User:Frigoris/Rhymes
"Hidden" rhymes due to phonetic shifts edit
- 天下熙熙 (OC *qʰlɯ)，皆爲利來 (OC *m·rɯːɡ)。[Imperfect rhyming common in vernacular proverbs. Cf.: other characters in the 來 (OC *m·rɯːɡ) series, e.g. 徠 (OC *rɯː, *rɯːs)， 倈 (OC *rɯ)] (Shiji)
- 前車覆 (OC *pʰɯːɡ)而後車戒 (OC *krɯːɡs).
- Vowel harmony + rhyme: 明夷于飛 (OC *pɯl)，垂其翼 (OC *lɯɡ)，君子于行，三日不食 (OC *ɦljɯɡ) (Zhouyi)
- 黍稷無成 (OC *djeŋ)，不能為榮 (OC *ɢʷreŋ) (Guoyu)
- 寧誅鋤草茅，以力耕 (OC *kreːŋ)乎？將游大人，以成名 (OC *meŋ)乎？ (Chuci)
- Phono-semantic harmony/compromise: 鳥窮則啄 (OC *rtoːɡ)，獸窮則攫 (OC *kʷaɡ)，人窮則詐 (OC *ʔsraːɡs) (Xunzi)
- Likely originally a vernacular proverb, with imperfect/dialectal rhyming (consonantal harmony).
- 詐 (OC *ʔsraːɡs) with *-k/g(-s) plosive (near-)final were lost later [=詐 (MC tsraeH)], perhaps during the same process as tonogenesis. The *-s suffix might be uncertain or unstable. See also: 作 (OC *ʔsaːɡs, *ʔsaːɡs, *ʔsaːɡ) in the 乍 (OC *zraːɡs) series, whose main entry appeared in Guangyun under 入 [=作 (MC tsak)] (as is prevalent in modern dialects) instead of the 去 [=作 (MC tsuH)] tone.
- All the three characters may have had some sort of weak syllable as proclitic.
- See also: another vernacular verse attested as 佞之見佞 (OC *neːŋs)，果喪其田 (OC *l'iːŋ)。詐之見詐 (OC *ʔsraːɡs)，果喪其賂 (OC *ɡ·raːɡs) (Guoyu)
- 佞 (OC *neːŋs): vowel also reconstructed as *i, /*nˤiŋ-s/.
- 循循善誘 (Analects), possibly something like /*(s.)lun (s.)lun ɡ(j)en slu(n)/, see etymology at 誘 (OC *luʔ) ~ 䛻
齊桓身殺 edit
殺 appears out of place here, because
- The circumstances of Duke Huan of Qi's death couldn't be said to be 殺, and, more importantly,
- The character appears out of rhyme with the surrounding verses, which resolve around the 之 (OC *tjɯ) rhyme-group (*-ɯ, *-ɯC).
It might be that 殺 here could have been a textual error, with some possible candidates:
- 弒 (OC *hljɯɡs) [in the 代 (OC *l'ɯːɡs) group, still harmonious with the rhyme, semantically acceptable, and good w.r.t. character-composition]
- 殕 (OC *pɯʔ, *qɯːɡ, “to grow mouldy; to decompose; to die”). His death: 後任豎刁，蟲流出戶。
- 殆 (OC *l'ɯːʔ, “imperilled”)
- or even 囿 (OC *ɢʷɯs, *ɡʷɯ, “imprisoned”)
The last one appears even less likely from a character-composition point of view.
It could also be that 殺 (OC *sreːds, *sreːd) was deliberately used to cause alarm by breaking the rhyme.
Warring-States peculiarities edit
其即 as 其次 edit
其即 as 其次 (OC *ɡɯ sn̥ʰis). This was unambiguously attested across geographic (and ethnic) boundaries, in Zhongshan bronze-script archived link and Chu manuscripts (郭店《老子丙》). On the Zhongshan bronze it was inscribed:
The problem is that 次 (OC *sn̥ʰis) is fairly firmly established as derivative of PST *g/s-ni-s (“two”), while 即 (OC *ʔsɯɡ), extremely high-frequency yet not well understood phonetically, was thought to have had /*s-/ or /*ts-/ initial and plosive *-k final without the *-s suffix. It doesn't seem obvious how 其即 could be used as 其次. If this is to be harmonized, there could be several routes:
- The re-reconstruction of PST *g/s-ni-s with unstable final *-s/k, at least in some grammatical contexts. This is also hinted at by the Myanmar နှစ် (hnac).
- Unlike Baxter–Sagart but agreeing with Zhengzhang, let the initial of 次 be *s-, or even *ʔs-
- Unlike Zhengzhang and like Baxter–Sagart, the vowel goes fronter, as *-i-
- Overall for 即 it becomes /*sik/, perhaps even /*[sC]ik/ as variant, where /*s-/ is modified consonantally, e.g. by a medial, e.g. /*sl̥ik/ etc.
