it. In the beginning, I thought that this might have been a mistake of these two books. However, after further study, I determined that this sinogram was in the right position and understood the reason why the yù (喻) initial needed to be moved in the rhyme tables. The reason is that the author of the rhyme tables originally planned to follow the principle of “quoting without rewriting” and tried not to change the arrangement of the rhyme dictionaries, but their rhyme tables needed to be consistent with the purpose that voiced and voiceless sounds in rhyme dictionaries should be distinctively classified. These two principles were contradictory when the yú (于) initial was being categorized. As for the “voiced

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  165 and voiceless” features of five-​type initials, there are a set of terms, namely “voiceless,” “second-​ voiceless,” “voiced,” and “second-​ voiced.” According to the historical trend that “voiced” sound was changing toward “voiceless” in the Táng dynasty, sometimes “voiced” sound matched “second-​voiced” sound, and sometimes it matched “voiceless” and “second-​voiceless” sounds (contemporary scholars’ discussions of the aspirated and unaspirated voiced initials in middle Chinese are the results of different perspectives). “Voiced” sound seems to have had little relationship with “second-​voiced” sound. However, as for the sinograms belonging to the yú (于) initial set, they can be divided into two kinds, with only xióng (熊) and xióng (雄) matched with second-​voiceless sound just as with the sinograms of the xiá (匣) initial, and other sinograms mixed with the pronunciation of the yù (喻) initial becoming the “second-​voiced” sound. Fortunately, the Qièyùn system did not regulate the categorization of the yú (于) initial, so the author of the rhyme tables, according to the changed pronunciation at that time, moved the yú (于) initial to the third line of “second-​voiced” sound and, at the same time, moved the yù (喻) initial originally in this position to the fourth line, becoming yù (喻) Division IV. This adjustment would not introduce confusion into the rhyme tables because, as was mentioned before, in each rhyme of dental initials, lines three and four were of the same value and belonged to the same rhyme. The adjustment of rhyme tables simply reflected the change brought about by voiced sounds changing into voiceless sounds. However, after the merging of rhyme tables according to rhyme gatherings, sometimes the yù Division IV invaded or occupied the position of other rhymes.9 This, together with the occurrence of four-​division theory, introduced confusion for later generations. At the same time, xióng (雄) being kept in the dōng (東) rhyme explains why circles were still marked at xiá (匣) Division III, compared to the pigeonholes without circles at rì (日) Divisions I, II, and IV after most of the yú (于) initial sinograms were moved away in the Sòng version of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú. This is because even though most of the sinograms of xiá (匣) Division III were moved away, such pronunciation continued to exist but without corresponding sinograms.

14.5  Birth of the 43-​table pattern As was mentioned in the previous chapter, the study of spoken pronunciation by the ancients involved two aspects. One was the study of the major phonological categories based on the official pronunciation, and the other was the integration of ancient and dialectical phonological categories based on the study of major phonological categories. The compilation of rhyme dictionaries is based on this principle. The author of the rhyme tables, to faithfully reflect the rhyme dictionaries, would also try to follow this principle. Based on what has been studied so far, I can see that the author of the rhyme tables had already finished the latter half of the task, which means that the categories of the rhyme dictionaries had been fully represented and every initial and

166  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged rhyme category in the rhyme dictionaries was reflected in the rhyme tables with every minor rhyme in its position. Now, the author had to finish the first half of the task of reflecting the major phonological categories referred to by the rhyme dictionaries. The so-​called major phonological category was the 16 rhyme gatherings. The author managed to achieve this task by merging the rhyme tables according to these 16 rhyme gatherings. The merged result was 43 rhyme tables generated from 85 rhyme tables. In that case, how did the author carry out the merging task? First, let us study the distribution of the initial categories in the rhyme tables. Because the results of the initial categorization are reflected by division, I call this table the “Division Distribution Table Before the Merging of Rhyme Tables” (Table 14.8). Table 14.8 Distribution of divisions before the rhyme tables were merged Divisions with sinograms present

Sixteen rhyme IV gatherings

Order of tables

Even

Rising

Departing

Entering

I

II

III

1

dōng 東

dǒng 董

sòng 送

wū 屋

√

√

√

2

dōng 冬

sòng 宋

wò 沃

√

3

zhōng 鐘

zhǒng 腫

yòng 用

zhú 燭

4

jiāng 江

jiǎng 講

jiàng 絳

jué 覺

5

zhī 支

zhǐ 紙

zhì 寘

√

√

√

6

zhī 支

zhǐ 紙

zhì 寘

√

√

√

7

zhī 脂

zhǐ 旨

zhì 至

√

√

√

8

zhī 脂

zhǐ 旨

zhì 至

√

√

√

9

zhī 之

zhǐ 止

zhì 志

√

√

√

10

wēi 微

wěi 尾

wèi 未

√

11

wēi 微

wěi 尾

wèi 未

√

Rhyme heading

√ tōng 通

√

√ jiāng 江

√

zhǐ 止

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables 167 Table 14.8 Cont. Order of tables

Even

Rising

Departing

12

yú 魚

yǔ 語

13

yú 虞

14

mú 模

Divisions with sinograms present

Rhyme heading

II

III

yù 御

√

√

√

yǔ 麌

yù 遇

√

√

√

mǔ 姥

mù 暮

√

15

tài 泰

√

16

tài 泰

√

17

qí 齊

18

qí 齊

qí 薺

Entering

I

Sixteen rhyme IV gatherings

jì 霽

√

jì 霽

√

19

jì 祭

√

√

√

20

jì 祭

√

√

√

21

jiā 佳

xiè 蟹

guà 卦

√

22

jiā 佳

xiè 蟹

guà 卦

√

23

jiē 皆

hài 駭

guài 怪

√

24

jiē 皆

guài 怪

√

25

guài 夬

√

26

guài 夬

√

27

huī 灰

huì 賄

duì 隊

√

28

hāi 咍

hǎi 海

dài 代

√

yù 遇

xiè 蟹

(continued)

168  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Table 14.8 Cont. Order of tables

Divisions with sinograms present

Rhyme heading Even

Rising

Departing

Entering

I

II

III

29

fèi 廢

√

30

fèi 廢

√

Sixteen rhyme IV gatherings

31

zhēn 真

zhěn 軫

zhèn 震

zhì 質

(入)

√

√

32

zhēn 真

zhěn 軫

zhèn 震

zhì 質

(入)

√

√

33

zhēn 臻

zhì 櫛

√

34

wén 文

wěn 吻

wèn 問

wù 物

√

35

yīn 殷

yǐn 隱

xìn 焮

qì 迄

√

36

yuán 元

ruǎn 阮

yuàn 願

yuè 月

√

37

yuán 元

ruǎn 阮

yuàn 願

yuè 月

√

38

hún 魂

hùn 混

hùn 慁

mò 没

39

hén 痕

hěn 佷

hèn 恨

40

hán 寒

hàn 旱

hàn 翰

mò 末

√

41

hán 寒

hàn 旱

hàn 翰

mò 末

√

42

shān 刪

shān 潸

jiàn 諫

xiá 鎋

√

43

shān 刪

shān 潸

jiàn 諫

xiá 鎋

√

44

shān 山

chǎn 產

jiǎn 襇

xiá 黠

√

45

shān 山

jiǎn 襇

xiá 黠

√

√

zhēn 臻(一)

shān 山(一)

zhēn 臻(二)

√

shān 山(二)

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables 169 Table 14.8 Cont. Divisions with sinograms present

Sixteen rhyme IV gatherings

Order of tables

Even

Rising

Departing

Entering

46

xiān 先

xiǎn 銑

xiàn 霰

xiè 屑

√

47

xiān 先

xiǎn 銑

xiàn 霰

xiè 屑

√

48

xiān 仙

mí 獼

xiàn 線

xuē 薛

√

√

√

49

xiān 仙

mí 獼

xiàn 線

xuē 薛

√

√

√

50

xiāo 蕭

xiǎo 篠

xiào 嘯

51

xiāo 宵

xiǎo 小

xiào 笑

52

yáo 肴

qiǎo 巧

xiào 效

53

háo 豪

hào 皓

hào 號

√

54

gē 歌

gě 哿

gè 箇

√

55

gē 歌

gě 哿

gè 箇

√

56

má 麻

mǎ 馬

mà 禡

√

57

má 麻

mǎ 馬

mà 禡

√

58

tán 覃

gǎn 感

kān 勘

hé 合

√

59

tán 談

gǎn 敢

kàn 闞

hé 盍

√

60

yáng 陽

yǎng 養

yàng 漾

yào 藥

61

yáng 陽

yǎng 養

yàng 漾

yào 藥

62

táng 唐

dàng 蕩

dàng 宕

duó 鐸

Rhyme heading

I

II

III

√ √

√

√

√

√

xiào 效

guǒ 果

√

jiǎ 假

xián 咸(一)

√

√ √

√ dàng 宕

√ (continued)

170  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Table 14.8 Cont. Divisions with sinograms present

Order of tables

Even

Rising

Departing

Entering

I

63

táng 唐

dàng 蕩

dàng 宕

duó 鐸

√

64

gēng 庚

gěng 梗

jìng 敬

65

gēng 庚

gěng 梗

66

gēng 耕

gěng 耿

67

gēng 耕

68

qīng 清

69

Rhyme heading

Sixteen rhyme IV gatherings

II

III

mò 陌

√

√

jìng 敬

mò 陌

√

√

zhèng 諍

mài 麥

√

zhèng 諍

mài 麥

√

jìng 靜

jìng 勁

xī 昔

√

√

qīng 清

jìng 靜

jìng 勁

xī 昔

√

√

70

qīng 青

jiǒng 迥

jìng 逕

xī 錫

√

71

qīng 青

jiǒng 迥

jìng 逕

xī 錫

√

72

yóu 尤

yǒu 有

yòu 宥

73

hóu 侯

hòu 厚

hòu 候

74

yōu 幽

yǒu 黝

yòu 幼

75

qīn 侵

qǐn 寢

qìn 沁

qī 緝

√

√

√

76

yán 鹽

yǎn 琰

yàn 艷

yè 葉

(入)

√

√

77

tiān 添

tiǎn 忝

tiàn 㮇

tiè 帖

√

√

gěng 梗

√ liú 流

√ √

√

shēn 深 xián 咸(二)

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables 171 Table 14.8 Cont. Divisions with sinograms present

Order of tables

Even

Rising

Departing

Entering

78

zhēng 蒸

zhěng 拯

zhèng 證

zhí 職

Rhyme heading

I

II

III

√

√

zhí 職

79 děng 等

dèng 嶝

√

80

dēng 登

dé 德

√

81

dēng 登

dé 德

√

82

xián 咸

qiān 謙

xiàn 陷

qià 洽

√

83

xián 銜

jiàn 檻

jiàn 鑑

xiá 狎

√

84

yán 嚴

guǎng 广

yán 嚴

yè 業

√

85

fán 凡

fàn 范

fàn 梵

fá 乏

√

Sixteen rhyme IV gatherings √

zēng 曾

xián 咸(三)

Three guidelines exist for merging rhyme tables. (1) Tables of the same rhyme gathering should be put together, if possible, into one table, which means they all belong to the same phonological category. (2) The position of each division sinogram in the current 85 tables should be maintained. This means that if two rhymes of the same rhyme gathering share one division sinogram, then these two rhymes must be put into different tables to maintain the existing pattern and keep the system intact. (3) For the sake of practical use, the total number of tables should be as small as possible. Different emphasis on these three guidelines leads to different results. For example, if we just consider the second guideline, then there is no need to merge the rhyme tables. Liáng Sēngbǎo’s Qièyùn qiúméng with 80 rhyme tables generally followed this pattern (he merged several rhyme tables, and therefore the number of rhyme tables did not reach 85). If we just consider the first and third guidelines, then the number of rhyme tables would be dramatically reduced, and the result would turn out to be the pattern of the Jīngshǐ zhèngyīn qièyùn zhǐnán written by Liú Jiàn or the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú written

172  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged by Sīmǎ Guāng. Therefore, these three guidelines must be combined to fully convey the author’s principle of phonological study. Now let us look at how the author of rhyme tables dealt with each rhyme gathering. Except for the special cases of the rhyme heading, generally even tone sinograms were used to indicate sinograms of the other three tones (rising, departing, and entering) over a rhyme when they are mentioned. (1) The tōng (通) rhyme gathering, two tables One table for the dōng (東) rhyme: the dōng (東) rhyme has four divisions and cannot be merged with other rhymes. Therefore, it must be made into one independent table. The merged table of the dōng (冬) and zhōng (鍾) rhymes The dōng (冬) rhyme has only Division I, and the zhōng (鍾) rhyme has only Divisions II and IV. (2) The jiāng (江) rhyme gathering, one table: one table for the jiāng (江) rhyme. I believe that the jiāng (江) rhyme is an independent rhyme gathering. On the one hand, it could not be categorized into the tōng (通) rhyme gathering, otherwise it could be merged into the table of the dōng (冬) and zhōng (鍾) rhymes, which lack a Division II. On the other hand, it could not be categorized into the dàng (宕) rhyme gathering; otherwise, even if it were not placed in the table of the yáng (陽) and táng (唐) rhymes, it should have at least been moved near that table.10 (3) The zhǐ rhyme gathering, seven tables: this is the rhyme gathering with the most tables and comparatively fewer rhymes. Because both the rounded and unrounded articulations of each rhyme have Division III sinograms (even Division II, III, and IV sinograms) that conflict with each other and cannot be merged, four rhymes were divided into seven tables. This is an example of how, when these three guidelines conflict, the second guidelines should be followed. (4) The yù (遇) rhyme gathering, two tables: both the yú (魚) and yú (虞) rhymes have Divisions II, III and IV, therefore they cannot be merged. However, the mó (模) rhyme has only Division I, and therefore it can be merged with one of the two rhymes into a rhyme table. The current rhyme tables put the yú (虞) and mó (模) rhymes into one table and yú (魚) into another, independent table. In fact, it would also be acceptable if the yú (虞) rhyme were put into an independent table and the yú (魚) and mó (模) rhymes were put into one rhyme table. Both methods have their historical precedents. In Go-​on of Japan, yú (魚) and mó (模) had the same pronunciation, as did yú (虞) and mó (模). In the Yánshì jiāxùn, yú (魚) and yú (虞) have the same pronunciation. (5) The xiè (蟹) rhyme gathering, four tables: this is an example of a large number of rhymes and a small number of tables, which exemplifies the high degree of skill of the author in merging the rhyme tables according to the three criteria. This rhyme gathering has nine rhyme sets and 16 tables for

