Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T12:58:48.377Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pictographic Reconnaissances. Part VII

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2011

L. C. Hopkins
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It would have been better that the explanation following should have formed an introduction to the series of papers under this heading, rather than a belated interjection at or near their end. But at any rate circumstances require that the explanation should not be further delayed.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 58 , Issue 3 , July 1926 , pp. 461 - 486
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 1926

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 463 note 1 Lo gives his authorities for these synonymous references, which are unnecessary here.

page 467 note 1 in his Fu Shih Yin Ch’i Lei Tsuan.

page 467 note 2 This is how Wu cites it, and how Tuan Yü-ts’ai has it in his edition, but Wang Yün and others write it .

page 467 note 3 This occurs in the Changti Ode of the Book of Odes, see Legge's, Chinese Classics, vol. iv, part 2, pp. 250–251Google Scholar. Legge, following the commentators Mao and Chu, renders the line o fu wei wei, by “ Are they not gorgeously displayed ?”, but in a note mentions that Chêng K'ang-ch'êng “ on the other hand, took as ‘ the calyx of the flower ’, and (read foo) as = ‘ the foot or stalk of the calyx.’ ”

page 470 note 1 pp 23 and 36.

page 470 note 2 New Oxford Dictionary, s.v. “brace.”

page 472 note 1 As Hsü does not add the word shêng, sound, here, it is clear that, according to his practice, he did not regard the character as a Phonetic Compound, but as a hui i, or Suggestive Compound. Under the character chung, Hsü gives as its ku wên. The student should note that the latter is the true “ ancient form ” (as understood by Hsü Shên), and that is the modernized and sophisticated shape it was forced to take when required to appear in a li or modern script context. All the alleged ku wên or “ ancient forms ” inserted in Kanghsi's Dictionary have suffered a li change of the same kind, and are valueless for purposes of research.

page 472 note 2 Structure of Chinese Characters, p. 126.

page 472 note 3 Chinese Characters (English edition), vol. i, p. 53.

page 472 note 4 Analytic Dictionary of Chinese, p. 324.

page 473 note 1 See “ The Chinese Numerals and their Notational Systems ” : JRAS., Oct., 1916, pp. 758–9.

page 473 note 2 It is right to admit that the decipherment of this form as chêng is to some extent conjectural, and that it does not altogether agree with the normal archaic type on the Honan Bones.

page 477 note 1 See his Shuo Wen Ku Chou Pu, p. 33.

page 477 note 2 See JRAS., July, 1924, pp. 417–18.

page 478 note 1 See the I Shu Ts'ung Pien, vol. 21, p. 70.

page 480 note 1 See the Chou Li, book 29, par. 28, and Biot, Le Tcheou Li, vol. 2, p. 175.

page 481 note 1 Karlgren, Analytic Dictionary of Chinese, pp. 42 and 226, spells the “ ancient Chinese ” (sixth century a.d.) of as p wang (approx. pwang), and of as P wɒng (approx. pwêng).

page 483 note 1 Here Kanghsi cites the Shuo Wen as authority, but the character does not appear in either Tuan Yü-ts'ai's or Wang Yün's edition of that work. The Liu Shu Ku gives , shih ming yeh, to dawn, as the meaning.