- This way in both systems the phonetic links with both 次 and 節 (OC *ʔsiːɡ) might get a bit more straightforward. The latter character was a fairly late creation, obviously derivative of 即, in the Warring-States period (since which it also got used in received, transcribed, and edited earlier texts such the Shi, Yi, and Shu, etc.). As a late coinage it was then used in highly inconsistent ways (including phonetic loading for the sense "knot; bend", "segment; one-by-one countable thing" >1 "regulate" 2> "festival day; key days in the solar calendar", etc.). On the Zhongshan bronze, 節 was used as 即 itself, as in 節于𬪭𨣧. Similar usage was also seen in Shuihudi Qin codices.
- Also 節 and 膝 (OC *siɡ) might be both coined in Warring-States. The link to PST *tsik may not be so direct as it seems.
原田每每 品庶每生 edit
The ominous song by "the masses" (輿人, commoners) before the Battle of Chengpu [632 BCE], one of the decisive wars narrated in the Zuozhuan. The narration was termed 誦, implying poetic diction.
原田每每 (OC *mɯːʔ)，舍其舊而新是謀 (OC *mɯ)
As 誦 it is strongly implied that 每 (OC *mɯːʔ) and 謀 (OC *mɯ) were phonetically related. This is indeed the case in current reconstructions where the vowels are much more harmonic than in modern dialects. In early writing, the character 謀 (OC *mɯ) simply uses 母 (OC *mɯʔ) as the phonetic component.
This may even enable an alternative understanding of a difficult place of the 賦 by Jia Yi, The Owl (《鵩鳥賦》), recorded in the Shiji and Hanshu. What does 每 in 品庶每生 mean? It should be a verb, as the previous line implies. Meng Kang glosses it as "to covet" (每，貪也). Wang Xianqian believes this to be a variant of the rare character 挴 (OC *mlɯːʔ, *mɯːʔ) > 挴 (MC mwojX), with the same meaning. Alternatively, if one feels hesitant to accept Wang's explanation via a rare character, the unclear gloss might have been understood to be related to 謀 (OC *mɯ) semantically, in the sense of "to want, to seek," etc.
But the link to 挴 (OC *mlɯːʔ, *mɯːʔ) further helps us to understand the Chengpu song in the Zuo. Traditionally, the song was explained to mean that the Duke of Jin should not have felt hesitant to wage war against Chu, if he felt an obligation to Chu might have existed on his part (due to Chu's support in his rise to power); it was "worth it" to do this, as the establishment of a new order far outweighed the shame of defaulting on an old, petty obligation. But there might have been a linguistic support, too. In the Fangyan it was written:
- 挴、㥾、赧，愧也。晉曰挴，或曰㥾。秦晉之間凡愧而見上謂之𧹞，梁宋曰㥾。 [Classical Chinese, trad.]
- From: Yang Xiong, Fangyan, c. 1st century BCE
- 挴, 㥾, nǎn, kuì yě. Jìn yuē 挴, huò yuē 㥾. Qín Jìn zhījiān fán kuì ér jiàn shàng wèi zhī 𧹞, Liáng Sòng yuē 㥾. [Pinyin]
- --
挴、㥾、赧，愧也。晋曰挴，或曰㥾。秦晋之间凡愧而见上谓之𧹞，梁宋曰㥾。 [Classical Chinese, simp.]
每 (OC *mɯːʔ) in the original song might have as well been a pun for 挴 (OC *mlɯːʔ, *mɯːʔ) = shame; regret. And it would have been in the character of the Jin commoners to use this dialectal form (and the layering of meanings in a vernacular song).
虢季子白盤 edit
The inscriptions are an unusually early attestation of rhyming text. Assuming that the item is genuine, this is one of the earliest artefact bearing Chinese text with rhyme (and meter, to some extent).
隹十又[⿱二年]正月初吉丁亥，虢季子白乍[> 作]寶盤。不[> 丕]顯子白[⿱𤰔爿?> 莊 (OC *ʔsraŋ)?]，武于戎工，經[⿸維攵> 護?]亖[> 四]方 (OC *paŋ)，[ 博/搏/[⿰干尃] ][~ 薄?]伐[𠪚?][> 嚴?> 玁?][ [ ⿰[⿱來禾]?允 ]? ][> 狁?]，于洛之陽 (OC *laŋ)，折首[⿱五百]，執[⿲口[寺?/丮？]糸> 訊?][⿱五十]，是㠯[> 以]先行 (OC *ɡraːŋ)。[𧻚> 桓?][𧻚]子白，獻𢦞[> 馘]于王 (OC *ɢʷaŋ)。王孔加[> 嘉]子白義。王各[> 格]周廟，宣𫷺[⿸广射> 榭?]爰卿 (OC *kʰraŋ)[> 鄉 (OC *qʰaŋ)[> 饗 (OC *qʰaŋʔ)]。王曰白父，孔[⿰[⿱日尹?]見][> 勛?]又光 (OC *kʷaːŋ)。王睗[> 賜]乘馬，是用左[> 佐]王 (OC *ɢʷaŋ)，晹[> 賜]用弓，彤矢其央 (OC *qaŋ)。易[> 賜]用戉，用政[> 征]䜌[> 蠻]方 (OC *paŋ)。子子孫孫，萬年無彊[> 疆 (OC *kaŋ)]。