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  173 rounded and unrounded articulations. Among them, the eight tables for the jiē (皆), jiā (佳), guài (夬), and jì (祭) rhymes (dots indicate rhymes with only a departing tone and not an even or rising tone) all have Division II sinograms that conflict with each other and are hard to merge. They should be arranged into eight tables. However, the author simply arranged them into four tables including the rounded and unrounded articulations of the hāi (咍), jiē (皆), jì (祭), jì (齊) and tài (泰), jiā (佳), and jì (祭) rhymes. First, because each rhyme set of this gathering does not have an entering tone, the author put the guài (夬) rhyme with a departing tone in the position of the entering tone on the fourth tone section (and the fèi (廢) rhyme with a departing tone was placed in the position of the entering tone11). In this way, the two rhyme tables were saved and the contradiction between the second and third guidelines was resolved. Second, the author divided the Division III and IV sinograms of the jì (祭) rhyme into several groups and then put them into the four tables. In this way, he skillfully revealed the cogathering relationship of the four rhyme tables (compared with the zhǐ (止) rhyme gathering, which does not have such a condition) and settled the contradiction between the first and second guidelines. Further, if the position of Division IV of the jì (祭) rhyme was replaced with the jì (齊), jì (薺), and jì (霽) rhymes, then the former and the latter two tables would lose their inner link and could not be regarded as the same gathering. The only problem here is that the jì (祭) rhyme also has Division II sinograms, which could possibly be confused with the departing tone of the jiā (佳) rhyme (guà rhyme (卦)) or the departing tone of the jiē (皆) rhyme (guài (怪) rhyme). (6) The zhēn (臻) rhyme gathering, four tables: the rhyme heading order of the Qièyùn is generally the same as that of the 16 rhyme gatherings, which this is also why I think that the compilation of the Qièyùn is the integration work of the pronunciation categories based on the 16 rhyme gatherings. It can be inferred from Table 14.8 that there are only two places that are not in agreement. One is the xián (咸) rhyme gathering that will be discussed later, and the other that is discussed here. The rhymes of the zhēn (臻) and shān (山) rhyme gatherings are separated into two places. As is known, the yuán (元) rhyme set used to belong to the zhēn (臻) rhyme gathering in the Southern and Northern dynasties, whereas in the Táng dynasty it belonged to the shān (山) rhyme gathering. Therefore, in the 16 rhyme gatherings of the Qièyùn, the yuán (元) rhyme set was in fact categorized into the zhēn (臻) rhyme gathering. In that case, no problem existed with the rhyme heading order. In the rhyme table, the yuán (元) rhyme set was placed in the shān (山) rhyme gathering because the author understood that the 16 rhyme gatherings were based on the spoken pronunciation of the Táng dynasty. In the rhymes of the zhēn (臻) rhyme gathering, the zhēn (真), wén (文), and yīn (殷) rhymes all have Division III sinograms, which conflict with each other and therefore need to be arranged into at least four rhyme tables. The hún (魂) and hén (痕) rhymes only have Division

174  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged I sinograms, and the zhēn (臻) rhyme only has Division II sinograms. Technically, it seems that they should be put together with the wén (文) and yīn (殷) rhymes with only Division III sinograms. However, possibly because the fifth type of rhymes (for example, the wēi (微), fèi (廢), or fán (凡) rhymes) were generally listed independently when the rhyme tables were being merged, the hún (魂), hén (痕), and zhēn (臻) rhymes were still put together with the zhēn (真) rhyme. However, because it was noticed that the zhēn (真) rhyme has no Division II sinograms and the zhēn (臻) rhyme has no rising or departing tones, the fact that the zhì (質) rhyme has Division II sinograms might be neglected. This led to confusion between the Division II sinograms of the zhì (質) rhyme and the departing tone of the zhēn (臻) rhyme (zhì (櫛) rhyme). The rhyme tables of this rhyme gathering could have followed the method of the previous rhyme gatherings by replacing the position of the wén (文) and yīn (殷) rhymes with Division III of the zhēn (真) rhyme to show their cogathering relationship. However, from the general rules of all the rhyme tables, it seems that Division IV sinograms can be replaced by Division IV rhymes to indicate the cogathering relationship, but Division III sinograms cannot be replaced by Division III rhymes, indicating that they are in different conditions. (7) The shān (山) rhyme gathering, four tables: the shān (山) rhyme gathering includes six rhyme sets: Division I has two tables for the hán (寒) rhyme, Division III has four tables for the yuán (元) and xiān (仙) rhymes, Division IV has four tables for the xiān (先) and xiān (仙) rhymes, and Division II has six tables for the shān (删), shān (山), and xiān (仙) rhymes. If this gathering was arranged based on Division II, there would be six tables. However, Division II sinograms of the xiān (仙) rhyme only include a few dental initials, which are not necessary to arrange independently. If the shān (山) or shān (删) rhyme was taken out to form another rhyme table, it would be hard to show the cogathering relationship between them and other rhyme sets (although the guài (夬) rhyme can be moved to the entering-​tone position of the xiè (蟹) rhyme, this is not applicable for the shān (山) and shān (删) rhymes). Considering all these conditions, the author of the rhyme tables ultimately produced four tables. They also divided the sinograms of the xiān (仙) rhyme into two groups and put them into four tables to show the cogathering relationship of these rhymes. However, a few Division II sinograms of the xiān (仙) rhyme sets remain unable to be arranged. They would unavoidably mix with the shān (山) and shān (删) rhyme sets. (8) The xiào (效) rhyme gathering, two tables: these four rhyme sets perfectly match the four divisions, and therefore they were put into one table. However, the xiāo (宵) rhyme set is an exception because it has both Division III and IV sinograms. Therefore, it was placed in an independent table. Because the Division IV sinograms of the xiāo (宵) rhyme set were taken out as an independent table, the cogathering relationship between

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  175 these two rhyme tables is manifested. If the xiāo (蕭) rhyme set was taken out as an independent rhyme table, it would be impossible to manifest the cogathering relationship between these two rhyme tables.12 (9) The guǒ (果) rhyme gathering, two tables: in the Wángyùn, rounded and unrounded rhymes are undivided, and in the Tángyùn, rounded and unrounded rhymes are divided. All in all, only two rhyme tables exist in this rhyme gathering. (10) The jiǎ (假) rhyme gathering, two tables: the guǒ (果) and jiǎ (假) rhyme gatherings must be different from each other. Otherwise, Division I of the gē (歌) rhyme set and Divisions II, III, and IV of the má (麻) rhyme set could just be merged into one table, just as the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú had it later. (11) The xián (咸) rhyme gathering, three tables: in Table 10, the rhyme headings of the xián (咸) rhyme gathering are separated into three parts, and this might introduce a question of whether these eight rhyme sets really belong to the same rhyme gathering in the Qièyùn. However, in the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty, the order of lax and entering tones of these eight rhyme sets is different. If an entering tone were matched with a lax tone, then these eight rhyme sets would be grouped differently, as is illustrated by the following table. Judging from these two situations, I think that these eight rhyme sets should belong to the same rhyme gathering. These eight rhyme sets contain two groups of Division I, II, III and IV rhymes, which could have been categorized into two tables. However, because the yán (鹽) rhyme set has both Divisions III and IV, another rhyme table (69-​ 87) would have to be made, which would take the place of either the yán (嚴) or fán (凡) rhyme. There is no other way to manifest the cogathering relationship in this table. However, several Division II sinograms for the yè (葉) rhyme of the entering tone of the yán (鹽) rhyme set remain. These sinograms could not be considered when the rhyme tables were being arranged, but if they were arranged, they would conflict with the entering tone of either the xián(咸) rhyme (qià (洽) rhyme) or the xián (銜) rhyme (xiá (狎) rhyme). (12) The dàng (宕) rhyme gathering, two tables: the táng (唐) rhyme has Division I sinograms and the yáng (陽) rhyme has Division II, III, and

Table 14.9 The lax tone and entering tone grouping Rhyme heading Lax tone grouping Entering tone grouping

tán 覃

tán 談 （一）

yán 鹽

tiān 添

（二） （一）

xián 咸

xián 銜

yán 嚴

（三） （二）

fán 凡

176  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged IV sinograms that can be made into two rhyme tables with rounded and unrounded articulations. (13) The gěng (梗) rhyme gathering, four tables: both the gēng (庚) and gēng (耕) rhyme sets belong to Division II, and therefore they needed to be divided and arranged into four rhyme tables. If these rhymes were clearly divided, they could be arranged as gēng (庚) II, gēng (庚) III, and qīng (青) with rounded and unrounded articulations divided together with gēng (耕), qīng (清) III, and qīng (清) IV with rounded and unrounded articulations divided. To show the cogathering relationship between these rhymes, the author of the rhyme tables chose to put Division III and Division IV of the qīng (清) rhyme into two different places on the rhyme table. This rhyme gathering has no Division I sinograms, but it is not placed in the same table as the céng (曾) rhyme gathering, which means that these two gatherings are different. (14) The liú (流) rhyme gathering, one table: both the yóu (尤) and yōu (幽) rhyme sets have Division IV sinograms, and this rhyme gathering should have been arranged following the xiào (效) rhyme gathering by taking out the Division IV sinograms of the yóu (尤) rhyme to make another independent rhyme table. But the author of the rhyme tables (possibly not the original author) found that the yóu (尤) rhyme did not have many Division IV sinograms except for dental initials, and the yōu (幽) rhyme did not have many dental initials. Therefore, both rhyme sets were made into one table. However, this seemingly simplified rhyme table brought about the confusion of the yóu (尤) and yōu (幽) rhymes. This is the best example of emphasizing the third guideline at the cost of the second guideline. (15) The shēn (深) rhyme gathering, one table. (16) The zēng (曾) rhyme gathering, two tables: the dēng (登) rhyme set has Division I sinograms and the zhēng (蒸) rhyme set has Division II, III, and IV sinograms. They were merged into two rhyme tables with rounded and unrounded articulations divided. The total number of tables associated with the 16 rhyme gatherings is 43. From the aforementioned analysis, it can be inferred that the author of the rhyme tables exerted great efforts to make these 43 tables. Generally, these 43 tables embody the three guidelines mentioned above but are not perfect. The biggest problem lies in the shān (山) and liú (流) rhyme gatherings. The shān (山) rhyme gathering has six groups of Division II rhymes with only four tables, and the liú (流) rhyme gathering has two groups of Division IV rhymes with only one table. Therefore, the 43 rhyme tables are not as mysterious as Zhāng Línzhī claimed in his Yùnjìng qiánxù (韻鏡前 序), Prologue to the Yùnjìng, when he said, “All the pronunciations are included in these 43 tables.”13 The number of rhyme tables is also changeable. For example, the 44 rhyme tables would have been developed by adding a table for Division IV sinograms

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  177 of the yóu (尤) rhyme in the liú (流) rhyme gathering;14 46 rhyme tables would have been developed by adding two tables for Division II sinograms of the shān (山) rhyme gathering; 26 rhyme tables would have been developed if the first guideline was emphasized, which focuses only on the merging of the same division and gathering and ignores position for every rhyme (one for the tōng (通) gathering, one for the jiāng (江) gathering, two for the zhǐ (止) gathering, one for the yù (遇) gathering, two for the xiè (蟹) gathering, two for the zhēn (臻) gathering, two for the shān (山) gathering, one for the xiào (效) gathering, two for the guǒ (果) gathering, two for the jiǎ (假) gathering, two for the xián (咸) gathering, two for the dàng (宕) gathering, two for the gěng (梗) gathering, one for the liú (流) gathering, one for the shēn (深) gathering, and two for the céng (曾) gathering). Compared with the rhymes in the Jīngshǐ zhèngyīn qièyùn zhǐnán, only the guǒ (果) and jiǎ (假) rhyme gatherings are not placed into the same table.15 Despite various possible numbers for the rhyme tables, all these tables are based on 16 rhyme gatherings. The idea that the 43 rhyme tables were originally 43 rhyme gatherings, and the 16 rhyme gatherings are the simplified version of those rhyme gatherings is a misunderstanding. To demonstrate the table merging process hypothesized above, I now take the Yùnjìng as an example to see if the expected contradiction and confusion appeared and how the Yùnjìng chose to deal with them. There are altogether five problems of this kind. (1) The xiè (蟹) rhyme gathering: Division II of the jì (祭) rhyme and one guà (卦) and guài (怪) rhyme: Table 13, Division II of the jì (祭) rhyme has xiè (㡜), and Division II of the guài (怪) rhyme has shā (鎩), chài (瘥), and zhài (瘵). Among these, xiè (㡜) and shā (鎩) are in the same position, and therefore these two sinograms were deleted in the Yùnjìng. Table 14, the rounded articulation for Division II of the jì (祭) rhyme includes shuì (𠻜) and cuì (㯔), which conflicts with the position of the guài (怪) rhyme. shuì (𠻜) was deleted and cuì (㯔) was demoted to Division III in the Yùnjìng. (2) The zhēn (臻) rhyme gathering: Division II of the zhì (質) rhyme is mixed with the zhì (櫛) rhyme: Table 17, Division II of the zhì (質) rhyme includes zhí (𪗨) and chì (㓼), and the zhì (櫛) rhyme includes sè (瑟) and zhì (櫛). While all these four sinograms were collected in the Qīyīnlüè, chì (㓼) was deleted in the Yùnjìng. Both patterns lead to the situation where different rhymes appear at the same division of the same table. (3) The shān (山) rhyme gathering: Division II of the xiān (仙) rhyme set and the shān (山) and shān (删) rhyme sets: Table 23, Division II of the xiān (仙) rhyme, has chán (潺), and the shān (删) rhyme has shān (删), which are all included in the Yùnjìng: Table 23, Division II of the xuē (薛) rhyme, has shā (榝) and zhá (㔍), and the xiá (黠) rhyme has shā (殺), chà (䶪), and zhá (札). Among them, shā (殺) and shā (榝), chà (䶪) and zhá (㔍) are all in the same pigeonhole. Shā (榝) and zhá (㔍) of the xuē (薛) rhyme were all deleted in the Yùnjìng. (In the Qīyīn lüè, shā

178  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged (榝) in the xuē (薛) rhyme was kept, and chà (䶪) was moved to the rounded articulation of Table 24, which still turned out to be misplaced despite the different methods of the Yùnjìng.) Tables 24 and 22, the rounded articulation of the xiān (仙) rhyme, includes shuān (栓) and quán (跧). In the Yùnjìng, quán (跧) was categorized into the shān (删) rhyme in Table 24 and shuān (栓) was categorized into the shān (山) rhyme in Table 22. Table 24, Division II of the mí (獼) rhyme, has zhuàn (撰), which was mixed with the shān (潸) rhyme. Table 24, Division II of the xiàn (線) rhyme, has shuàn (𨏉) and zhuàn (饌), and the jiàn (諫) rhyme has luán (㝈) and cuàn (篡). Shuàn (𨏉) and luán (㝈) are in the same pigeonhole. In the Yùnjìng, shuàn (𨏉) was deleted but zhuàn (饌) was kept, which leads to the situation where different rhymes are in the same division of the same table. Tables 24 and 22, Division II of the xuē (薛) rhyme has zhuó (茁) and shuā (㕞), and the xiá (鎋) rhyme has zhuó (䵵). These three sinograms were collected in Table 22 of the Yùnjìng, which leads to the confusion between the xuē (薛) and xiá (鎋) rhyme sets. In Table 24, zhuó (茁) and shuā (㕞) recur, which again leads to confusion between the xuē (薛) and xiá (黠) rhyme sets. (4) The liú (流) rhyme gathering: Division IV of the yóu (尤) and yōu (幽) rhyme sets: Table 37, the dental initials of division IV of the yōu (幽) rhyme set only have jiū (稵), which is absent in the Yùnjìng. Sinograms of the yóu (尤) rhyme replaced the dental initials of the yōu (幽) rhyme, which challenges the supposition that the yōu (幽) rhyme was taken as the Division IV rhyme. Jiū(稵) was still kept in the Qīyīn lüè, from which the pattern of the old rhyme tables could still be known. Table 37, the yōu (幽) rhyme set has qiū (恘), which is in fact a chóngniǔ doublet of the qiū (丘) rhyme in the yóu (尤) minor rhymes. Therefore, it was put on the fourth line and mixed with the yōu (幽) rhyme set. Table 37: in the Wángyùn, Division IV of the yǒu (黝) rhyme set has qiǎo (愀), which is at the same pigeonhole as jiǔ (酒) at Division IV of the yǒu (有) rhyme set. In the Yùnjìng, this sinogram was also deleted. Table 37: furthermore, those yù initial sinograms arranged at Division IV of the rhyme table, such as yóu (猷), yǒu (酉), and yòu (狖), actually belong to the yóu (尤) rhyme set rather than the yōu (幽) rhyme set. In the entire text, it is only in this table that the yù (喻) initial sinograms were moved from Division III to Division IV, which has led to confusion with other rhymes. (5) The xián (咸) rhyme gathering: Division Ⅱ of the yè (葉) and qià (洽) rhyme sets. Table 39, Division II of the yè (葉) rhyme set, has shà (萐), which takes the same pigeonhole as shà (霎) of the qià (洽) rhyme. Shà (萐) was also deleted in the Yùnjìng. These problems are completely in agreement with what I expected in the table merging process based on the 16 rhyme gatherings. Among those gatherings, the shān (山) gathering, which was changed from six to four tables due to

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  179 lack of a better option, contains the most problems. The liú (流) rhyme gathering is also in a similar situation. These provide sufficient evidence that the rhyme tables with 43 zhuǎn patterns are the result of the merged rhyme tables with divisions instead of the product of the detailed study of spoken pronunciations. Otherwise, how could the sinograms belonging to different rhymes be put on the same line of the same division of the same table? How could it be possible that the sinograms of the same rhyme had to be categorized into different divisions because of their differences while the sinograms belonging to different rhymes are identical? Furthermore, how could the close relationship between the rhyme tables and the rhyme dictionaries be explained?

14.6 Conclusion In this chapter, based on the historical conditions of the Táng dynasty, the process of arranging the rhyme tables was reproduced and the methods of arranging the rhyme tables were discussed. It can be inferred in this process that the rhyme tables with such patterns and arrangements could only have been produced in the Táng dynasty—​not earlier, not later. The rhyme tables could not have been produced earlier than the Táng dynasty, even after the appearance of the Qièyùn (let alone before the Qièyùn). The Yùnquán was necessary to act as a transition to rhyme tables and the Tángyùn xù and Tiānbǎo yùnyīng were needed to develop the knowledge of initial and rhyme categories. What if the rhyme tables had appeared later than the Táng dynasty? In such a case, there would not have been 33 initial categories in the rhyme dictionaries, which means that the four-​division method would not have been developed because, among the five types of initials, not only the dental initials but also other types of initials can be further divided into subcategories. If the total number of minor rhymes was as large as that of the Guǎngyùn or even the Jíyùn instead of the rhyme dictionaries in the Táng dynasty, which have a relatively small number of rhymes, there would have been more than 43 tables when the rhyme tables were merged based on the 16 rhyme gatherings. (The Děngyùn jílüè, compiled by Páng Dàkūn had 61 tables because he wanted to present all the minor rhymes in the Guǎngyùn and the Jíyùn. In fact, he failed to include all the rhymes of these two dictionaries. Otherwise, the number of rhyme tables would have been much larger.) What is more, if people’s knowledge of the major phonological categories had surpassed 16 rhyme gatherings, such as 13 rhyme gatherings or other theories, the rhyme tables made would have been different. Having the correct knowledge of the principles for studying pronunciation around the period of the Qièyùn is key. The destruction of the usual phonological pattern in the rhyme tables indicates that the representation of the sound categories was more important than other factors, and this cannot be grasped unless the theory of studying pronunciation in that

180  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged historical period is taken into consideration. It is useless to explain the historical phenomenon by overpraising the ancients’ achievements beyond the historical facts.

Notes 1 Lǐ Róng (李榮), Qièyùn yīnxì, Beijing: Kēxué Chūbǎnshè (科學出版社), Science Press, 1952. 1–​73. 2 Wáng Guójù (王國琚), Dú děngyùn bìng fǎnqiè ménfǎ héjiě, (讀等韻並反切門法合 解), The union of the explanations for rhyme division and ménfǎ for sinographic liaison, an unpaginated copy in the National Library of China in Beijing, 1937. 3 Gě Yìqīng held that the reason for such a chaotic situation is that, in the rhyme dictionaries taken as the reference by the Yùnjìng, the labial sounds have both rounded and unrounded articulations. However, Gě Yìqīng’s opinion is not persuasive enough. Gě Yìqīng (葛毅卿), “Yùnjìng yīn suǒ dàibiǎo de shíjiān hé dìyù,” Xuéshù Yuèkān (學術月刊), Academic Monthly, no. 8, 1957: 79–​85. 4 Obvious exceptions are the gē (歌), gě (哿), and gè (箇) rhymes. This might be because, when the gē (歌) and gē (戈) rhymes were separated, all of the labial sounds were categorized into rounded articulations according to the spoken pronunciations. Therefore, it can be concluded that the rhyme tables were produced after the Tángyùn. Another exception is the guài (怪) rhyme in the Qīyīn lüè. 5 Wáng Lì (王力), Hànyǔ yīnyùnxué, Jinan: Shāndōng Jiàoyù Chūbǎnshè (山東教育 出版社), Shandong Education Press, 1986. 119. 6 Zhāng Línzhī (張麟之), Yùnjìng: diàoyùn zhǐwēi, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1936. 7. 7 Shěn Kuò (沈括), Mèngxī bǐtán, Shanghai: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1915. 267. 8 Zhōu Zǔmó (周祖謨), “Chénlǐ qièyùn kǎo biànwù,” (陳澧切韻考辨誤), On the mistakes in the study of the Qièyùn by Chén Lǐ, in Volume 1 of the Wèn xué jí, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1966. 529. 9 In the extant texts of the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè, only one case for such a situation exists. The yù (喻) Division Ⅳ of the yóu (尤) rhyme set is mixed with the yōu (幽) rhyme set. This single example provides more substantial evidence that, in the earliest rhyme tables, the Division Ⅳ sinograms of the yóu (尤) rhyme set were arranged independently into another rhyme table. See Volume II of this book. 10 Although the jiāng (江) rhyme gathering is an independent gathering, according to the phonological literature of the Suí and Táng dynasties available, the independent status of this rhyme gathering in spoken pronunciation has been challenged. 11 Zhèngqiáo (鄭樵), Tōngzhì: qīyīn lüè, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書 館), The Commercial Press. 165–​189. 12 In the Děngyùn jílüè written by Páng Dàkūn, Division III and IV of the háo (豪), yáo (肴), and xiāo (宵) rhymes were arranged into one table, whereas the xiāo (蕭) rhyme was arranged as an independent rhyme table. Páng Dàkūn (龐大 堃), Děngyùn jílüè (等韻輯略), A compilation of rhyme division. Mr Shi Cunzhi’s personal collection. Now it is lost.

The Method of Arranging the Rhyme Tables  181 13 Zhāng Línzhī (张麟之), Yùnjìng: diàoyùn zhǐwēi, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館, The Commercial Press, 1936. 1. 14 Qièyùn lèilì (切韻類例), Examples of the sinogram categories of the Qièyùn, written by Yáng Zhōngxiū (楊中修) in the Southern Sòng dynasty had 44 rhyme tables, which might take this pattern. This book was written before the Yùnjìng with the preface by Zhāng Línzhī and the Qīyīn lüè introduced by Zhèng Qiáo. 15 In fact, the xián (咸) rhyme gathering is an independent rhyme gathering which only needs one rhyme table without the division of rounded and unrounded articulations, and this may result in 25 or 23 rhyme tables.

15 A New View of Ménfǎ Rules

In the previous chapter, a conjecture was made about the process of arranging rhyme tables and an exploration was conducted about the pattern of arranging rhyme tables. In the process of analysis, the necessary historical background was studied, and rhyme tables were employed for argumentation. Now it is time to make use of other relevant literature to provide evidence for the process mentioned above and our conception of division. The ménfǎ rule is a very important proof. Ever since the appearance of děngyùn studies, the ménfǎ rule has existed, and it has been well developed since the Táng and Sòng dynasties. In the Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn, only yīnhé and lèigé are mentioned. In the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú and the prelude of the Sìshēng děngzǐ, eight methods are mentioned, namely, yīnhé, lèigé, shuāngshēng, diéyùn, and píngqiè ((憑切) a ménfǎ rule that the division of the sinogram liaised is determined by the division of its SL final), píngyùn ((憑韻) a ménfǎ rule that the division of the sinogram liaised is determined by the division of its SL initial), jìshēng ((寄聲) marking a circle to indicate a sound), and jìyùn ((寄韻) one rhyme taking the place of a neighboring rhyme in the rhyme tables through liaison). These methods, together with the guidelines mentioned in these books, resulted in 11 methods in the Zhǐzhǎngtú and 14 methods in the Sìshēng děngzǐ. The Jīngshǐ zhèngyīn qièyùn zhǐnán removed the alliterated disyllables and rhymed disyllables and classified the remaining items, leading to 13 kinds of ménfǎ rules. The Shì zhēnkōng Yùyàoshi ménfǎ (释真空玉鑰匙門法), Jade-​key ménfǎ by Shì Zhēnkōng; henceforth Yùyàoshi, added to it another 7 kinds of ménfǎ rules, resulting in 20 kinds of ménfǎ rules. From then on, the theory of ménfǎ rules developed further. Some theories appeared that either reduced or merged the ménfǎ1 methods, but most of them did not exceed the scope of the Shì zhēnkōng Yùyàoshi ménfǎ. The attitudes towards these ménfǎ rules were both positive and negative. Those who held positive attitudes towards these ménfǎ rules gave very high praise of their value, considering them to be the key to the mastery of rhyme tables. Those who held negative attitudes towards these ménfǎ rules held that these methods were too trivial and difficult to be practical and even considered ménfǎ rules to be responsible for the destruction of rhyme tables. DOI: 10.4324/9781003376729-17

newgenrtpdf

Table 15.1 Ménfǎ rules for the theory of rhyme divisions SSDZ

QYZN

YYS

守溫殘卷

指掌圖

四聲等子

切韻指南

玉鑰匙

Original order in the YYS

Yīnhé

Yīnhé

Yīnhé

Yīnhé

Yīnhé

1

Lèigé

Lèigé

Jiāohù

Jiāohù

Lèigé

Lèigé

Lèigé

Brief explanation

Example sinograms

Lèigé of duān (端) Zhōng (中) is liaised as dōng (東) division: duān (端) gōng (恭) ; cháo (嘲) is liaised initials are liaised with as dāo (刀) bāo (包) ; cháo (朝) zhī (知) sounds. is liaised as dū (都) cháo (朝) ; Lèigé of zhī (知) cháng (長) is liaised as táng (唐) division: zhī (知) wáng (王) . initials are liaised with Dōng (東) is liaised as zhì (智) 2 duān (端) sounds. tōng (通) ; tóng (同) is liaised as chú (除) hóng (洪) ; děng (等) is liaised as zhī (知) kěn (肯) ; dēng (登) is liaised as zhì (智) gōng (肱) . Mutual SL of heavy and Fēi (非) is liaised as bù (布) zhuī (追) 4 light initials: heavy ; wàng (望) is liaised as mò (莫) labial initials are kuáng (誑) ; fáng (房) is liaised liaised with light as píng (平) fáng (房) ; fēn (分) is labial sounds. liaised as bù (布) yún (雲) Mutual SL of light and Páo (袍) is liaised as fáng (房) heavy initials: light gāo (高) ; bù (不) is liaised as fēi labial initials are (非) hé (紇) ; bù (步) is liaised as liaised with heavy fú (扶) bù (步) ; pēi (胚) is liaised labial sounds. as fāng (芳) bēi (杯) . (continued)

A New View of Ménfǎ Rules  183

SWYXCJ ZZT

SWYXCJ ZZT

SSDZ

QYZN

YYS

守溫殘卷

四聲等子

切韻指南

玉鑰匙

Hùyòng

Hùyòng

Zhènjiù

Zhènjiù

指掌圖

Píngqiè (Jìyùn)

Zhènjiù

Brief explanation

Example sinograms

Original order in the YYS

Alternative usage between jīng (精) initials and zhào (照) sounds: division I and IV of jīng (精) initials +​division II → division II of zhào (照) sounds Alternative usage between zhào (照) initials and jīng (精) sounds: division II of zhào (照) initials +​ division I → division I of jīng (精) sounds

Shuāng (雙) is liaised as sān (三) jiāng (江) ; shēng (生) is liaised as xīn (心) gēng (庚) ; shān (山) is liaised as sū (蘇) shān (山) ; shǐ (史) is liaised as xiān (仙) chuǎi (揣) . Sān (三) is liaised as shī (师) gān (甘) ; sū (蘇) is liaised as shēng (生) sū (蘇) ; cǎo (草) is liaised as chū (初) lǎo (老) ; sēng (僧) is liaised as shān (山) gōng (肱) .

7

Qián (前) is liaised as cái (才) rán (然) ; qīn (侵) is liaised as cāng (倉) lín (林) ; zī (貲) is liaised as zǔ (祖) zhī (知) ; juān (鐫) is liaised as zàn (赞) yuán (員) Xìng (性) is liaised as xī (西) yǒng (詠) ; shí (十) is liaised as sī (思) zhào (趙) ; zǐ (子) is liaised as zǐ (子) lǐ (李) ; qiǎn (淺) is liaised as qiān (千) yuǎn (遠)

5

Division I of jīng (精) sounds Division IV of jīng (精) sounds

+division III→ division IV

184  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged

Table 15.1 Cont.

newgenrtpdf

Zhèngyīn píngqiè

Zhèngyīn píngqiè

Jìyùn píngqiè

Jìyùn píngqiè

Jìyùn píngqiè

Yùxià píngqiè

Yùxià píngqiè

Rìjì píngqiè

Rìjì píngqiè

Píngqiè

Division II of zhào (照) initials +​division III → division II of zhào (照) initials Division II of zhào (照) initials +​division IV → division II of zhào (照) initials

Chū (初) is liaised as chǔ (楚) jū (居) ; chuàng (剏) is liaised as chǔ (楚) kuàng (况) ; chóng (崇) is liaised as chú (鉏) lóng (龍) ; shǐ (史) is liaised as shān (山) shuǐ (水) . Xiān (仙) is liaised as shān (山) tián (田) ; suō (缩) is liaised as shān (山) zú (足) ; sōu (搜) is liaised as shān (山) yōu (幽) ; shǐ (使) is liaised as shān (山) zuǐ (嘴) . Division III of zhào Zhān (栴) is liaised as zhāng (章) (照) initials +​division xiān (仙) ; shèn (慎) is liaised I and IV → division as shí (十) cùn (寸) ; zhě (者) is III liaised as zhì (炙) huǒ(火) ; chāng (昌) is liaised as chāng (昌) guāng (光) . Fù (覆) : division III Yóu (尤) is liaised as yǒu (有) of yù (喻) initials yóu (由) ; wéi (爲) is liaised as +​division IV → wū (於) cí (慈) ; yùn (韻) is liaised division III as wū (於) xìn (信) ; yǔ (羽) is Yǎng (仰) : division IV liaised as yún (雲) qǔ (取) . of yù (喻) initials Wéi (唯) is liaised as yǐ(以) zhuī (追) +​division III → ; yì (弋) is liaised as yáng (陽) division IV yù (域) ; yí (移) is liaised as yáng (陽) zhī (知) ; yǎn (演) is liaised as yǎn (演) zhǎn (展) . Rì (日) initials +​ Ráo (饒) is liaised as rén (人) division I, division II gāo (高) ; ruò (若) is liaised as ér and IV→ division III (而) guō (郭) ; róng (茸) is liaised as rú (如) tóng (同) ; rǔ (汝) is liaised as rǔ (乳) hǔ (虎) .

6

8

9

10

(continued)

A New View of Ménfǎ Rules  185

Zhèngyīn píngqiè

newgenrtpdf

SWYXCJ ZZT

SSDZ

QYZN

YYS

守溫殘卷

指掌圖

四聲等子

切韻指南

玉鑰匙

Tōngguǎng júxiá

Tōngguǎng júxiá

Tōngguǎng Tōngguǎng

Nèiwài

Nèiwài

Júxiá

Júxiá

Nèiwài

Nèiwài

Brief explanation

Example sinograms

Original order in the YYS

All the divisions of velar, labial and guttural sounds+​ division Ⅲ of dental, lingual, lái (來) and rì (日) initials → division Ⅳ All the divisions of velars, labial and guttural sounds +​ division IV of jīng (精) and yù (喻) initials → division III Inner III: dental initials of outer zhuǎn +​ division II of zhào (照) sounds

Qí (祇) is liaised as qú (渠) zhī (知) ; piān(篇) is liaised as fāng(芳) lián (連);bīn (頻) is liaised as fú(扶) zhēn(真); xiè ( ) is liaised as hū (呼) shì (世) .

11

eight inner zhuǎn

––––––––––► division Ⅲ Outer II: dental initials of outer zhuǎn +​ division II of zhào (照) sounds eight outer zhuǎn

––––––––––► division Ⅲ

Wú (無) is liaised as wú (無) yú (餘) ; 12 yīn (音) is liaised as yú (於) xún (尋) ; jīn (金) is liaised as gǔ (古) xīn (心) ; xuē (靴) is liaised as xiū (休) xié (邪) . Jiāng (薑) is liaised as jū (局) shuāng (霜) ; jīn (金) is liaised as jū (居) lín (林) ; yù (玉) is liaised as niú (牛) shù (數) ; fǎng (倣) is liaised as fǔ (甫) shuǎng (爽) ; jiāng (江) is liaised as gǔ (古) shuāng (雙) ; má (麻) is liaised as mò (末) shā (沙) ; bān (班) is liaised as bù (布) shān (山) ; jiē (皆) is liaised as guān (官) zhāi (齋) .

13

186  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged

Table 15.1 Cont.

Kāihé

Kāihé

/​

Kēqiè

Kēqiè

19

3

20

14

(continued)

A New View of Ménfǎ Rules  187

The open initials are liaised with closed sounds and the closed initials are liaised with open sounds. Kēqiè Division III of zhī (知) Zhōng (中) is liaised as zhī (知) initials +​division IV róng (容) ; chōu(紬) is liaised as of dental and guttural zhí (直) yóu (由); zhí(直) is liaised sounds → division III as chú (除) xī (息); zhāo(朝) is liaised as zhāo(朝) xiāo(霄) . Minor Division III of lái (来) tōngguǎng initials +​division júxiá IV of jīng (精) and yù (喻) sounds → division III Gèyùn búdìng Division III of zhī (知) Diē (爹) is liaised as zhì (陟) xié(邪) ; initials +​division tǐ (體) is liaised as chì (敕) xǐ (洗) ; IV of dental and nǎng (𩜒) is liaised as nǚ (女) guttural sounds xiàng (像) ; níng (寍) is liaised as no sinogram in division III kēqiè nǚ (女) xīng (星) . –––––––––––––––––► → division IV Kāihé

newgenrtpdf

SWYXCJ ZZT

SSDZ

QYZN

YYS

守溫殘卷

四聲等子

切韻指南

玉鑰匙

指掌圖

Brief explanation

Example sinograms

Original order in the YYS

Former III: the Fèng (俸) is liaised as féng (逢) 15 tōng (通) and liú (流) gòng (貢) ; fú (浮) is liaised as rhyme gatherings and fù (縛) móu (牟) ; fēng (封) is division III of the liaised as fēng (封) gōng (公) fēi (非) initials +​ ; féng (逢) is liaised as fú (扶) division I → light hóng (紅) . labial of division III Péng (蓬) is liaised as pú (蒲) Latter I: the tōng (通) lóng (龍) ; mù (木) is liaised as and liú (流) rhyme mù (木) qū (曲); pōu (剖) is liaised gatherings and as pú (蒲) liǔ (柳); mēng (蒙) is division I of the liaised as mò(莫) lóng (龍) . bāng (帮) initials +​ division III → heavy labial of division I Jìzhèng yīnhé Division III of the Shān (山) is liaised as shū (書) 16 zhào (照) initials +​ mén (門) ; cén (岑) is liaised as division II → division shé (舌) cén (岑) ; chuáng (牀) is II of the zhào (照) liaised as shí (食) zhuāng (莊); initials shǐ (史) is liaised as shè (設) chuǎi (揣). Jiùxíng Division Ⅲ sinograms of Fēng (風) is liaised as fàng (放) 17 the velars are all liaised kōng (空) ; qú (渠) is liaised as as labial and guttural qí (其) tú (徒) ; qún (群) is liaised sounds +​division Ⅰ as qún (群) hún (魂) ; qián (乾) is no sinogram in division I of kāihé liaised as jù (巨) hán (寒) . –––––––––––––––––––► division Ⅲ Qiánsān hòuyī

188  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged

Table 15.1 Cont.

Chuànglì yīnhé

Shuāng shēng

Diéyùn

Diéyùn

Píngyùn

Píngyùn

Jìshēng

Jìshēng

18

A New View of Ménfǎ Rules  189

Shuāng shēng

The júxiá rhyme Miào (繆) is liaised as méi (眉) gathering and all the jiū (鳩) ; miē (乜) is liaised as divisions of the velars, mò (莫) zhě (者) ; bàng (𩦠) is labial and guttural liaised as pí (毘) wǎng (往) ; sounds +​division III miē (哶) is liaised as mí (彌) no sinogram in division I of kāihé dū (闍) . ––––––––––––––––––► division IV The sinogram liaised Huì (會) is liaised as hé (和) huì (會) and the SL initial are (with huì (會) as the SL initial) . the same sinogram. The sinogram liaised Liáng (量) is liaised as shāng (商) and the SL finial are liáng (量) (with liáng (量) as the the same sinogram. SL final) . Sinograms with the Qí (其) is liaised as jù (巨) yí (宜) same pronunciation and qí (祈) is liaised as jù (巨) but different SL finals. sù (泝) . Marking with circles in the pigeonholes are used to indicate nonexistent sinograms.

190  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged Both attitudes are too extreme. From my point of view, if the structure of rhyme tables can be fully understood, then most, if not all, ménfǎ rules can be discarded. However, ménfǎ rules are the result of years of careful academic study by ancient literati and reflect the dedication of these literati to studying the nature of the rhyme tables. Some of the ménfǎ methodologies are quite insightful and can be a useful reference for us in understanding the arrangement of rhyme tables, studying the nature of rhyme tables, and studying the historical background and development of rhyme tables. From this perspective, ménfǎ rules are indeed a kind of key to the rhyme tables. Here I would like to make a table of the ménfǎ rules mentioned above, then make a brief introduction or simplify it according to the Xù tōngzhì’s (續通 志), A continuation of the Tōngzhì, explanation of the examples mentioned in this book. The Yīnhé is easy to understand, and no examples need to be given. It is hard to give examples for jìshēng. However, jìshēng should not be neglected as a ménfǎ rule because it reflects two kinds of processing methods for the blanks on the rhyme tables in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú. A pigeonhole is given for the rhymes with neither a sound nor a sinogram. A circle is marked in the pigeonhole for the rhymes with a sound but no sinogram. As is found in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, Divisions I, II and IV of fēi (非) initial group and rì (日) initial have no circle. Divisions II and III of duān (端) initial group and jīng (精) initial group have no circle. Divisions I and IV of zhī (知) initial group and zhào (照) initial group have no circle. All these cases are different from other rhymes with a circle but no sinograms. This is obvious evidence for differentiating dental and lingual sounds and classifying light labial sounds. With all this evidence, the author of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú was definitely telling us that this book is the result of reproduction based on such rhyme tables as the Yùnjìng. This is a substantial counterargument against the incorrect theory by the phonologists in the Qīng dynasty that the Qīyīn lüè is a copy of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú. Several other ménfǎ rules that are unique to the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú and the Sìshēng děngzǐ, such as alliterated disyllables and rhymed disyllables, can help us to recall the compiling principles of the rhyme tables as well as the level at which ancient literati studied pronunciation. Píngyùn (to determine the division of rhymes by referring to the SL final) is relevant to the question of chóngniǔ doublets, which can be discussed together with relevant ménfǎ rules. Generally, ménfǎ referred to the 13 ménfǎ rules of Liú Jiàn or the 20 ménfǎ rules in the Yùyàoshi. For this reason, the 20 ménfǎ rules in the Yùyàoshi may deserve our further study. A detailed analysis of these 20 ménfǎ rules can allow us to categorize them into three kinds: the first kind is those that can reflect the original appearance of the rhyme tables, the second kind is those that can reflect the compiling principles of the rhyme tables, and the third kind is those relevant to the questions that arise when people want to add more entries to the rhyme tables. These three categories will be elaborated on in the following sections.

A New View of Ménfǎ Rules  191

15.1  Ménfǎ rules reflecting the original appearance of rhyme dictionaries The ménfǎ rules that reflect the original appearance of rhyme dictionaries include: (1) Yīnhé (2) Lèigé: There are many cases of lèigé for the lingual duān (端) and zhī (知) initial groups in the Guǎngyùn and more in the Qièyùn. All these features are reflected faithfully in the rhyme tables. When the rhyme tables were first produced, there was no intention to divide the sounds into different divisions based on lingual sounds. The intention of division was the result of the contributions from later. Therefore, the rhyme tables were likely based on relatively earlier rhyme dictionaries. (3) Jiāohù (交互), the mutual sinographic liaison between heavy and light labial sounds. Labial sounds were not classified into light and heavy, which can still be found as an obvious feature in the Guǎngyùn. (4) Qiánsān hòuyī (前三後一), former III and latter I; heavy or light labial determination. When the heavy and light labial sinogram in the tōng (通) and liú (流) rhyme groups are liaised with each other, the former sinogram determines if the sinogram liaised will be a heavy or light labial. This term also means that labial sounds are not classified into heavy or light articulations. (5) Jiùxíng (就形), following the division of the first sinogram in sinographic liaison; when a Division III rhyme takes a Division I rhyme as its SL final, the sinogram liaised should be classified according to the division of the SL initial. This term indicates the cases in the rhyme dictionary when the SL final and sinogram liaised are different in their hóngxì (洪 細), degree of large and small aperture, as is shown in Table 2. The condition mentioned in this ménfǎ rule that “there is no sinogram in the place of Division I for rounded and unrounded articulations” refers to those labial initials and qún (羣) initials that do not have Division I sinograms. (6) Hùyòng (互用), alternative usage of the SL initial, also referred to as jīngzhào hùyòng. When the initial sinograms of the jīng (精) initial group and Division II sinograms of the zhào (照) initial group are used as the SL initial for each other, the division of the sinogram liaised should be determined by the SL final. According to the analysis of the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè, only four sinograms fall into this category: zhàn (虥), liaised as zuó (昨) xián (閑) (shān (山) rhyme), jùn (葰), liaised as sū (蘇), guǎ (寡) (mǎ (馬) rhyme), zhàn (覱), liaised as zǐ (子), jiàn (鑑) (jiàn (鑑) rhyme), and zōu (鯫), liaised as shì (士), gòu (垢) (hòu (厚) rhyme). The first three sinograms should have been classified into Division I under the principle of dental classification, but they were classified into Division II. Zōu (鯫) should have been placed into Division II, but it was placed into Division I. According

192  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged to the textual research of many scholars, the jīng (精) and zhuāng (莊) initial groups have the same origin. It is highly possible that the lèigé method could be used between them, which is the first point I would like to clarify. Secondly, I think that as far as the rhyme tables are concerned, there is a clear boundary between the jīng (精) and zhuāng (莊) initial groups, and therefore they are not mixed with each other. Possibly, when the rhyme tables were first produced, zhàn (虥), jùn (葰), and zhàn (覱) were placed in Division I and zōu (鯫) was placed in Division II. This is the situation of chǎi (茝), which is still placed in Division III. However, in the development of the rhyme tables, there might have been a tendency to arrange the rhymes vertically and match them horizontally (many examples can be found in the following text), so some positions of the rhymes may have been changed. Of course, this is just a hypothesis, but this hypothesis is not without proof. Taking zhàn (虥) as an example, the Guǎngyùn explains the sinogram as the liaision of shì (士) and shān (山), with the liaison of zuó (昨) and xián (閑) as an alternate pronunciation. Therefore, someone may think that shì (士) shān (山) is an orthodox pronunciation. However, the Wángyùn also gives zhàn (虥) as the liaison of zuó (昨) and xián (閑), as does the Tángyùn.2 Could it be that the arrangement of rhyme tables adversely influenced the liaison of the sinogram? Taking jùn (葰) as another example, the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty all explain it as the liaison of sū (蘇) and guǎ (寡), whereas the Guǎngyùn changed it to be liaised as shā (沙) wǎ (瓦). The situation of zōu (鯫) is slightly different. In the annotations of the Hàn shū (漢書), History of the Hàn dynasty, by Yán Shīgǔ (顔師 古), zōu (鯫) is explained as the liaison of cái (才) and gòu (垢), and the pronunciation of the even tone is liaised as cú (徂) gōu (鈎) because zōu (鯫) also has an even-​tone. Therefore, the arrangement of rhyme tables may have its reasons. (7) Kāihé (rounded and unrounded articulations): The unclear classification of rounded and unrounded articulations for sinographic liaison in rhyme dictionaries is a very serious problem, as is shown in Table 2. However, if just studied from the perspective of the liaison of minor rhymes, the number of rhymes is limited. This ménfǎ rule is designed for the liaison of these rhymes. This means that the author is telling us that they have classified the rounded and unrounded articulations in sinographic liaison. That is, when rounded and unrounded articulations are to be determined, the rhyme tables should be taken as the reference instead of the (unreliable) liaisons. All the cases mentioned above can be found in the rhyme dictionaries. When we are making use of rhyme tables, we simply remember that: (a) the initial categories of rhyme dictionaries are different from the 36 sinogram initials, and (b) some of the sinographic liaisons in rhyme dictionaries are problematic

A New View of Ménfǎ Rules  193 by themselves. Therefore, those ménfǎ rules can be considered useless from my point of view.

15.2  Ménfǎ rules reflecting the compiling principle of rhyme tables The ménfǎ that reflect the compiling principle of rhyme tables include the following: (8) Zhènjiù (振救), literally “to rescue”; when the SL initial is an initial sinogram of the jīng (精) initial group and the SL final is a Division III sinogram, the sinogram liaised should be a Division IV sinogram. (9) Zhèngyīn píngqiè (正音憑切), the SL final is categorized by the division of the SL initial when the initial belongs to the zhào (照) initial group. (10) Jìyùn píngqiè (寄韻憑切), when the SL initial is a Division III sinogram of the zhào (照) initial group, the sinogram liaised should belong to Division III no matter whether the SL final belongs to a rhyme of Division I or Division III.) These three kinds of ménfǎ rules indicate that the divisions of the rhyme tables are classified based on dental sounds. Zhènjiù is about the jīng (精) initial group, and the sounds of its small aperture are always in Division IV. Zhèngyīn píngqiè is about the zhuāng (莊) initial group and is always in Division II. Jìyùn píngqiè is about the zhào (照) initial group and is always in Division III. For the last two ménfǎ rules, some examples deserve discussion. 15.2.1 Zhèngyīn píngqiè The rounded zhǐ (紙) rhyme chuǎi (揣), liaised as chū (初) wěi (委), should be placed in Division II. The Qīyīn lüè placed this sinogram in the correct position whereas the Yùnjìng placed it incorrectly in Division III. This might have been under the influence of the 36 sinogram initials, which are not classified as zhào (照) Division II or zhào (照) Division III. The zhěng (拯) rhyme shēng (㱡), liaised as sè (色) chěng (庱), should be placed in Division II. The Qīyīn lüè placed it in the correct position but the Yùnjìng placed it incorrectly in Division III. The rounded zhī (支) rhyme suī (䪎), liaised as shān (山) chuí (垂), was found in the second version of the Qièyùn and the third versions of the Qièyùn, the Wángyùn and the Guǎngyùn. It should be placed in Division II, but the Qīyīn lüè placed it incorrectly in Division III. The Yùnjìng simply chose to omit this sinogram (sometimes the Yùnjìng omits sinograms). The yōu (幽) rhyme sān (犙), liaised as shān (山) yōu (幽), should be placed in Division II. However, after the merging of rhyme tables based on rhyme gatherings, it was placed at the same position as sōu (搜) of the yóu (尤) rhyme. Therefore, both the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè chose to omit it.

194  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged 15.2.2 Jìyùn píngqiè The hāi (咍) rhyme tāo (㹗), liaised as chāng (昌) lái (來), was added to the Yùnjìng and is absent in the Qīyīn lüè. In fact, it is an incorrect sinogram.3 The hǎi (海) rhyme chǎi (茝), liaised as chāng (昌) dài (殆), was placed correctly in Division III in the Yùnjìng and incorrectly in Division II in the Qīyīn lüè, mixing into the hài (駭) rhyme. The qí (齊) rhyme yí (栘), liaised as chéng (成) xī (西), should be placed in Division III. The Yùnjìng deleted it and the Qīyīn lüè placed it in Division IV, both of which are incorrect. (11) Rìjì píngqiè (日寄憑切), a ménfǎ rule relating to the rì (日) and zhào (照) initials: When the rì (日) initial sinogram is taken as the SL initial, the sinogram liaised is categorized as a Division III sinogram no matter which division the SL final belongs to. This is the evidence that the rì (日) initial originally belonged to the dental sound category and was placed in the zhào (照) initial group. The qí (齊) rhyme has ní (臡), liaised as rén (人) xī (兮), which should be placed in Division III. The Yùnjìng placed it in division IV with a circle around it, making it to mark it as 臡 Both positions special. The Qīyīn lüè placed this sinogram in Division IV. ○ are wrong. In Wú Cǎiluán (吳彩鸞) copy of the Tángyùn mentioned by Wèi Liǎowēng (魏了翁) in the Sòng dynasty, yí (栘) and ní (臡) are selected as an independent rhyme set. This might be because both sinograms are in Division III, which is different from other sinograms of the qí (齊) rhyme belonging to Division IV.4 Therefore, literati at that time thought that they might be two different rhymes. From this, it can be concluded that in Wú Cǎiluán period there were rhyme tables of the current size, and some rhymes were changed according to these rhyme tables, which provides evidence for our theory that the rhyme tables appeared before this period.5 This ménfǎ rule also provides evidence for our theory that the rì (日) initial should not have Divisions I, II, and IV. According to this theory, the rhyme tables that have the following sinograms in Divisions I, II and IV of the rì (日) initials all made mistakes: nǎi (疓) in Division I of the hǎi (海) rhyme, rú (蝡) in Division IV of the zhǔn (準) rhyme (absent in the Qīyīn lüè), rè (𩭿) in Division II of the xiá (鎋) rhyme (absent in the Qīyīn lüè), rè (熱) in Division IV of the xuē (薛) rhyme (absent in the Qīyīn lüè, wrongly copied here), ruǎn (輭) in Division IV of the mí (獼) rhyme (absent in the Qīyīn lüè), rǎn (染) in Division IV of the yàn (豔) rhyme (correctly placed in Division III in the Qīyīn lüè), and rǎn (苒) in Division IV of the tiān (添) rhyme (absent in both the Guǎngyùn and the Qīyīn lüè). In the Qīyīn lüè, shì in Division I of the hāi (咍) rhyme (absent in the Yùnjìng) and nǎi (疓) in Division I of the hǎi (海) rhyme are also wrongly placed. All those sinograms mentioned could not be found in the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty. They were wrongly

A New View of Ménfǎ Rules  195 placed into the divisions of rhyme tables when later literati were trying to modify the rhyme tables based on later rhyme dictionaries to make those rhymes neatly arranged. That those sinograms are supplementary can also be proven by the phenomenon that some can be found in the Yùnjìng but not in the Qīyīn lüè and vice versa. Therefore, the study of rhyme tables cannot follow the same methods as the Sìshēng yùnpǔ or Děngyùn jílüè, which held the principle that the more sinograms, the better. Blind modifications by later generations tended to bring about more problems for study. At the same time, we need to be aware that we should not be overly superstitious towards those authoritative academic works of děngyùn studies, even if they are the Yùnjìng or the Qīyīn lüè. (12) Yùxià píngqiè (喻下憑切), when a Division III sinogram of the yù (喻) initial is taken as the SL initial, the sinogram liaised is always a Division III sinogram of the yù (喻) initial no matter whether the SL final is a Division III or a Division IV sinogram. When the SL initial is a Division IV sinogram of the yù (喻) initial, the sinogram liaised should always be a Division IV sinogram of the yù (喻) initial regardless of whether the SL final is a Division III or IV sinogram.) The author of the rhyme tables, according to the spoken pronunciation of his period, chose to place Division III of the xiá (匣) initial on the third line to become Division III of the yù (喻) initial while placing the yù (喻) initial on the fourth line to become Division IV of the yù (喻) initial. As noted, this ménfǎ rule reflects a kind of processing principle. From the author’s perspective, Divisions III and IV in the same rhyme are of the same value, and this is unquestionable. However, once the theory of division was introduced into the classifying principle, especially after the merged rhyme tables were created, some exceptions continued to exist. This was so even though the author tried to make cleverly thought out arrangements to avoid the mixture of different rhymes. On this occasion, the ménfǎ rules needed to be introduced to provide an explanation. What deserves attention here is that róng (肜), yōng (庸), and yáng (羊) were added to the Yùnjìng, which is not in accordance with this principle. This indicates that the person who added these sinograms to the rhyme tables did not actually understand the compiling nature of rhyme tables. At the same time, it also proves that yù (喻) Division III and yù (喻) Division IV were pronounced completely the same at that time. (13) Tōngguǎng (通廣), connection and broadness, one of the ménfǎ rules; Division III and IV sinograms can be interchanged with each other under certain circumstances. This was especially made for the chóngnǔ doublets in the Qièyùn and the Guǎngyùn. It means that when an SL initial is a guttural, velar, or labial initial and the SL final belongs to the zhīor (知) zhào (照) initials of the zhī (支), zhī (脂), zhēn (真),

196  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged zhūn (谆), xiān (仙), jì (祭), qīng (清), or xiāo (宵) rhymes or Division III of the lái (来) or rì (日) initials, then the sinogram liaised is classified as Division IV. This is about the method of dealing with rhymes with chóngniǔ doublets. Finding a complete definition or explanation of this ménfǎ rule in the rhyme dictionaries available is difficult. Páng Dàkūn noted: [The] Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú held that when the SL initial is a guttural, labial, or velar initial and the SL final is Division III of the dental initial, then the sinogram liaised should be categorized as Division IV. The Qièyùn zhǐnán held that when the SL initial is a velar or labial initial such as yǐng (影), xiǎo (曉), or xiá (匣) and the SL final is a lingual or dental initial such as Division III of the lái (来) or rì (日) rhymes, then the sinogram liaised should be categorized as Division IV. When the SL initial of a tōng connection category is liaised with a lingual or dental sound from Division III of the lái (来) or rì (日) rhyme, the sinogram liaised can be categorized into both Divisions III and IV. When the SL initial belongs to Division III of other initials, sometimes the sinogram liaised can also be categorized as Division IV. For example, bì (臂), liaised as bēi (卑) yì (義), and bì (避), liaised as pí (毗) yì (義), are both categorized as Division IV. When the initials of broad categories are SL initials with Division III of a dental sound, the sinogram liaised should be categorized as Division IV. Sometimes when the lingual initials are SL initials with Division III of the lái (来) and rì (日) rhymes, the sinogram liaised is also categorized as Division IV. Examples are biāo (驃), liaised as pí (毗) zhào (召), bì (鷩), liaised as bìng (並) liè (列), and miè (滅), liaised as wáng (亡) liè (列)—​all are categorized as Division Ⅳ.6 His idea is correct. In particular, the statement that “the sinogram liaised can be categorized into either Division III or IV” notes the major problem of chóngniǔ doublets. Without such awareness, the principle that “when the SL initial is liaised with Division III of a dental sound, the sinogram liaised should be in Division IV” tends to lead to a partial or biased conclusion and ignores the kernel problem of chóngniǔ doublets. (14) Júxiá (局狹), narrowness; when the SL initial is a guttural, velar, or labial sound and the SL final is in Division IV of the jīng (精) rhyme set and Division IV of the yù (喻) rhyme set of the dōng (东), zhōng (钟), yú (鱼), yáng (阳), zhēng (蒸), yóu (尤), yán (盐), or qīn (侵) rhymes, then the sinogram liaised should be categorized as Division III. This is the third kind of rhyme, which is a method of dealing with rhymes with complete dental sounds but without chóngniǔ doublets. This ménfǎ rule could have been ignored were it not for the ménfǎ rule of tōngguǎng.

A New View of Ménfǎ Rules  197 (15) Kēqiè (窠切), nestled sinographic liaison. When the SL initial belongs to Division III of the zhī (知), chè (徹), chéng (澄), or niáng (娘) initials and the SL final belongs to the jīng (精) rhyme set or Division IV of the yǐng (影) and yù (喻) rhymes, then the sinogram liaised should still be categorized as Division III. For the rhymes in the júxiá ménfǎ rule, the sinograms of the jīng (精) rhyme set and Division IV of the yù (喻) rhyme set can all be categorized as Division III. For the rhymes in the tōngguǎng ménfǎ rule, the lingual sound will still generally be categorized as Division III, which is different from the categorization of guttural, velar, and labial sounds. Kēqiè reflects such a situation. (16) Minor tōngguǎng júxiá (小通廣局狹). This ménfǎ rule proves that the lái (来) initial goes together with other lingual sounds, from which it can be inferred that the lái (来) rhyme was indeed separated from lingual sounds. (17) Nèiwài (内外), inner zhuǎn and outer zhuǎn. Many controversies exist over this ménfǎ rule. As quoted in Table 11 from the Yùyàoshi and the Qièyùn zhǐnán, when the dental initials of the outer zhuǎn tables liaise with the rhymes of the inner zhuǎn tables of the zhuāng (莊) initials, the sinogram liaised should be categorized as Division III, and the outer zhuǎn rhyme tables should be categorized as Division II. However, this principle is not precise enough. It is right to say that the sinogram liaised should be categorized as Division III when the SL final belongs to the inner zhuǎn table, but the sinogram liaised is not necessarily Division II when the SL final belongs to the outer zhuǎn rhyme table because the zhuāng (莊) initials in the outer zhuǎn rhyme tables are not necessarily Division II rhymes. For example, the zhì (質), jì (祭), and xiān (仙) rhyme sets of the zhēn (臻), xiè (蟹), and shān (山) rhyme gatherings all have sinograms belonging to the zhuāng (莊) initials. If these sinograms are taken as SL finals, the sinogram liaised would still be categorized as Division III. What is represented in the Qièyùn zhǐnán or the Yùyàoshi is only the situation after the merging of rhyme tables from 43 tables to 24 tables or 20 tables, which is not completely the same as the rhyme tables like the Yùnjìng. The Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú and the Sìshēng děngzǐ express the same theory. “In the inner zhuǎn tables, the labial, dental, velar, and guttural initials have no Division II sinograms and only the dental initials have sinograms in all four divisions. In the outer zhuǎn tables, there are sinograms belonging to five initials with all four divisions.”7 This theory seems reasonable just from the layout of the rhyme tables. However, if this principle were followed, it would be hard to explain the zhēn (臻) and guǒ (果) rhyme gatherings. Because the zhēn (臻) rhyme gathering has no Division II sinograms except for dental initials, why is it put at the outer zhuǎn table? The gē (歌) and gē (戈) rhyme in the guǒ (果) rhyme

198  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged gathering have no Division II sinograms, and this has nothing to do with the difference between the inner and outer zhuǎn tables. Chén Lǐ, a scholar in the Qīng dynasty, criticized this theory. He said, “If we follow such a principle, then the purpose of the inner and outer zhuǎn tables would just be to tell if the sinograms of the four divisions are complete or incomplete and have nothing to do with the phonological study.”8 Therefore, scholars switched their attention to the phonological study. Japanese scholar Oya Toru stated, “The presence or absence of Division II sinograms in rhyme tables are but an occasional phenomenon in the process of producing rhyme tables. Its reason is also hard to explain, and the academic study of categorization should take the rounded and unrounded features of rhymes as its foundation.”9 Subsequently, he recategorized the zhēn (臻) rhyme gathering into the inner zhuǎn tables and the dàng (宕) and guǒ (果) rhyme gatherings into the outer zhuǎn tables according to the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, and then the number of inner zhuǎn tables changed from eight to seven and the number of outer zhuǎn tables from eight to nine. Luó Chángpéi accepted this idea and made a categorization based on the reconstruction of the Guǎngyùn by Karlgren. Subsequently, he noted that “If we follow these standards, the so-​called inner zhuǎn tables will all have the rhymes containing a back vowel [u]‌, [o], middle vowel [ə], and front high vowel [i], [e], and the outer zhuǎn tables will all have the rhymes containing a front vowel [e], [ε], [æ], [ɑ], middle vowel [ , and back low vowel [a], [ɔ].”10 The vowels of the inner zhuǎn tables are either back vowels or high vowels. For the back vowels, the tongue retracts, and for the high vowels, the mouth closes. That is why they are called “inner.” For the vowels of the outer zhuǎn tables, they are either front vowels or low vowels. For front vowels, the tongue extends, and for low vowels, the mouth spreads. That is why they are called “outer.”11 After a comparative study of the theories mentioned above, we prefer the theory in the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú. Oya Toru randomly modified the historical literature and proposed his theory of inner seven and outer nine. This is an unreliable hypothesis. The reconstruction of the Guǎngyùn by Karlgren is another unreliable hypothesis. The basis of Luó Chángpéi’s theory on these two unreliable hypotheses only makes his hypothesis more unreliable. If his hypothesis were true, then the classification of inner and outer zhuǎn tables would not only require the knowledge of many vowel phonemes but also demand that long and short [e]‌be differentiated, short [e] be categorized into inner zhuǎn, and long [e] be categorized into outer zhuǎn.12 Can we imagine that the ancients were capable of doing such a complicated job? As for the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, although its explanation of inner and outer zhuǎn with respectively eight tables is only reflective of the superficial understanding of the author about rhyme tables, the inner and outer zhuǎn recorded in this book should be reliable. This is especially true because the guidelines for the use of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú are not in accordance with the rhyme tables themselves and reflect the outlook of the earlier rhyme tables. More attention should be paid to the study of this book. From the

A New View of Ménfǎ Rules  199 compilation of the rhyme tables, the inner and outer ménfǎ rule can provide us with two clues: a) The rhyme tables were merged based on the concept of rhyme gatherings (or zhuǎn) and the total number of rhyme gatherings is 16. b) Therefore, the study of inner and outer zhuǎn should take rhyme gatherings as its unit rather than individual rhymes. If we study the eight inner and outer rhyme gatherings of the Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú, taking rhyme gathering as the unit, the problem is very clear: every rhyme gathering of outer zhuǎn contains one or several Division II rhyme(s) and none of the rhyme gathering of inner zhuǎn, even though they have Division II sinograms, have Division II rhyme(s). Then why is the presence or absence of Division II rhymes the standard for the classification of inner and outer zhuǎn? From the process of arranging rhyme tables, it can be inferred that the nature of Division II rhymes is different from that of Division I, III, or IV rhymes. Division I, III, and IV rhymes can generally be classified into the articulations of large and small apertures according to the dental jīng (精) rhyme set, but the apertures of Division II rhymes are hard to determine solely by the SL initial. Therefore, the “inner” of the inner zhuǎn might refer to the method by which the rhyme tables were produced based on the further classification of the Qièyùn Rounded and unrounded articulations with large or small apertures for each division and each rhyme could be judged from the “inner” features of the rhyme tables, whereas the Division II rhymes of the outer zhuǎn had to rely on “outer” literature to determine their rounded and unrounded articulations with large and small apertures.13 Of course, this is just another hypothesis for inner and outer zhuǎn. All the content of the ménfǎ rules mentioned above was discussed when we studied the process of arranging the rhyme tables. Many historical academic findings on the study of ménfǎ rules were used in our study. If our hypothesized process of arranging rhyme tables is correct, then because we know the historical origin and development of the form of the extant rhyme tables, we do not need to memorize the specific items of the ménfǎ rules.

15.3  Ménfǎ rules proposed due to the modification of rhyme tables by later scholars The arrangement process of rhyme tables was actually a special process of sorting out rhyme dictionaries. In this process, the principle of horizontal initials and vertical rhymes was in some respects easy to understand and follow and in some respects hard. Although the ménfǎ rules mentioned in the previous section reflect this process, because these ménfǎ rules are the result of lengthy study and accumulated experience, the author of the rhyme tables

200  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged did not mention them. Therefore, understandings of the rhyme tables by later generations were partly reasonable and partly unreasonable. Unreasonable understandings, when used to modify the rhyme tables, were based on opinion and violated the original principles of the rhyme tables. Once these misconceptions were added to rhyme tables, later generations tended to regard them as the dedicated work of earlier scholars or mistakenly regarded them as the original content of the rhyme tables. Therefore, new misunderstandings were produced, which necessitated the introduction of new ménfǎ rules. This led to the occurrence of the third kind of ménfǎ rules. The ménfǎ rules falling into this category include the following: (18) Chuànglì yīnhé (剏立音和), a new rule of labial sound matching; when the SL initial is a guttural, velar, or labial sound and the SL final is a sinogram of the júxiá rhyme gathering, then sinographic liaison need not follow the júxiá method. Chuànglì yīnhé is about the situation of guttural, velar, and labial sounds in the júxiá rhyme gathering. In fact, in the júxiá rhyme gatherings of the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè, guttural and velar initials do not have Division IV sinograms except for the yù (喻) initial. In the Qīyīn lüè, Division IV of the guttural sounds of the wèi (未) rhyme has the sinograms of yī (衣) and xī (稀), which is a mistake of the copying process. Only the labial sounds have Division IV sinograms, and these books have a total of two sinograms, which can be explained with this ménfǎ rule. The Qīyīn lüè: Division IV of the yǎng (養) rhyme, bàng (𩦠), liaised as pí (毗) yǎng (養). This sinogram was added to the Guǎngyùn. Because the Division III sinograms of the same rhyme are all light labial sounds, it was placed in Division IV. The Yùnjìng: Division IV of the yóu (尤) rhyme, pōu (䬌), liaised as pǐ (匹) yóu (尤). This sinogram is also placed in Division IV because all the Division III sinograms of the same rhyme are light labial sounds. In the Qīyīn lüè, this sinogram is still placed in Division III, which reflects the situation of the original rhyme table. Therefore, this ménfǎ rule was designed to classify light and heavy labial sounds. Originally, in the Qièyùn and the Guǎngyùn, light and heavy labial sounds were not yet distinct in speech, and therefore sinographic liaison with light and heavy labial sounds did not have any problems. This is also reflected in the rhyme tables. However, by the end of the Táng dynasty, the difference between light and heavy labial sounds in spoken pronunciation had become obvious. This became a question to be dealt with in the rhyme tables. However, initially the ménfǎ rules were proposed only with the aim of explaining the original rhyme tables, such as the light and heavy labials and crossing-​category linguals. At most, such ménfǎ rules were further divided, resulting in labial sounds in the ménfǎ rules of qiánsān hòuyī and jiùxíng. Later, some scholars regarded the classification of light and heavy labial sounds as a necessary

A New View of Ménfǎ Rules  201 principle and took it as a guideline in examining rhyme tables. When they encountered some light labial sinograms in Division I, they chose to neglect them because light and heavy labial sounds were distinct. The labial sounds in Division III were strictly forbidden from being mixed with heavy labial sounds and had to be placed in Division IV. Two previously mentioned examples demonstrate this situation. The Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè do not contain many examples. Later, the number of examples increased, and it reached a peak in the Qièyùn qiúméng written by Liáng Sēngbǎo in the Qīng dynasty. These are all the result of the influence of this ménfǎ rule. (19) Gèyùn búdìng (各韻不定), undetermined rhyme; it is hard to determine the position of the sinogram diē (爹) of the má (麻) rhyme in the rhyme tables. Originally, this ménfǎ rule was called “undetermined má (麻) rhyme,” which originated from the sinogram diē (爹) of the má (麻) rhyme. Diē (爹), liaised as zhì (陟) xié (邪), was not found in the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng dynasty. It was added to the Yùnjìng based on the Guǎngyùn and is absent in the Qīyīn lüè. The position of this sinogram is special. When the duān (端) and zhī (知) initials were separate, because most of the sinograms in the first and fourth lines of rhyme tables belonged to the duān (端) initials and those in the second and third lines belonged to the zhī (知) initials, the following literati made a principle that the Division I and IV sinograms be placed into the duān (端) initials and Division II and IV sinograms be placed into the zhī (知) initials. When Division I or IV rhymes make use of sinograms of the zhī (知) initials or Division II or III rhymes make use of sinograms of the duān (端) initials, this is called lèigé. Diē (爹) is in Division III of the má (麻) rhyme, which should be in the third line,14 and this is also reasonable from the principles of sinographic liaison. But such categorization of diē (爹) is not in accordance with the spoken pronunciation (in the spoken language, diē (爹) should have been pronounced as the duān (端) initials). The author who modified the rhyme table moved diē (爹) into Division IV in case people would misread it. But such a situation could not be explained with lèigé or other ménfǎ rules. Therefore, another ménfǎ rule was proposed, namely, búdìng (undetermined). The Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè have only one case of this kind. (20) Jìzhèng yīnhé (寄正音和), new rule of true dental sound matching, a ménfǎ rule relating the zhào (照) initial group; when the SL initial is a Division III sinogram of the zhào (照) initial group and the SL final belongs to a Division II sinogram, then the sinogram liaised should be placed into Division II. This ménfǎ rule only has one case in the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè, namely chān (㺗) in Division III of the shān (山) rhyme. Chān (㺗), liaised as chōng (充) shān (山), should be placed in Division III according to the liaisers. The rhyme table categorized it into Division II. This might be a result of Divisions II and III of the zhào (照) initial not being classified into the 36 sinogram initials.

202  The Methods with Which Rhyme Tables Were Arranged From these ménfǎ rules, some trends in the process of modifying the rhyme tables can be inferred. Chuànglì yīnhé aimed to classify Divisions III and IV with light and heavy labial sounds. Gèyùn búdìng aimed to classify Divisions III and IV with apical alveolar and dorsoprepalate sounds, jìzhèng yīnhé mixed Divisions II and III of the zhào (照) initial under the influence of 36-​sinogram-​initials system. All these ménfǎ rules violated the dental–​initial classification principle and also conflicted with the previous ménfǎ rules such as lèigé and jiāohù, resulting in some of the mistakes in the Yùnjìng and the Qīyīn lüè. Among these three kinds of ménfǎ rules, it is this kind that should be discarded. Furthermore, the content that was added to the rhyme tables based on these ménfǎ rules should also be corrected or removed to recover the original appearance of the rhyme tables. One more example can be introduced here about scholars who took the wrong approach to rhyme tables. Wáng Guójù stated, “Both sounds and sinograms are indicated by the four rhyme divisions, which makes sound matching possible. If there were only sounds but no sinograms or neither sounds nor sinograms for any division, then sinographic liaison would not possible. However, this is not the case. Because liaison can be made with any two sinograms, there must be some rules to explain the sound changes. And that is why all the ménfǎ rules are necessary, which were made to solve the possible problems in sound combinations.”15 The rhyme tables were originally produced according to the sinographic liaison system of the Qièyùn and only functioned as a reference to check the sinographic liaison of rhyme dictionaries such as the Qièyùn. Rhyme dictionaries of the Qièyùn series contain fixed rules to govern the liaison of SL finals and initials. How could any two sinograms be used for liaison? It seems that the author of the Xù tōngzhì was also in favor of this idea. Therefore, we cannot make use of many of the example liaisons of the ménfǎ rules in Table 11 because 90% of these examples are invented and cannot be found in rhyme dictionaries of the Qièyùn series. If such misconceptions were taken as the principle for dealing with rhyme tables, more and more complicated ménfǎ rules would be proposed. No wonder people would feel bored and resistant to such ménfǎ rules. However, resisting ménfǎ rules is not the way out. We can conclude from the extant literature that rhyme tables and ménfǎ rules are closely linked. Rhyme tables are a complete system by themselves, and part of the rhyme table system is reflected in the ménfǎ rules. Negating the value of ménfǎ rules also means negating the rhyme tables. A scientific and objective attitude should be taken to study the literature left to us so that this literature can display its value.

A New View of Ménfǎ Rules  203

Notes 1 For example, in the Děngyùn jílüè written by Páng Dàkūn, the ménfǎ rules were merged to make eight kinds. 2 Huáng Shì (黄奭), Huángshì yìshū kǎo: sūnmiǎn tángyùn (黃氏逸書考·孫愐唐 韻), The part of Sūn Miǎn’s Tángyùn in Huáng’s collection of lost ancient literature, Yangzhou: Jiāngsū Guǎnglíng Gǔjí Kèyìnshè (江蘇廣陵古籍刻印社), 1984. 45. 3 Yú Míngxiàng (余明象), “Guǎngyùn zhájì yīzé” , “(廣韻”札記一則), The reading notes of the Guǎngyùn, Zhōngguó Yǔwén (中國語文), Chinese Language, no. 5, 1980. 347. 4 According to the compiling style guide, when the dental jīng (精) and zhào (照) rhyme sets have sinograms, they are placed in Division Ⅲ. As for the qí (齊) rhyme, perhaps because it only has a jīng (精) rhyme set for the rising and departing tones, and only two sinograms of an even tone belong to the zhào (照) rhyme set, these two sinograms yí (栘) and ní (臡) are categorized into Division Ⅳ as exceptions. 5 Some text like the Wúwáng (吳王) version written on the third day of the first lunar month in the ninth year of the Yuánhé (元和) period of the Táng dynasty (814 CE) could be found after the Táng nǚxiān wú cǎiluán kǎishū sìshēng yùntiè (唐女仙吳彩 鸞楷書四聲韻帖), Rhyme copybook with four-​tones in regular script by the fairy lady Wú Cǎiluán in the Táng dynasty, collected by Xiàng Yuánbiàn (項元汴) and studied by Biàn Zhīyù (卞之譽). It is said that Wú Cǎiluán lived in the Tàihé period. Anyway, this period was around the first half of the ninth century. Lù Zhìwěi (陸志 韋), “Táng wǔ dài yùnshū bá” [唐五代韻書跋), The postscript of rhyme dictionaries in the Táng and Five Dynasties, Yànjīng Xuébào (燕京學報), no. 26, 1939. 112. 6 See “Eight Methods” in (龐大坤), Děngyùn jílüè, 1935. Mr Shi Cunzhi’s personal collection. Now this book is lost. 7 See Sī Mǎguāng (司馬光), Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú: jiǎnlì, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中 華書局), 1985. 8. 8 Chén Lǐ (陳澧), Qièyùn kǎo: wàipiān: juànsān, Beijing: China Books, 1984. 17. 9 Quoted from Luó Chángpéi (羅常培), “Shì nèiwàizhuǎn” (釋內外轉), On the inner and outer turn, in the Luóchángpéi yǔyánxué lùnwén xuǎnjí, Beijing: Zhōngguó Shūdiàn (中國書店), 1963. 94. 10 Ibid., 98. 11 Ibid. 12 Ibid. 13 A fourth kind of rhyme is also found in the Division Ⅲ rhymes, namely rhymes without a dental initial such as wēi (微), fèi (廢), wén (文), yīn (殷), yuán (元), yán (嚴), or fán (凡). Determining the aperture of these rhymes is difficult. Interestingly, sinograms of these rhyme sets are all categorized into the rhyme gatherings of the outer zhuǎn except for wēi (微). 14 The diē (爹) sinogram is placed in Division Ⅲ in the Huángjí jīngshì jiě qǐshùjué written by Zhù Mì in the Southern Sòng dynasty. Zhù Mì (祝沁), Huángjí jīngshì jiě qǐshùjué, (皇極經世解起數訣), Techniques for solving frequency problems in the Huángjí jīngshì, in the appendix of Volume 6 of the Guānwùpiānjiě, (觀物篇 解), The part of observing things, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1935. Volume 6, 7. 15 Wáng Guójù (王國琚), Dú děngyùn bìng fǎnqiè ménfǎ héjiě. Personal collection. Now it is lost. Copied in the National Library of China in Beijing.

Bibliography

Chāng Hòu (昌厚). “Suí yùnpǔ guǒ jiǎ yù xiè xiào liú liùshè” (隋韻譜 果、假、遇、 蟹、效、流六攝), The six rhyme gatherings of guǒ, jiǎ, yù, xiè, xiào, and liú in the rhyme spectrum of the Suí dynasty. Zhōngguó Yǔwén 中國語文 Chinese Language, no. 10–​11 (1961): 47–​58. —​—​—​. “Suíyùnpǔ zhēn jiāng dàng gěng céng tōng liùshè” (隋韻譜 臻、江、宕、梗、 曾、通六攝 The six rhyme gatherings of zhēn, jiāng, dàng, gěng, céng, and tōng in the rhyme spectrum of the Suí dynasty). Zhōngguó Yǔwén 中國語文 Chinese Language, no. 2 (1962): 70–​84. —​—​—​. “Suíyùnpǔ zhǐ xián shēn shān sìshè” (隋韻譜 止、鹹、深、山四攝 The four rhyme gatherings of zhǐ, xián, shēn, and shān in the rhyme spectrum of the Suí dynasty). Zhōngguó Yǔwén 中國語文 Chinese Language, no. 1 (1962): 38–​49. Chén Lǐ (陳澧). Qièyùn kǎo (切韻考), Verification of the Qièyùn. Beijing: Zhōngguó Shūdiàn (中國書店), 1984. Chén Péngnián et al. (陳彭年等), Guǎngyùn (廣韻), Enlarged rhyme dictionary. Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1935. Chén Yínkè (陳寅恪). Jīnmíngguǎn cónggǎo èrbiān (金明館叢稿二編), Jinming hall, Collection II. Shanghai: Shànghǎi Gǔjí Chūbǎnshè (上海古籍出版社), Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House, 1980. China Phonology Research Association (中國音韻學研究會編). Yīnyùnxué Yánjiū Dìyījí (音韻學研究第一輯), The study of Chinese phonology, Volume 1, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1984. Dài Zhèn (戴震). Dàizhèn jí (戴震集), A collection of Dài Zhèn’s works. Shanghai: Shànghǎi Gǔjí Chūbǎnshè (上海古籍出版社), Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House, 1980. Dīng Dù et al. (丁度等). Jíyùn (集韻), A comprehensive rhyme dictionary, Shanghai: Shànghǎi Gǔjí Chūbǎnshè (上海古籍出版社), Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House, 1985. Fāng Xiàoyuè (方孝嶽). “Lüèlùn hànyǔshǐshàng gòngtóngyǔ yǔyīn hé fāngyīn de guānxi —​—​ fùtán duì Dàizhèn de yīnyùnxué de píngjià” (畧論漢語歷史上共同語 語音和方音的關係—​—​附談對戴震的音韻學的評價), On the relationship between the common language and dialects in Chinese history: commentaries on Dài Zhèn’s phonological studies, Zhōngshān Dàxué Xuébào (中山大學學報), Journal of Sun Yat-​sen University, no. 4, 1960. 36–​47. Fēngyǎn (封演). Fēngshì wénjiànjì (封氏聞見記), Literary sketches by Fēng Yǎn. Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1985.

Bibliography 205 Gě Yìqīng (葛毅卿). “Yùnjìng yīn suǒ dàibiǎo de shíjiān hé dìyù” (韻鏡音所代表的 時間和地域), The times and places indicated by the pronunciations in the Yùnjìng. Xuéshù Yuèkān (學術月刊), Academic Monthly, no. 8, 1957. 79–​85. Gù Shí (顧實) and Xú Jìngxiū (徐敬修). Yīnyùn chángshí (音韻常識), Common knowledge of Chinese phonology, Shanghai: Dàdōng Shūjú (大東書局), 1925. Gù Yánwǔ (顧炎武). Yīnlùn: shàng (音論·上), Discussion of sounds, Volume I, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1982. Hán Dàozhāo (韓道昭) and Níng Jìfú (甯忌浮). Jiàodìng wǔyīn jíyùn (校訂五音集 韻),A proofread version of the comprehensive rhyme dictionary arranged by the five-​type initials, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1992. Huáng Cuìbó (黃淬伯). “Qièyùn yīnxì de běnzhì tèzhēng” (切韻音系的本質特徵), Essential characteristics of the phonological system of the Qièyùn. Nánjīng Dàxué Xuébào (Rénwén Kēxué) (南京大學學報(人文科學)), Journal of Nanjing University (Humanities Edition, nos.3-​4, 1965. 99–​126. —​—​—​. Huìlín yíqiè jīng yīnyì fǎnqiè kǎo (慧琳《一切經音義》反切考), A study of the sinographic liaison of Huìlín’s Yíqiè jīng yīnyì. Taipei: Guólì Zhōngyāng Yánjiūyuàn Lìshǐ Yǔyán Yánjiūsuǒ (國立中央研究院歷史語言研究所), the Institute of History and Philology Academia Sinica, 1931. Huáng Shì (黃奭). Huángshì yìshū kǎo (黃氏逸書考), Huáng’s collection of lost ancient literature. Yangzhou: Jiāngsū Guǎnglíng Gǔjí Kèyìnshè (江蘇廣陵古籍刻 印社), 1984. Jì Xiànlín (季羨林). “Yuánshǐ fójiào de yǔyán wèntí” (原始佛教的語言問題), The language problem of primitive Buddhism, Běijīng Dàxué Xuébào (北京大學學報), Journal of Peking University, no. 1, 1957. 70–​75. Jiāng Yǒng (江永). Yīnxué biànwēi (音學辨微), Discrimination of Chinese phonology. Wèinán：Yán Shìhuì (渭南嚴式誨), 1923. —​—​—​. Cóngshū jíchéng chūbiān (叢書集成初編), Collection of a series of ancient Chinese books, first edition, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1940. —​—​—​. Gǔyùn biāozhǔn (古韻標準), The standard of ancient rhymes, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1982. Karlgren, Bernhard (高本漢). Zhōngguó yīnyùnxué yánjiū (中國音韻學研究), Etudes sur la phonologie Chinoise, the Chinese version. Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商 務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1940. Kumārajīva Tipiwakqcariya (羅什三藏譯), trans. Nièpán jīng xītán zhāng (涅槃經 悉談章), Siddham chapter of the Nirvana Sutra, Shàngyú Luózhènyù (上虞羅振 玉), 1917. Láo Nǎixuān (勞乃宣). Děngyùn yīdé rènsǒu zìdìng niánpǔ (等韻一得 韌叟自訂年譜), A chronicle of Rènsǒu’s life made in person. Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書 局), 2020. Lǐ Fú (李涪). Lǐfú kānwù èrjuàn (李涪刊誤 二卷), Lǐ Fú’s corrections for the Qièyùn, two volumes, Wú Cípéi (吳慈培), 1912. Lǐ Róng (李榮). Qièyùn yīnxì (切韻音系), Phonological system of the Qièyùn, Beijing: Kēxué Chūbǎnshè (科學出版社), Science Press, 1952. Lǐ Xīnkuí (李新魁). “Yùnjìng yánjiū” (韻鏡研究), A study of the Yùnjìng, Yǔyán Yánjiū (語言研究), Study in Language and Linguistics, no. 00, 1981. 125–​166. —​—​—​. Hànyǔ děngyùnxué (漢語等韻學), The study of Chinese rhyme divisions, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1983.

206 Bibliography Liú Jiàn (劉鑒). Jīngshǐ zhèngyīn qièyùn zhǐnán (經史正音切韻指南), The proper pronunciation of the sinograms in the canons and histories, Shìsīyí (釋思宜), 1496. Lóng Yǔchún (龍宇純). Tángxiě quánběn wángrénxù kānmiù bǔquē qièyùn jiàojiān (唐寫全本王仁昫刊謬補缺切韻校箋), A copybook of Wáng Rénxù’s revised and expanded Qièyùn with proofread annotations in the Táng dynasty, Hong Kong: Xiānggǎng Zhōngwén Dàxué (香港中文大學), The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1947. Lǚ Kūn (呂坤). Jiāotàiyùn (交泰韻), Jiāotài rhyme, Shanghai: Shànghǎi Gǔjí Chūbǎnshè (上海古籍出版社), Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House, 1996. Lù Zhìwéi (陸志韋) and Zhōu Kāngxiè (周康燮). Hànyǔ yīnyùnxué lúnjí (漢語音韻學 論集), A collection of Chinese Phonology, Hong Kong: Chóngwén Shūdiàn (崇文 書店), 1971. —​—​—​. “Táng wǔ dài yùnshūbá” (唐五代韻書跋), Afterword for the rhyme dictionaries of the Táng and Five Dynasties period, Yānjīng Xuébào 燕京學報, no. 26, 1939. 82–​128. Luó Chángpéi (羅常培). Táng wǔ dài xīběi fāngyīn (唐五代西北方音), Dialectal pronunciations of northwestern areas in the Táng and Five Dynasties periods, Shanghai: Zhōngguó Kēxué Gōngsī (中國科學公司), 1933. —​—​—​. Hànyǔ yīnyùnxué dǎolùn (漢語音韻學導論), An introduction to Chinese phonology, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1956. —​—​—​. Luóchángpéi yǔyánxué lùnwén xuǎnjí (羅常培語言學論文選集), Selected linguistic papers of Luó Chángpéi, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1963. Luó Wěiháo (羅偉豪). “Cóng yánshì jiāxùn: yīncípiān lùn qièyùn” (從《顏氏家訓·音 辭篇》論《切韻》論〈切韻〉), On the Qièyùn from the Yánshì jiāxùn yīncípiān, Zhōngshān Dàxué Xuébào (Shèhuì Kēxué Bǎn) (中山大學學報(社會科學版)), Journal of Sun Yat-​sen University (Social Science Edition), no. 1, 1963, 24–​34. Mò Yǒuzhī (莫友芝). Yùnxué yuánliú (韻學源流), The origin of Chinese historical phonology, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1962. National Central Library Preparatory Office (中央圖書館籌備處). Sìkù quánshū zhēnběn chūjí (四庫全書珍本初集), The collections of valuable editions of the Sìkù quánshū, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1934. Pān Lěi (潘耒). Lèiyīn (類音), On the classification of rhymes, Suìchūtáng (遂初 堂), 1662. Pān Wénguó (潘文國). “Lùn zǒnghé tǐxì —​—​ ‘qièyùn’ xìngzhì de zàitàntǎo” (論總和體 系—​—​《切韻》性質的再探討), On the adding-up system: a further study of the nature of the Qièyùn, Huádōng Shīfàn Dàxué Xuébào (Zhéxué Shèhuì Kēxué Bǎn) (華東師範大學學報(哲學社會科學版)), Journal of East China Normal University (Philosophy and Socical Sciences), no. 4, 1986. 89–​96. —​—​—​. Pānwénguó hànyǔ lùnjí (潘文國漢語論集), A paper collection on Chinese language by Pān Wénguó, Shanghai: Huádōng Shīfàn Dàxué Chūbǎnshè (華東師範大 學出版社), East China Normal University Press, 2019. Páng Dàkūn (龐大堃). Děngyùn jílüè (等韻輯略), A compilation of rhyme division, Mr. Shi Cunzhi’s personal collection (currently lost). Qián Dàxīn (錢大昕). Qiányántángjí (潛研堂集), A collection of the academic works of Qián Dàxīn, Shanghai: Shànghǎi Gǔjí Chūbǎnshè (上海古籍出版社), Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House, 1989. Qián Xuántóng (錢玄同). Wénzìxué yīnpiān (文字學音篇), Phonological part of the study of sinograms, Beijing: Guólì Běijīng Dàxué Chūbǎnbù (國立北京大學出版 部), 1921.

Bibliography 207 Qián Zhōnglián (錢仲聯). “Fójiào yǔ zhōngguó gǔdiǎn wénxué de guānxì” (佛教與中 國古典文學的關係), The relationship between Buddhism and classical Chinese literature, Jiāngsū Shīyuàn Xuébào (江蘇師院學報), no. 1, 1980. 10–​20. Shào Róngfēn (邵榮芬). “Dūnhuáng súwénxué zhōng de biézì yìwén hé tángwǔdài xīběi fāngyīn” (敦煌俗文學中的別字異文和唐五代西北方音), On the misspelt sinograms and different meanings in the secular literature of Dūnhuáng and the dialectal pronunciation of the northwestern area in the Táng dynasty and Five Dynasties periods, Zhōngguó Yǔwén (中國語文), Chinese Language, no. 1–​6, 1964. 193–​218. —​—​—​. “Wǔjīng wénzì de zhíyīn hé fǎnqiè” (《五經文字》的直音和反切), On sinographic homophones and liaison in the Wǔjīng wénzì, Zhōngguó Yǔwén (中國 語文), Chinese Language, no. 3, 1964. 214. Shěn Kuò (沈括). Mèngxī bǐtán (夢溪筆談), Brush talks from dream brook by Shěn Kuò in the Sòng dynasty, Shanghai: Wénmíng Shūjú (文明書局), 1915. Shǐ Cúnzhí (史存直). “Cóng yīnwèixué kàn hànyǔ de zìdiào” (從音位學看漢語的 字調), On the tones of sinograms from the perspective of phonology, Zhōngguó Yǔwén (中國語文) Chinese Language, no. 9, 1957. 15–​19. —​—​—​. Hànyǔshǐ yǔyīnpiān cānkǎo zīliào (漢語史語音篇參考資料), Reference material on phonological studies in the history of Chinese, Shanghai: Fùdàn Dàxué Zhōngwénxì Hànyǔ Zhuānyè (復旦大學中文系漢語專業), The Chinese Department of Fudan University, 1978. —​—​—​. Hànyǔ yīnyùnxué gāngyào (漢語音韻學綱要), A syllabus on Chinese phonology, Hefei: Ānhuī Jiàoyù Chūbǎnshè (安徽教育出版社), Anhui Education Press, 1985. —​—​—​. Hànyǔ yīnyùnxué lùnwénjí (漢語音韻學論文集), A paper collection of Chinese phonology, Shanghai: Huádōng Shīfàn Dàxué Chūbǎnshè (華東師範大學出版社), East China Normal University Press, 1997. Shì Zhìguǎng (釋智廣). Xītánzìjì (悉曇字記), Siddham chapter, Shàngyú Luózhènyù (上虞羅振玉), 1916. Sī Mǎguāng (司馬光). Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú (切韻指掌圖), Handy rhyme tables based on the sinographic liaisons of the Sòng dynasty, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書 局), 1985. Sìbù bèiyào (四部備要), The collection of classics in four sectors, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1989. Sìshēng děngzǐ (四聲等子), Rhyme tables of four tones, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中 華書局), 1985. Wáng Guójù (王國琚). Dú děngyùn bìng fǎnqiè ménfǎ héjiě (讀等韻並反切門法合 解), The union of the explanations for rhyme division and ménfǎ for sinographic liaison, Personal collection (currently lost), Copied in the National Library of China in Beijing. Wáng Guówéi (王國維). Guāntáng jílín (觀堂集林), An anthology of the academic works by Wáng Guówéi, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1959. Wáng Lì (王力). Wánglì wénjí dìsìjuàn hànyǔ yīnyùnxué (王力文集 第4卷 漢語音韻學), A collection of papers by Wáng Lì, Volume 4: Chinese phonology, Jinan: Shāndōng Jiàoyù Chūbǎnshè (山東教育出版社), Shandong Education Press, 1986. —​—​—​. Hànyǔshǐ Lùnwénjí (漢語史論文集), A paper collection on the history of the Chinese language, Beijing: Kēxué Chūbǎnshè (科學出版社), Science Press, 1958. —​—​—​. “Nánběicháo shīrén yòngyùn kǎo” (南北朝詩人用韻考), Study on the use of rhymes by the poets of the Northern and Southern dynasties,” Qīnghuā Dàxué

208 Bibliography Xuébào (Zìrán Kēxué Bǎn) (清華大學學報(自然科學版)), Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology), no. 3, 1936. 783–​842. Wāng Shòumíng (汪壽明) and Pān Wénguó (潘文國). Hànyǔ yīnyùnxué yǐnlùn (漢語音 韻學引論), A preliminary introduction to Chinese phonology, Shanghai: Huádōng Shīfàn Dàxué Chūbǎnshè (華東師範大學出版社), East China Normal University Press, 1992. Wáng Xiǎn (王顯). “Duì gānlù zìshū de yìdiǎn rènshì” (對〈幹祿字書〉的一點認識), Comment on the Gānlù zìshū), Zhōngguó Yǔwén (中國語文), Chinese Language, no. 4, 1964. 304. —​—​—​. “Zàitán qièyùn yīnxì de xìngzhì” (再談切韻音系的性質), A further study on the nature of phonology in the Qièyùn, Zhōngguó Yǔwén (中國語文), Chinese Language, no. 12, 1962. 540–​548. Wáng Yúnwǔ (王雲五) and Jì Yún (紀昀). Shěngshì sìshēng kǎo (沈氏四聲考), Study on the four tones by Shěn Kuò, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1936. Wáng Yúnwǔ (王雲五). Cóngshū jíchéng chūbiān (叢書集成初編 ), The first edition of aggregation of series of ancient Chinese books, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商 務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1940. Wèi Jiàngōng (魏建功). “Qièyùn yùnmù sìshēng bù yíguàn de jiěshì” (切韻韻目四聲 不一貫的解釋), Explanations of the inconsistencies of the four tones of the rhyme headings of the Qièyùn, Běijīng Dàxué Xuébào(北京大學學報), Journal of Peking University, no. 2, 1958. 45–​68. Wéi Jìng (惟凈). Jǐngyòu tiānzhú zìyuán (景佑天竺字源), An etymological introduction to Sanskrit written in the Jǐngyòu period of the Sòng dynasty, Guǎngshèngsì (廣勝寺), 1149. Wèi Zhēng et al. (魏徵等). Suí shū (隋書), History of the Suí dynasty, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1973. Yán Zhītuī (顏之推) and Wáng Lìqì (王利器). Yánshì jiāxùn jíjiě (顏氏家訓集解), Collection of analysis on the Yánshì jiāxùn, Shanghai: Shànghǎi Gǔjí Chūbǎnshè (上海古籍出版社), Shanghai Chinese Classics Publishing House, 1980. Yú Míngxiàng (餘明象). “Guǎngyùn zhájì yìzé” (廣韻”劄記一則), The reading notes of the Guǎngyùn, Zhōngguó Yǔwén (中國語文), Chinese Language, no. 5, 1980. 347. Yuán Jiāhuá (袁家驊). Hànyǔ fāngyán gàiyào (漢語方言概要), An outline of Chinese dialects, Beijing: Wénzì Gǎigé Chūbǎnshè (文字改革出版社), 1960. Zhāng Bǐnglín (章炳麟). Guógù lùnhéng (國故論衡), Discussion of traditional Chinese studies, Hangzhou: Zhèjiāng Túshūguǎn (浙江圖書館), Zhejiang Library, 1923. Zhāng Jiànmù (張建木). “Fójiào duìyú zhōngguó yīnyùnxué de yǐngxiǎng” (佛教對於 中國音韻學的影響), The Buddhist influence on old Chinese phonology, Zhōngguó Yǔwén (中國語文), Chinese Language, no. 11, 1956. 23–​26. Zhāng Línzhī (張麟之). Yùnjìng (韻鏡), Mirror of rhymes, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1936. Zhāng Shìlù (張世祿). Yīnyùnxué (音韻學) The study of phonology, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1947. —​—​—​. “Zhū áo fǎnqiè kǎo” (朱翱反切考), A study on sinographic liaison by Zhū Áo, Shuìwén Yuèkān (說文月刊), no. 4, 1944. 117–​173. Zhào Chéng (趙誠). Zhōngguó gǔdài yùnshū (中國古代韻書), Ancient rhyme dictionaries in China, Beijing: Zhōngguó Yǔwén (中國語文), Chinese Language, 1979. Zhào Yīntáng (趙蔭棠). Děngyùn yuánliú (等韻源流), The origin of divisional rhymes, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1957.

Bibliography 209 Zhèng Qiáo (鄭樵). Tōngzhì lüè (通志略), An outline of a general record of Chinese history, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1939. —​—​—​. Tōngzhì (通志). A brief introduction to a general record of history, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1987. Zhōu Fǎgāo (周法高). Xuányìng fǎnqiè kǎo (玄應反切考), A study on Xuán Yìng’s sinographic liaison, Taipei: Guólì Zhōngyāng Yánjiūyuàn Lìshǐ Yǔyán Yánjiūsuǒ (國立中央研究院歷史語言研究所), the Institute of History and Philology Academia Sinica, 1948. Zhōu Yīliáng (周一良). Wèijìn nánběicháo shǐlùnjí (魏晉南北朝史論集), Collection of histories of the Wèi, Jìn, and Northern and Southern dynasties, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1963. Zhōu Zǔmó (周祖謨). Táng wǔ dài yùnshū jícún (唐五代韻書集存), A collection of rhymes in the Tang and Five Dynasties periods, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書 局), 1983. —​—​—​. Wèn xué jí (問學集), A collection of commentaries and questions on learning, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書局), 1966. —​—​—​. Qièyùn de xìngzhì hé tāde yīxì jīchǔ (切韻的性質和它的音系基礎), The nature of the Qièyùn and its phonological foundations, Beijing: Zhōnghuá Shūjú (中華書 局), 1966. Zhù Mì (祝泌). Guānwùpiānjiě fù huángjí jīngshì jiě qǐshùjué (觀物篇解 附皇極經世 解起數訣), The part of observing things in the techniques for solving frequency problems in the Huángjí jīngshì, Beijing: Shāngwù Yìnshūguǎn (商務印書館), The Commercial Press, 1935.

Index

Note: Page numbers in bold indicate tables on the corresponding pages arrangement of rhyme tables 91–​96; conditions satisfied with 126–​138 Brāhmana 56, 57 Buddhism and rhyme tables 79–​84 Chén Lǐ 102–​103 Chén Yínkè 109–​110 Chuànglì yīnhé 202 Dài Zhèn 98–​99 dàng 50 Děngyùn qièyīn zhǐnán 4 děngyùn rhyme divisions 3, 5, 179 Děngyùn yīdé 4 division 98–​107; occurrence of four, in arrangement of rhyme tables 148–​153, 149, 152–​154 dōng 37 Dǒng Nányī 91 Dūnhuáng Manuscripts of the Táng dynasty 8 duó 46 Etudes Sur La Phonologie Chinoise 5 fèi 42 Fēng Yǎn 135–​136 Five dynasties period 132 43-​table pattern 165–​179, 167–​171, 175 gatherings, rhyme 137–​138 gē 38–​39, 45 gěng 39, 47 gēng 39, 46

Gě Yìqīng 10–​13, 14, 110 Gèyùn búdìng 202 guà 41 guài 42, 44 Guǎngyùn 24–​29, 53, 71 Gù Shí 5 gutturals 70 hǎi 38 Hànyǔ děngyùnxué 101 Hànyǔ fāngyán gàiyào 124 hóngxì 53–​54 Huáng Cuìbó 100, 103, 110 Huáng Tíngjiān 116–​117 Huáyán zìmǔpǔ 59 Hùyòng 191–​192 jiā 49 jiǎn 44 Jiāng Yǒng 94, 99 Jiāohù 191 jìng 40, 47, 51 Jīngshǐ zhèngyīn qièyùn zhǐnán 4 jiǒng 51 Jiùxíng 191 Jì Xiànlín 81 Jìyùn píngqiè 193, 194–​199 Jìzhèng yīnhé 202 Júxiá 196 kāi and hé 34–​35, 54 Kāihé 34, 192 Kāngxī zìdiǎn 4 Karlgren, B. 5, 109 Kēqiè 197 Kumārajīva Tipiwakqcariya 57

Index  211 labials 35–​36; confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to use of 41–​48 Láo Nǎixuān 4 Lèigé 191 Lǐ Fú 134–​135 Lǐ Róng 34–​35, 110 Lí Shùchāng 7 Liú Jiàn 4, 5 Lǐ Xīnkuí: on determination of era in which rhyme tables were produced 24–​29; on division 101–​102; on Yùnjìng origins in the Sòng Dynasty 14–​23 Lù Fǎyán 30–​33, 122 Luó Chángpéi 7, 110, 198 Luòyáng dialect 110 mà 46 mǎ 39 Mahāparinirvāna-​ sūtra 57 méi 44 Ménfǎ rules 104–​105, 182–​202; Jìyùn píngqiè 194–​199; proposed due to modification of rhyme tables by later scholars 199–​202; reflecting compiling principle of rhyme tables 193; reflecting original appearance of rhyme dictionaries 191–​192; for theory of rhyme divisions 183–​189; Zhèngyīn píngqiè 193 method of arranging rhyme tables 140–​180; birth of 43-​table pattern 165–​179, 167–​171, 175; distribution of divisions before rhyme tables were arrange 167–​171; division of unrounded and rounded rhymes in 142–​148, 144–​147; division of yù initial in 161–​165, 162–​164; independence of lái and rì initials in 154–​160, 160; lax tone and entering tone grouping 175; occurrence of four divisions 148–​153, 149, 152–​159; preparatory work in 141 Míngyìlì 60–​61 mò 40, 48 Mò Yǒuzhī 4 Nèiwài 197 neuter rhymes 36 Oya Toru 10, 60, 198

Pān Lěi 93–​94 phonology 32–​33; ancient study of 112–​113; Luòyáng dialect 110; of the Qièyùn 109–​124; of time and place 110–​111 poetry 32–​33, 128, 130, 133 pseudo division 105–​106 Qián Dàxīn 99 Qiánsān hòuyī 191 Qián Xuántóng 4 Qièyùn 25–​29, 37; arrangement of 94–​96, 126–​138; combining of rhymes of various rhyme dictionaries in 73; confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to other reasons 49–​52; confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to use of labial sounds 41–​48; detailed classification and analysis of rhyme categories of 66–​74; development of 30–​33; large and small apertures undifferentiated 38–​40; Luòyáng dialect 110; nature of phonology of 109–​124; neuter rhymes in 36; problems in and understanding of 34–​54; selected phonological texts in period of 130, 132; time and place system in 110–​111; tonal categories of 68 Qièyùn zhǐnán 4; concept of division in 98–​99 Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú 3, 4; arrangement of 91–​92; Ménfǎ rules 198–​199; order of gutturals in 70 Qièyùn zhǐzhǎngtú jiǎnlì hòuxù 3 qīng 51 Qīyīn lüè 3; arrangement of 91; order of gutturals in 70 Qīyīn yùnjiàn 83; concept of division in 98–​99 rhyme tables 1; arrangement of 91–​96, 140–​180; collection and classification of initials in 64–​66; concept of division and birth of 98–​107; conditions satisfied with arrangement of 126–​138; detailed classification and analysis of rhyme categories of Qièyùn 66–​74; determination of era of production of 24–​29; development in Suí and Táng dynasties 30–​33; four divisions of 10;

212 Index historical process of generation of 56–​75; order of 8; prototype of 7–​8; recent debate on 7–​13; relationship between Buddhism, sinogram initials and 79–​84; relationship between rhyme dictionaries and 14–​15; rhyme gatherings 137–​138; Siddham script from India and 56–​59, 58; sinicization of matching pattern of initials and rhymes in 59–​64, 62–​64; sinograms of 15–​16; three periods in development of 11–​12; time of writing of 11; timetable of 74, 74; traditional views on 3–​5; Yùnjìng origins in the Sòng Dynasty 14–​23; See also individual rhyme tables Rìjì píngqiè 194–​195 Sabdavidyā 80 Sanskrit 82–​84 Shān 44 Shào Yōng 8 Shǐ Cúnzhí 110 Shittanzō 57 Shǒuwēn yùnxué cánjuàn 9 Siddham script, India 56–​59, 58, 81 Sìděng zhòngqīnglì 86–​88, 87 Sìkù quánshū zǒngmù tíyào 3–​4 Sīmǎ Guāng 4 sinicization of matching pattern of initials and rhymes 59–​64, 62–​64 sinograms 120 sinographic liaison (SL) 34, 142; concept of division in 99–​101; confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to other reasons 49–​52; confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to use of labial sounds 41–​48; labials 35–​36; large and small apertures undifferentiated 38–​40; minor rhyme in 36; xìlián of 35, 36 Sìshēng děngzǐ 5 Sìshēng yùnpǔ 61 sòng 37 Sòng Dynasty, Yùnjìng origins in 14–​23 Sòngshǐ: yìwénzhì 64 Sòng shū: xiè língyùn zhuàn 68 Suí dynasty, development of rhyme dictionaries in 30–​33 Suí shū: jīngjízhì 56–​57

Sūn Miǎn 32–​33, 66 tài 49 Táng dynasty: poetry of 32–​33, 128, 130, 133; rhyme dictionaries developed in 30–​33; rhyme tables produced in 27–​29; selected phonological texts in 132; understanding of Qièyùn in 34–​54 Táng Lán 110 Tángyùn 32–​33 Tantrism 82–​83 Tiānbǎo yùnyīng 66–​67, 72, 74 Tōngguǎng 195–​196 Tōngguǎng júxiá 197 unrounded and rounded rhymes: confusion between, due to other reasons 49–​52; confusion between, due to use of labial sounds 41–​48; division of, in arrangement of rhyme tables 142–​158, 144–​147 Wáng Guójù 142, 202 Wáng Lì 110 Wáng Xíng 3 Wángyùn 21–​22, 26–​27, 37; confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to other reasons 49–​52; confusion between rounded and unrounded sinograms due to use of labial sounds 41–​48; large and small apertures undifferentiated 38–​40 wèi 41 Wèi Jiàngōng 30 Wénzìxué yīnpiān 4 Wǔ Xuánzhī 59–​61 xī 51 xiá 45 xiàn 50 xiǎn 45 Xiàng Chǔ 4 xiè 41 Xītán zhāng 57 Xú Jìngxiū 5 Yàng 39 yǎng 50 Yáng Zhōngxiū 4 Yánshì jiāxùn: yīncí piān 114–​118

Index  213 yīn and yáng 73–​74 Yīnhé 190, 191 Yīnxué biànwēi xù 4–​5 Yīnyùn chángshí 5 yuàn 44 Yùnhuì 116–​117 Yùnjìng: arrangement of 93; comparison with Yùnlüè 16–​17; consistency between rhyme tables and dictionaries 17–​22, 18–​20; era of production of 24–​29; order of gutturals in 70; origins and development of 7–​13; origins in the Sòng Dynasty 14–​23 Yùnjìng hòuxù 79 “Yùnjìng yīn suǒ dàibiǎo de shíjiān hé dìyù” 10–​11 Yùnlüè 16–​17 Yùnquán 59–​64; collection and classification of initials

in 64–​66; conjectured complete table of 62–​65 Yùxià píngqiè 195 Zhāng Bǐnglín 110 Zhāng Línzhī 79 Zhāng Shìlù 117 Zhào Yīntáng 9 Zhèng 48 Zhèng Qiáo 3, 79, 80–​81 Zhèngyīn píngqiè 193 Zhènjiù 193 zhì 41, 44, 49 zhī 49 Zhǐzhǎngtú 3 Zhōu Fǎgāo 110 Zhōu Zǔmó 110 Zìmǔ qièyùn yàofǎ 4 Zōu Tèfū 4