scarcely two provinces in China have the same oral language. The
officers and their attendants who came with us from the capital could
converse only with the boatmen of the southern provinces, through the
medium of an interpreter. The character of the language is universal,
but the name or sound of the character is arbitrary. If a _convention of
sounds_ could have been settled like a convention of marks, one would
suppose that a commercial intercourse would have effected it, at least
in the numeral sounds, that must necessarily be interchanged from place
to place and myriads of times repeated from one corner of the empire to
the other. Let us compare then the numerals of Pekin with those of
Canton, the two greatest cities in China.
Pekin. Canton.
1. Ye yat
2. ul ye
3. san saam
4. soo see
5. ou um
6. leu lok
7. tchee tsat
8. pas pat
9. tcheu kow
10. shee shap
11. shee-ye shap-yat
12. shee-ul shap-ye
20. ul-shee ye-shap
30. san-shee saam-shap
31. san-shee-ye saam-shap-yat
32. san-shee-ul saam-shap-ye
100. pe paak
1000. tsien tseen
10,000. van man
100,000. she-van shap-man
If then, in this highly civilized empire, the oral language of the
northern part differs so widely from the southern that, in numerous
instances, by none of the etymological tricks[15] can they be brought to
bear any kind of analogy; if the very word which in Pekin implies the
number _one_, be used in Canton to express _two_, how very absurd and
ludicrous must these learned and laboured dissertations appear, that
would assign an oriental origin to all our modern languages?
[15] Such as the addition, deduction, mutation, and transposition of
letters, or even syllables. Thus Mr. Webbe thinks that the derivation of
the Greek [Greek: gynê] _a woman_, from the Chinese _na-gin_, is
self-evident.
Whatever degree of affinity may be discovered between the sounds of the
Chinese language and those of other nations, their written character has
no analogy whatsoever, but is entirely peculiar to itself. Neither the
Egyptian inscriptions, nor the nail-headed characters, or monograms,
found on the Babylonian bricks, have any nearer resemblance to the
Chinese than the Hebrew letters have to the Sanscrit; the only analogy
that can be said to exist between them is, that of their being composed
of points and lines. Nor are any marks or traces of alphabetic writing
discoverable in the composition of the Chinese character; and, if at any
time, hieroglyphics have been employed to convey ideas, they have long
given way to a collection of arbitrary signs settled by convention, and
constructed on a system, as regular and constant as the formation of
sounds in any of the European languages arises out of the alphabets of
those languages.
The history of the world affords abundant evidence that, in the dawn of
civilization, most nations endeavoured to fix and to perpetuate ideas by
painting the figures of the objects that produced them. The Egyptian
priesthood recorded the mysteries of their religion in graphic emblems
of this kind; and the Mexicans, on the first arrival of the Spaniards,
informed their prince Montezuma of what was passing by painting their
ideas on a roll of cloth. There is no way so natural as this of
expressing, and conveying to the understanding of others, the images
that pass in the mind, without the help of speech. In the course of the
present voyage, an officer of artillery and myself were dispatched to
make observations on the small island of _Collao_, near the coast of
_Cochin-China_. In order to make the natives comprehend our desire to
procure some poultry, we drew on paper the figure of a hen, and were
immediately supplied to the extent of our wants. One of the inhabitants
taking up the idea drew close behind the hen the figure of an egg, and a
nod of the head obtained us as many as we had occasion for. The
Bosjesmen Hottentots, the most wild and savage race perhaps of human
beings, are in the constant habit of drawing, on the sides of caverns,
the representations of the different animals peculiar to the country.
When I visited some of those caverns I considered such drawings as the
employment of idle hours; but, on since reflecting that in almost all
such caverns are also to be seen the figures of Dutch boors (who hunt
these miserable creatures like wild beasts) in a variety of attitudes,
some with guns in their hands, and others in the act of firing upon
their countrymen; waggons sometimes proceeding and at others standing
still, the oxen unyoked, and the boors sleeping; and these
representations generally followed by a number of lines scored like so
many tallies; I am inclined to think they have adopted this method of
informing their companions of the number of their enemies, and the
magnitude of the danger. The animals represented were generally such as
were to be met with in the district where the drawings appeared; this,
to a people who subsist by the chace and by plunder, might serve as
another piece of important information.
The Chinese history, although it takes notice of the time when they had
no other method of keeping their records, except, like the Peruvians, by
knotting cords, makes no mention of any hieroglyphical characters being
used by them. If such were actually the case, the remains of symbolical
writing would now be most discoverable in the radical, or elementary
characters, of which we shall presently have occasion to speak, and
especially in those which were employed to express some of the most
remarkable objects in nature. Out of the two hundred and twelve, or
thereabout, which constitute the number of the radical signs, the
following are a few of the most simple, in none of which, in my opinion,
does there appear to be the least resemblance between the picture and
the object.
[Chinese] _gin_, man
[Chinese] _koo_, a mouth
[Chinese] _tee_, earth
[Chinese] _tsé_, a son
[Chinese] _tsau_, a plant
[Chinese] _shan_, a mountain
[Chinese] _sin_, a heart
[Chinese] _shoo_, a hand
[Chinese] _fang_, space, or a square of ground
[Chinese] _yué_, the moon
[Chinese] _jee_, the sun
[Chinese] _moo_, a tree
[Chinese] _swee_, water
[Chinese] _ho_, fire
[Chinese] _shee_, a stone.
The rest of the elementary characters are, if possible, still more
unlike the objects they represent. There seems, therefore, to be no
grounds for concluding that the Chinese ever made use of hieroglyphics
or, more properly speaking, that their present character sprung out of
hieroglyphics. They have a tradition, which is universally believed,
that their prince _Fo-shee_ was the inventor of the system upon which
their written character is formed, and which, without any material
alteration, there is every reason to suppose has continued in use to
this day. To _Fo-shee_, however, they ascribe the invention of almost
every thing they know, which has led Mr. Baillie ingeniously to
conjecture that _Fo-shee_ must have been some foreigner who first
civilized China; as arts and sciences do not spring up and bear fruit in
the life of one man. Many changes in the form of characters may have
taken place from time to time, but the principle on which they are
constructed seems to have maintained its ground. The redundancies of
particular characters have been removed for the sake of convenience; and
the learned in their epistolary writing have adopted a sort of running
hand, in which the form is so very materially altered, by rounding off
the angles, connecting some parts and wholly omitting others, as to make
it appear to a superficial observer a totally different language. But I
may venture to observe, that it has not only not undergone any material
alteration for more than two thousand years, but that it has never
borrowed a _character_, or a syllable, from any other language that now
exists. As a proof of this, it may be mentioned, that every new article
that has found its way into China since its discovery to Europeans has
acquired a Chinese name, and entirely sunk that which it bore by the
nation who introduced it. The proper names even of countries, nations,
and individuals are changed, and assume new ones in their language. Thus
Europe is called _See-yang_, the western country; Japan _Tung-yang_, the
eastern country; India _Siau-see-yang_, the little western country. The
English are dignified by the name of _Hung-mou_, or _Red-heads_, and the
French, Spanish, Portuguese, and others, who visit China, have each a
name in the language of the country totally distinct from that they bear
in Europe. This inflexibility in retaining the words of their own poor
language has frequently made me think, that Doctor Johnson had the
Chinese in his mind when, in that inimitable piece of fine writing which
prefaces his dictionary, he made this remark: "The language most likely
to continue long without alteration, would be that of a nation raised a
little, and but a little, above barbarity, secluded from strangers, and
totally employed in procuring the conveniences of life."
The invention of the Chinese character, although an effort of genius,
required far less powers of the mind than the discovery of an alphabet;
a discovery so sublime that, according to the opinion of some, nothing
less than a divine origin ought to be ascribed to it. It may, however,
be considered as the nearest approximation to an universal character
that has hitherto been attempted by the learned and ingenious of any
nation; each character conveying at once to the eye, not only simple,
but the most combined ideas. The plan of our countryman, Bishop Wilkins,
for establishing an universal character is, in all respects, so similar
to that upon which the Chinese language is constructed, that a reference
to the former will be found to convey a very competent idea of the
nature of the latter. The universal character of our countryman is,
however, more systematic, and more philosophical, than the plan of the
Chinese character.
Certain signs expressing simple objects or ideas may be considered as
the roots or primitives of this language. These are few in number, not
exceeding two hundred and twelve, one of which, or its abbreviation,
will be found to compose a part of every character in the language; and
may, therefore, be considered as the _key_ to the character into which
it enters. The eye soon becomes accustomed to fix upon the particular
key, or root, of the most complicated characters, in some of which are
not fewer than sixty or seventy distinct lines and points. The right
line, the curved line, and a point are the rudiments of all the
characters. These, variously combined with one another, have been
extended from time to time, as occasion might require, to nearly eighty
thousand different characters.
To explain the manner in which their dictionaries are arranged will
serve to convey a correct notion of the nature of this extraordinary
language. All the two hundred and twelve roots or keys are drawn fair
and distinct on the head of the page, beginning with the most simple, or
that which contains the fewest number of lines or points, and proceeding
to the most complicated; and on the margins of the page are marked the
numeral characters one, two, three, &c. which signify, that the _root_
or _key_ at the top will be found to be combined on that page with one,
two, three, &c. lines or points. Suppose, for example, a learner should
meet with an unknown character, in which he perceives that the simple
sign expressing _water_ is the _key_ or _root_, and that it contains,
besides this root, _six_ additional points and lines. He immediately
turns over his dictionary to the place where the character _water_
stands on the top of the page, and proceeding with his eye directed to
the margin, until the numeral character _six_ occurs, he will soon
perceive the one in question; for all the characters in the language,
belonging to the _root water_, and composed of _six_ other lines and
points, will follow successively in this place. The name or sound of the
character is placed immediately after it, expressed in such others as
are supposed to be most familiar; and, in the method made use of for
conveying this information, the Chinese have discovered some faint and
very imperfect idea of alphabetic writing, by splitting the monosyllabic
sound into a dissyllable, and again compressing the dissyllable into a
simple sound. One instance will serve to explain this method. Suppose
the name of the character under consideration to be _ping_. If no single
character be thought sufficiently simple to express the sound _ping_,
immediately after it will be placed two well-known characters _pe_ and
_ing_; but, as every character in the language has a monosyllabic sound,
it will readily be concluded, that _pe_ and _ing_, when compressed into
one syllable, must be pronounced _ping_. After these, the meaning or
explanation follows, in the clearest and most easy characters that can
be employed.
When, indeed, a considerable progress has been made in the language, the
general meaning of many of the characters may be pretty nearly guessed
at by the eye alone, as they will mostly be found to have some
reference, either immediate or remote, though very often in a figurative
sense, to the signification of the _key_ or _root_; in the same manner
as in the classification of objects in natural history, every species
may be referred to its proper genus. The signs, for instance, expressing
the _hand_ and the _heart_, are two _roots_, and all the works of art,
the different trades and manufactures, arrange themselves under the
first, and all the passions, affections, and sentiments of the mind
under the latter. The root of an _unit_ or _one_ comprehends all the
characters expressive of unity, concord, harmony, and the like. Thus,
if I observe a character compounded of the two simple _roots_, _one_ and
_heart_, I have no difficulty in concluding that its signification is
_unanimity_, but, if the sign of a _negative_ should also appear in the
same character, the meaning will be reversed to _discord_ or
_dissention_, literally _not one heart_. Many proper names of persons
have the character signifying _man_ for their key or root, and all
foreign names have the character _mouth_ or _voice_ annexed, which shews
at once that the character is a proper name employed only to express
sound without any particular meaning.
Nor are these keys or roots, although sometimes placed on the right of
the character, sometimes on the left, now at the top, and then at the
bottom, so very difficult to be discovered to a person who knows but a
little of the language, as Doctor Hager has imagined. This is by far the
easiest part of the language. The abbreviations in the compound
characters, and the figurative sense in which they are sometimes used,
constitute the difficulty, by the obscurity in which they are involved,
and the ambiguity to which they are liable.
The Doctor is equally unfortunate in the discovery which he thinks he
has made of a want of order in classing the elements according to the
number of lines they contain. The instances he gives of such anomaly are
in the two characters of [Chinese] _moo_, mother; and [Chinese] _tien_,
cultivated ground: the first of which he is surprised to find among the
elementary characters of _four_ lines, and the latter (which he asserts
to be still more simple) among those of _five_. The Chinese, however,
are not quite so much out of order as the Doctor seems to be out of his
province in attempting a critique on a language, of which he really
possesses a very superficial knowledge. The first character [Chinese]
_moo_ is composed of [Illustration: strokes] and the second [Chinese]
_tien_ of [Illustration: strokes]; the one of four and the other of five
lines according to the arrangement of Chinese dictionaries, and their
elementary treatises.
Among the roots or primitives that most frequently occur are those
expressing the _hand_, _heart_, _mouth_, and the five elements, _earth_,
_air_, _fire_, _wood_, and _water_. _Man_ is also a very common root.
The composition of characters is capable of exercising a very
considerable degree of ingenuity, and the analysis of them is extremely
entertaining to a foreigner. As in a proposition of Euclid it is
necessary to go through the whole demonstration before the figure to
which it refers can be properly understood, so, in the Chinese
character, the sense of the several component parts must first be known
in order to comprehend the meaning of the compound. To endeavour to
recollect them without this knowledge would be a laborious and almost
impossible effort of the mind. Indeed, after this knowledge is acquired,
the sense is sometimes so hid in metaphor, and in allusions to
particular customs or ways of thinking, that when all the component
parts of a character are well understood, the meaning may yet remain in
obscurity. It may not be difficult to conceive, for instance, that in a
figurative language, the union of the _sun_ and _moon_ might be
employed to express any extraordinary degree of _light_ or _brilliancy_;
but it would not so readily occur, that the character _foo_ or
_happiness_, or _supreme felicity_, should be designed by the union of
the characters expressing a spirit or demon, the number _one_ or
_unity_, a _mouth_, and a piece of _cultivated ground_, thus [Chinese: fú].
This character in the Chinese language is meant to convey the same
idea as the word _comfort_ does in our own. The character implying the
_middle_ of any thing, annexed to that of _heart_, was not inaptly
employed to express _a very dear friend_, nor that with the _heart_
surmounted by a _negative_, to imply _indifference_, _no heart_; but it
is not so easy to assign any reason why the character _ping_, signifying
rank or order, should be expressed by the character _mouth_, repeated
thrice, and placed like the three balls of a pawnbroker, thus [Chinese:
p[vi]n], or why four of these mouths arranged as under, with the character
_ta_, _great_, in the center, should imply an instrument, or piece of
mechanism. [Chinese: qì]. Nor would it readily occur why the character
[Chinese] _nan_, _masculine_, should be made up of _tien_, a _field_,
and _lee_, _strength_, unless from the idea that the _male sex_
possesses _strength_, and only can inherit _land_. But that a
_smoothness_ or _volubility_ of _speech_ [Chinese: jìn] should be designed
by _koo_, _mouth_, and _kin_, _gold_, we can more easily conceive, as we
apply the epithet _silver tongue_ pretty nearly on the same occasion.
If the Chinese had rigidly adhered to the ingenious and philosophical
mechanism they originally employed in the construction of their
characters, it would be the most interesting of all languages. But such
is far from being the case. New characters are daily constructed, in
which convenience, rather than perspicuity, has been consulted.
It will follow from what has been said, that every compounded character
is not only a word, but also a _definition_, comprehending in visible
marks its full explanation; but no character, however compounded, can
have more than a monosyllabic sound, though each part when alone has a
distinct sound, as well as sense. Thus, "Happiness," though compounded
of four distinct characters, _shee_, a demon; _ye_, one; _koo_, a mouth,
and _tien_, a piece of cultivated ground, has only the simple
monosyllabic sound _foo_, which is unlike that of any one of its
compounds.
The sounds and various inflexions incidental to languages in general,
are not necessary to be attended to in the study of the Chinese
characters. They speak equally strong to a person who is deaf and dumb,
as the most copious language could do to one in the full enjoyment of
all his senses. It is a language addressed entirely to the eye, and not
to the ear. Just as a piece of music laid before several persons of
different nations of Europe would be played by each in the same key, the
same measure, and the same air, so would the Chinese characters be
equally understood by the natives of Japan, Tunquin, and Cochin-China;
yet each would give them different names or sounds, that would be wholly
unintelligible to one another. When, on the present voyage, we stopped
at Pulo Condore, the inhabitants, being Cochin-Chinese, had no
difficulty in corresponding, by writing, with our Chinese interpreters,
though they could not interchange one intelligible word.
Although, with the assistance of a good dictionary and a tolerable
memory, a knowledge of such of the Chinese characters, as most
frequently occur, may be obtained by a foreigner; yet the ambiguity to
which they are liable, on account of the frequent figurative expressions
and substitution of metaphor for the literal meaning, renders their best
compositions extremely obscure. Another, and not the least, difficulty
to a learner of this language arises from the abridgment of the
characters for the sake of convenience, by which the eye is deprived of
the chain that originally connected the component parts. In short, it is
a language where much is to be made out that is not expressed, and
particularly so in what is called fine writing; and a thorough knowledge
of it can only be acquired from a familiar acquaintance with the
manners, customs, habits, and opinions of the people. Those missionaries
even, who have resided in the country the best part of their lives, and
accepted employments about the palace, are frequently at a loss in
translating and composing the official papers that are necessary to be
made out on the occasion of an European embassy.
It is, however, a matter of surprize that, after all that has been
published in Europe by the Jesuits of the grandeur, the magnificence,
the learning, and the philosophy of the Chinese, so very few persons
should have taken the trouble to make themselves acquainted with the
language of this extraordinary nation. So little was a _professor_ of
Chinese, at Rome, versed in the language he professed to know, that he
is said[16] to have mistaken some characters found on a bust of Isis for
Chinese, which bust and the characters were afterwards proved to be the
work of a modern artist of Turin, made after his own fancy. In Great
Britain we have known still less of the Chinese language and Chinese
literature than on the continent. It is not many years ago, that one of
the small copper coins of China, stamped in the reign, and with the
name, of the late _Tchien-lung_ (or as he is usually called in the
southern dialect of China _Kien-long_) was picked up in a bog in
Ireland, and being considered as a great curiosity, was carried to an
indefatigable antiquary, whose researches have been of considerable use
in investigating the ancient history and language of that island. Not
knowing the Chinese character, nor their coin, it was natural enough for
him to compare them with some language with which he was acquainted; and
the conclusion he drew was, that the four following characters on the
face were ancient Syriac; and that the reverse (which are Mantchoo
letters) appeared to be astronomical, or talismanic characters, of which
he could give no explanation.
[16] By Mr. Pauw.
[Illustration: Face. _Tchien-lung._ (Emperor's name.) _Pao-tung._
Current value.]
[Illustration: Reverse. _po tchin._ House, or dynasty, of _Tchin._]
The Mantchoo Tartar characters of another coin he supposed to signify
_p u r_, which is construed into _sors_, or lot; and it is concluded,
that these coins must either have been imported into Ireland by the
Phoenicians, or manufactured in the country; in which case, the Irish
must have had an oriental alphabet. "In either case," it is observed,
"these medals contribute more to authenticate the ancient history of
Ireland than all the volumes that have been written on the subject."
I have noticed this circumstance, which is taken from the _Collectanea
Hibernica_, in order to shew how little is known of the Chinese
character and language among the learned, when so good a scholar and
eminent antiquary committed so great a mistake.