Baxter–Sagart

Although Old Chinese is known from written records beginning around 1200 BC, the logographic script provides much more indirect and partial information about the pronunciation of the language than alphabetic systems used elsewhere.
Several authors have produced reconstructions of Old Chinese phonology, beginning with the Swedish sinologist Bernard Karlgren in the 1940s and continuing to the present day.
The method introduced by Karlgren is unique, comparing categories implied by ancient rhyming practice and the structure of Chinese characters with descriptions in medieval rhyme dictionaries, though more recent approaches have also incorporated other kinds of evidence.

Although the various notations appear to be very different, they correspond with each other on most points.
By the 1970s, it was generally agreed that Old Chinese had fewer points of articulation than Middle Chinese, a set of voiceless sonorants, and labiovelar and labio-laryngeal initials.
Since the 1990s, most authors have agreed on a six-vowel system and a re-organized system of liquids.
Earlier systems proposed voiced final stops to account for contacts between stop-final syllables and other tones, but many investigators now believe that Old Chinese lacked tonal distinctions, with Middle Chinese tones derived from consonant clusters at the end of the syllable.

Sources of evidence

The major sources for the sounds of Old Chinese, covering most of the lexicon, are the sound system of Middle Chinese (7th century AD), the structure of Chinese characters, and the rhyming patterns of the ''Classic of Poetry'' (''Shijing''), dating from the early part of the 1st millennium BC.
Several other kinds of evidence are less comprehensive, but provide valuable clues.
These include Min dialects, early Chinese transcriptions of foreign names, early loans between Chinese and neighbouring languages, and families of Chinese words that appear to be related.

Middle Chinese

Middle Chinese, or more precisely Early Middle Chinese, is the phonological system of the '' Qieyun'', a rhyme dictionary published in 601, with many revisions and expansions over the following centuries.
These dictionaries set out to codify the pronunciations of characters to be used when reading the classics.
They indicated pronunciation using the ''fanqie'' method, dividing a syllable into an initial consonant and the rest, called the final.
In his ''Qièyùn kǎo'' (1842), the Cantonese scholar Chen Li performed a systematic analysis of a later redaction of the ''Qieyun'', identifying its initial and final categories, though not the sounds they represented.
Scholars have attempted to determine the phonetic content of the various distinctions by comparing them with rhyme tables from the Song dynasty, pronunciations in modern varieties and loans in Korean, Japanese and Vietnamese (the Sinoxenic materials), but many details regarding the finals are still disputed.
According to its preface, the ''Qieyun'' did not reflect a single contemporary dialect, but incorporated distinctions made in different parts of China at the time (a diasystem).

The fact that the ''Qieyun'' system contains more distinctions than any single contemporary form of speech means that it retains additional information about the history of the language.
The large number of initials and finals are unevenly distributed, suggesting hypotheses about earlier forms of Chinese.
For example, it includes 37 initials, but in the early 20th century Huang Kan observed that only 19 of them occurred with a wide range of finals, implying that the others were in some sense secondary developments.

Phonetic series

The logographic Chinese writing system does not use symbols for individual sounds as is done in an alphabetic system.
However, the vast majority of characters are phono-semantic compounds, in which a word is written by combining a character for a similarly sounding word with a semantic indicator.
Often characters sharing a phonetic element (forming a phonetic series) are still pronounced alike, as in the character 中 (, 'middle'), which was adapted to write the words ('pour', 沖) and ('loyal', 忠).
In other cases the words in a phonetic series have very different sounds both in Middle Chinese and in modern varieties.
Since the sounds are assumed to have been similar at the time the characters were chosen, such relationships give clues to the lost sounds.

The first systematic study of the structure of Chinese characters was Xu Shen's ''Shuowen Jiezi'' (100 AD).
The ''Shuowen'' was mostly based on the small seal script standardized in the Qin dynasty.
Earlier characters from oracle bones and Zhou bronze inscriptions often reveal relationships that were obscured in later forms.

Poetic rhyming

Rhyme has been a consistent feature of Chinese poetry.
While much old poetry still rhymes in modern varieties of Chinese, Chinese scholars have long noted exceptions.
This was attributed to lax rhyming practice of early poets until the late-Ming dynasty scholar Chen Di argued that a former consistency had been obscured by sound change.
This implied that the rhyming practice of ancient poets recorded information about their pronunciation.
Scholars have studied various bodies of poetry to identify classes of rhyming words at different periods.

The oldest such collection is the ''Shijing'', containing songs ranging from the 10th to 7th centuries BC.
The systematic study of Old Chinese rhymes began in the 17th century, when Gu Yanwu divided the rhyming words of the ''Shijing'' into ten groups ( ).
Gu's analysis was refined by Qing dynasty philologists, steadily increasing the number of rhyme groups.
One of these scholars, Duan Yucai, stated the important principle that characters in the same phonetic series would be in the same rhyme group, making it possible to assign almost all words to rhyme groups.
A final revision by Wang Li in the 1930s produced the standard set of 31 rhyme groups.
These were used in all reconstructions up to the 1980s, when Zhengzhang Shangfang, Sergei Starostin and William Baxter independently proposed a more radical splitting into more than 50 rhyme groups.

Min dialects

The Min dialects are believed to have split off before the Middle Chinese stage, because they contain distinctions that cannot be derived from the ''Qieyun'' system.
For example, the following dental initials have been identified in reconstructed proto-Min:

Other points of articulation show similar distinctions within stops and nasals.
Proto-Min voicing is inferred from the development of Min tones, but the phonetic values of the initials are otherwise uncertain.
The sounds indicated as *''-t'', *''-d'', etc. are known as "softened stops" due to their reflexes in Jianyang and nearby Min varieties in Fujian, where they appear as fricatives or approximants, or are missing entirely, while the non-softened variants appear as stops. Evidence from early loans into Mienic languages suggests that the softened stops were prenasalized.

Other evidence

Several early texts contain transcriptions of foreign names and terms using Chinese characters for their phonetic values.
Of particular importance are the many Buddhist transcriptions of the Eastern Han period, because the native pronunciation of the source languages, such as Sanskrit and Pali, is known in detail.

Eastern Han commentaries on the classics contain many remarks on the pronunciations of particular words, which has yielded a great deal of information on the pronunciations and even dialectal variation of the period.
By studying such glosses, the Qing philologist Qian Daxin, surrounded by neighbouring languages, some of whose relatives, particularly Austroasiatic and the Tai–Kadai and Miao–Yao languages, are still spoken today. The earliest borrowings in both directions provide further evidence of Old Chinese sounds, though complicated by uncertainty about the reconstruction of early forms of those languages.

Systems

Many authors have produced their own reconstructions of Old Chinese.
A few of the most influential are listed here.

Karlgren (1940–1957)

The first complete reconstruction of Old Chinese was produced by the Swedish linguist Bernhard Karlgren in a dictionary of Middle and Old Chinese, the ''Grammata Serica'' (1940), revised in 1957 as the ''Grammata Serica Recensa'' (GSR). Although Karlgren's Old Chinese reconstructions have been superseded, his comprehensive dictionary remains a valuable reference for students of Old Chinese, and characters are routinely identified by their GSR position.
Karlgren's remained the most commonly used until it was superseded by the system of Li Fang-Kuei in the 1970s.

In his ''Études sur la phonologie chinoise'' (1915–1926), Karlgren produced the first complete reconstruction of Middle Chinese (which he called "Ancient Chinese").
He presented his system as a narrow transcription of the sounds of the standard language of the Tang dynasty.
Beginning with his ''Analytical Dictionary of Chinese and Sino-Japanese'' (1923), he compared these sounds across groups of words written with Chinese characters with the same phonetic component.
Noting that such words were not always pronounced identically in Middle Chinese, he postulated that their initials had a common point of articulation in an earlier phase he called "Archaic Chinese", but which is now usually called Old Chinese.
For example, he postulated velar consonants as initials in the series
* 甘 ''kâm'', 柑 ''kâm'', 酣 ''ɣâm'', 鉗 ''gjäm''
In rarer cases where different types of initials occurred in the same series, as in
* 各 ''kâk'', 胳 ''kâk'', 格 ''kak'', 絡 ''lâk'', 駱 ''lâk'', 略 ''ljak''
he postulated initial clusters *kl- and *gl-.

Karlgren believed that the voiced initials of Middle Chinese were aspirated, and projected these back onto Old Chinese.
He also proposed a series of unaspirated voiced initials to account for other correspondences, but later workers have discarded these in favour of alternative explanations.
Karlgren accepted the argument of the Qing philologist Qian Daxin

HOME


Content is Copyleft
Website design, code, and AI is Copyrighted (c) 2014-2017 by Stephen Payne


Consider donating to Wikimedia



As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases