"Back to the title: "A Compendium of the Rhyme Books of Ancient and Modern Times" and Related Rhyme Books

Author: Ning Jifu
Publisher:
Publishing Date: 1997-05-01
Features: Since the reform and opening up, China's national economy has achieved relatively rapid development, and the scientific and cultural industries have also gradually flourished. Phonology has naturally followed suit. Over the past decade, the number of phonological research publications has increased by about ten times compared to the first three decades after the founding of the country. The research scope has also expanded from focusing on a few representative phonetic systems to encompassing all levels of the history of Chinese phonology, greatly enriching the content of the study of the history of Chinese phonology. However, given the weak foundation and poor base, it is impossible to achieve immediate success. Weak links still abound, and the period between the Song, Jin, and Yuan dynasties is one of them. Professor Ning Jifu has long been aware of this situation. Many years ago, he compiled and studied the Wuxiang Jiyun and its phonetic system, demonstrating its relationship with works such as the Sisheng Dengzi and the Qieyun Zhinan, and wrote the book Corrections to the Wuxiang Jiyun. Subsequently, he shifted his focus to the Gujin Yunhui Juyao and related rhyming books. After five years of effort, he has now completed this significant work, Gujin Yunhui Juyao and Related Rhyming Books.
The Yunhui Juyao was published during the era between the Qieyun and the Zhongyuan Yinyun, serving as a bridge between the two, and holds a crucial position in the history of Chinese phonology. Professor Ning Jifu's focus on the Yunhui is an entirely correct choice. His book provides a comprehensive study of the phonetic system of the Yunhui and related rhyming books, offering many new insights and theories. Two major points are particularly significant:
1. The distinction between initial consonants and final vowels: Professor Ning argues that not all initials in the Yunhui are equivalent to final vowels. Some initials are used to distinguish initial consonants. For example, in the Guangyun, some words with the same final vowel are classified into different initials, reflecting the influence of (the palatalization of voiced initials), which has no relation to the final vowel. Additionally, the initial consonants of the second tone () and the fourth tone ( and some initial consonants of the third tone) are often separated into distinct initials, which also relates to initial consonants rather than final vowels.
We know that the Yunhui and related rhyming books have a complex system of final vowels, calculated to be over two hundred. Most researchers of this phonetic system are troubled by its complexity. Professor Ning's new theory not only simplifies the final vowel system of the Yunhui but also explains why some initials are classified into different initials. Since the separation of initials follows certain phonetic conditions, this theory provides a more compelling basis. The palatalization of voiced initials began in the Tang and Five Dynasties, and its reflection in the Yunhui and related rhyming books is entirely plausible. The development of retroflex initials also had historical preparation, as the presence of palatalized initials in the Jiyun's annotations already indicates this trend (see my article "On the Palatalization of the Jiyun" in the Commemorative Collection for Professor Lü Jiaoxiang's 90th Birthday, Commercial Press, 1995). Under the influence of palatalized initials, the emergence of retroflex initials is not surprising. Thus, it is reasonable to argue that some initials in the Yunhui do not correspond to final vowels and instead indicate differences in initial consonants.
2. The absence of entering tones in the Yunhui and related rhyming books: The Qieyun Zhizhangtu, Sisheng Dengzi, and Qieyun Zhinan also lack entering tones. The entering tones were merged into Yin tones (, or the transformation of entering tones into Yin tones). This new theory not only simplifies the tone system of the Yunhui and related rhyming books but also further simplifies the final vowel system and pushes back the timeline of the disappearance of entering tones. Although this issue involves a broad and complex scope, with differing opinions, this theory remains highly insightful.
The book also includes a phonetic and final vowel correspondence table for the Yunhui and related rhyming books, fully demonstrating the internal structure of the phonetic system and providing great convenience for understanding or further studying this system. The pronunciation reflected in the Zengxiu Huzhu Libu Yunlue by the Mao brothers has long been overlooked by scholars. Although occasionally mentioned, these references were often casual and lacked detail. This book provides a more comprehensive exploration of this issue, revealing many important phonetic phenomena, many of which can be corroborated with the Yunhui.
Undoubtedly, Professor Ning Jifu's research on the phonetic systems of the Yunhui and Zengyun deepens our understanding of the phonological situation between the Song, Jin, and Yuan dynasties, enriches the content of foundational research in this period, and advances the study of phonology during this era.
Another significant contribution of Professor Ning Jifu's book is its comprehensive analysis of the development and inheritance of the phonetic systems in the Guangyun and Jiyun. He proposes many new perspectives, including:
1. Wang Wenyu of the Jin dynasty's Xincan Yunlue is a revision and expansion of the Jingde Yunlue.
2. Liu Yuan's Rizi Xincan Yunlue is a revision of Wang Wenyu's Xincan Yunlue.
3. The Libu Yunlue is a simplified version of the Jiyun manuscript and has no direct lineage from the Jingde Yunlue.
4. The Menggu Ziyun is a revision and recompilation of the Pingshui Yun. The Menggu Yunlue is the same as the Menggu Ziyun, not two different books.
These new insights clarify many traditional or widely held misconceptions, such as Liu Yuan being the founder of the Pingshui Yun, the Libu Yunlue being a revision of the Jingde Yunlue, and the Menggu Ziyun and Menggu Yunlue being different books. Given the solid evidence, meticulous analysis, and compelling arguments, these new perspectives are highly convincing. With these insights, we can better understand the origins and relationships of these books and utilize them effectively in phonological research.
Taking the Libu Yunlue as an example, once we recognize it as a simplified version of the Jiyun, it becomes a crucial tool for studying the Jiyun. First, we can learn about some of the editorial processes of the Jiyun from the Libu Yunlue. For instance, the Jiyun has several important phonological features, such as the updating of general rules, the separation of palatal and alveolar initials, the confusion between the initials zhang and chen, the transformation of labio-velar initials in certain rhymes, the interconnection of the yan, yan, and fan rhyme systems, the palatalization of initial consonants in the second and fourth tones, and the arrangement of small rhymes roughly according to the place of articulation of initials. It is evident that these features are already present in the Libu Yunlue. This not only supports the close relationship between the Libu Yunlue and the Jiyun but also suggests that many of the Jiyun's key features were largely established during its compilation. However, some important features appear only in the Jiyun and not in the Libu Yunlue. For example, the Libu Yunlue has "wan" (wu han qi) in the san rhyme, while the Jiyun changes it to "xian" (wu xian qi) and moves it to the shan rhyme. Similarly, the Libu Yunlue has "huo" (hu mai qi) in the mai rhyme, while the Jiyun changes it to "mo" (hu mo qi) and moves it to the xi rhyme. These changes, though minor, affect the classification of many other small rhymes.
Another notable feature of the Jiyun is the mixing of open and close tones, which is present in only a few or isolated cases in the Libu Yunlue (e.g., the zhen and zun rhyme systems and the ge and gē rhymes), while other relevant groups show no such mixing. This indicates that large-scale mixing occurred later and was a result of revisions to the Jiyun. Additionally, changes in the pairing of initials and finals in the annotations of the Jiyun are discussed in detail in Chapter 2, Section 6 of this book, and readers can refer to it.
Second, the Libu Yunlue serves as an important basis for collating the annotations of the Jiyun. It is well-known that the Lei pian is crucial for collating the Jiyun because it was compiled by rearranging the Jiyun according to its radicals. However, due to the lack of understanding of the special relationship between the Libu Yunlue and the Jiyun, it has been overlooked. Although Fang Chenggui's Collected Corrections to the Jiyun occasionally cites annotations from the Yunhui derived from the Libu Yunlue, these are indirect references. In such circumstances, relying solely on the Lei pian for judgment is often unreliable, especially for annotations with the same pronunciation but different characters. For example, in the yang rhyme, some editions have "kuang" (huang qi), while others have "xu" (hu xiang qi). The Lei pian aligns with the latter, leading Fang Chenggui to conclude that "xu" is correct. However, both "hu" and "xu" are initials from the xiao group, and "xu" is less commonly used than "hu," making Fang's judgment unreliable. Upon checking, the Libu Yunlue uses "hu" and not "xu," further demonstrating the unreliability of Fang's collation.
By using the Libu Yunlue alongside the Lei pian, we can achieve more reliable judgments when both sources agree. For instance, in the zheng rhyme, the zhang initial is annotated as "shi zheng qi," where "shi" belongs to the chang group, deviating from its original tone. In the geng rhyme, the zhang initial is annotated as "chu geng qi," where "geng" belongs to the geng rhyme, also deviating from its original tone. Although this deviation does not align with the Guangyun, both the Libu Yunlue and the Lei pian annotations correct it, suggesting that the original Jiyun text was indeed this way. Similarly, in the zhi rhyme, the shui initial is annotated as "shu gui qi," where "shu" belongs to the sheng group, deviating from its original tone. In the xin rhyme, the qin initial is annotated as "qi zhong qi," where "qi" belongs to the zhen rhyme, also deviating from its original tone. However, both the Libu Yunlue and the Lei pian use "shu gui qi" and "qi zhong qi," respectively, without deviation, indicating that the deviations were errors introduced during later transmission.
Another example is the xian rhyme, where the jing initial is annotated as "zi xian qi" in some editions and "jiang" in others, and the ge rhyme has "a" annotated as "yu he qi" in some editions and "kuo he qi" in others. Here, "zi" and "jiang" share the same initial, while "he" and "huo" share the same final, exemplifying cases where the pronunciation is the same but the characters differ. Both the Libu Yunlue and the Lei pian use "jiang" and "huo," respectively, confirming that these characters align with the original text. There are many such examples, and a comprehensive list could be compiled.
Thus, by utilizing the Libu Yunlue, we can reliably collate a large number of Jiyun annotations that are difficult to verify using only the Lei pian. From this example, we can glimpse the significant importance of Professor Ning Jifu's numerous new conclusions about the inheritance of rhyming books in phonological research.
Based on detailed and meticulous comparisons of various rhyming books, the book also corrects and supplements errors in works such as the Yunhui, Zengyun, Tongkao, and Menggu Ziyun. Particularly commendable is the use of the Xincan Yunlue to collate and correct errors in the Menggu Ziyun, yielding substantial results.
In summary, Professor Ning Jifu's book has achieved remarkable results in analyzing the phonetic system of the Yunhui and related rhyming books, clarifying the inheritance of the Guangyun and Jiyun systems, and correcting and supplementing errors in other rhyming books. It has made significant contributions to the study of Chinese phonology, especially in the historical period between the Song, Jin, and Yuan dynasties.
I had the pleasure of reading the manuscript of Professor Ning Jifu's book and was deeply impressed by its insights. I am delighted to recommend such a masterpiece to a broader audience and am honored to write this preface.
Shao Rongfen
March 1, 1996
Beijing, Zizhuyuan, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences