Kanji Etymology and the ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese

Keywords: kanji, etymology, chinese characters, Axel Schuessler, Lawrence J. Howell

Axel Schuessler's ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese was published in 2007. At that time, I was in the early stages of applying what I had gradually learned about the initials, finals and vowels of Old Chinese to one-by-one reinterpretations of the 6500 characters in the online database of my Kanji Networks dictionary, originally uploaded in 2004. Although there was good reason to believe that Schuessler's work might contain information useful to my purposes, I chose not to examine it until I had 1) completed the task of interpreting the characters according to the principles of phonosemantics I believe are applicable to the ancient Han language and 2) published my work in book form (Kanji Etymology; 2011).

In early 2012 I finally purchased a copy of the EDOC and took my initial look at the contents. I was delighted to find that the EDOC and I had independently arrived at the same conclusion concerning a number of significant points. These include the correspondence between the initial *n- and terms connected with softness/flexibility, initial *m- (conceal, dark, black), and the finals *-m (encompass) and *-p (press, shut, close). I was also gratified to confirm that, while I have found pieces of information that improve upon certain of my interpretations of individual characters, nothing in the EDOC counter-indicates the conceptual relations I suggest exist among particular groups of characters.

I have also found instances where EDOC conclusions are not as thoroughgoing as mine. One example is a pair of charts appearing on pages 21 and 22 of the EDOC, which lay out the complex of stems connected with the idea “swell.” As indicated both in my online dictionary and in Kanji Etymology, these stems are part of a much larger group revolving around the concept “Spread,” which in Old Chinese began with a plosive and involve not only the idea “swell” but other forms of spreading: Spread in alignment ( 畀比皮非 etc.); Spread at length ( 平丙方朋 etc.); Spread while remaining in contact ( 釆反 etc.); Spread in encompassing (凡) and so on.

All in all, Schuessler takes a cautious approach to the material, as seen in the passage treating the subject described two paragraphs above (page 27):

“Occasionally, certain meanings are associated with certain sounds. These are phonesthemic (or 'phonaesthetic') phenomena, e.g. English sl- is suggestive in words like slid, slither, slip, slim etc. Similar groups of OC words make the superficial, but often erroneous, impression of being somehow genetically related. Words that signify movement with with an abrupt endpoint often end in *-k... Words with the meaning 'shutting, closing', which also implies an endpoint, tend to end in final *-p. Words that imply 'keeping in a closed mouth' tend to end in a final *-m... The same and similar notions — 'dark, black, covered, blind, stupid' — tend to start with the initial stem *m-... Words for 'soft, subtle, flexible', including 'flesh; female breast' start with *n-...”

“Cautious” may not be the most appropriate adjective here: It's more as though Schuessler is hedging his bets. Immediately after declaring that we are beholding phonesthemic (or phonaesthetic) phenomena he warns us that appearances of genetic relatedness are superficial and often erroneous, which if true means they serve as poor examples of phonesthemic/phonaesthetic phenomena indeed.

Following this bit of misdirection Schuessler then utilizes limited affirmation by noting that words “often (or tend to) end in (xxx).” By the time he treats initial *n-, where softness is connected to words such as flesh and female breast, we observe that Schuessler is no longer employing qualifiers at all, leaving us to wonder what precisely is superficial and erroneous about the impression of

genetic relatedness we are forming in this case.

For my part, I believe there are clearly discernible patterns of correspondence between the sounds and the meanings of the characters, and that these patterns are not markedly beclouded by the small number of characters that on account of graphic changes or borrowing now appear to be exceptions to general principles. These patterns are outlined in detail in Kanji Etymology, making it more systematic than the EDOC (not that everyone agrees that systematization of languages is desirable or even possible).

I intend to further refine my understanding of Sino-Tibetan morphology in coming years by working methodically through the EDOC as well as through “Minimal Old Chinese and Later Han Chinese: A Companion to Grammata Serica Recensa ,” which Schuessler describes as a by-product of the EDOC project.

Lawrence J. Howell8 April 2012