The Essentials of the Ancient and Modern Rhyme Association 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, of course, is no exception. 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 the original focus on a few representative phonetic systems to the various levels of the entire history of Chinese language. This has greatly enriched 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 Five Fragments Collection of Rhymes and its phonetic system, demonstrating its relationship with works such as the Four Tones Equalization and the Guide to the Qieyun System, and wrote the book Corrections to the Five Fragments Collection of Rhymes. Subsequently, he shifted his focus to the Essentials of the Gujin Yunhui and related rhyming books. After five years of effort, he has now completed this significant work, The Gujin Yunhui and Related Rhyming Books. The Essentials of the Gujin Yunhui was published during the era between the Qieyun system and the Zhongyuan Yinyun, playing a connecting role and holding a very important position in the history of Chinese phonology. Professor Ning Jifu's focus on the Yunhui is a completely correct choice. His book provides a comprehensive study of the phonetic system of the Yunhui series of rhyming books, proposing many new insights and theories. Two of the most significant points are:
1. The relationship between initial consonants and final vowels: It argues that not all initial consonants in the Yunhui system are equivalent to final vowels. Some initial consonants are used to distinguish initial consonant differences. For example, in the Guangyun, some words with the same final vowel are classified into different initial consonant rhymes, with some being clear and others being (dark). These actually reflect the phenomenon of (dark initial consonant) becoming clear, which has nothing to do with the final vowel. Additionally, the initial consonants of the second tone's open mouth sounds (such as jian, xi, xia, xiang) and the initial consonants of the fourth tone's open mouth sounds (such as jian, xi, xia, xiang) are often separated into independent initial consonant rhymes, which are also related to initial consonants. This is a reflection of the palatalization of dental and retroflex sounds, which has nothing to do with the final vowel.
2. The absence of entering tones in the Yunhui system: The Qieyun Zhizhangtu, Four Tones Equalization, and Guide to the Qieyun System also do not include entering tones. The entering tones are merged into the yin tones (i.e., entering tones become Yin tones). This new theory not only simplifies the tone system of the Yunhui series but also further simplifies the final vowel system and pushes the disappearance of entering tones further back in time. Although this issue involves a broad and complex scope, with different perspectives, this theory is still highly insightful.
The book also includes a comprehensive phonetic and final vowel compatibility table for the Yunhui series, fully demonstrating the internal structure of the phonetic system, providing great convenience for understanding this system or conducting further research. The pronunciation reflected in the Revised and Annotated Lipu Yinyun by Mao's father and son has long been overlooked by scholars. Although it has occasionally been mentioned, it has been done so casually and lacks detail. This book provides a relatively comprehensive exploration of this issue, revealing many important phonetic phenomena, many of which can be corroborated with the Yunhui.
Undoubtedly, the research on the phonetic systems of the Yunhui and Zengyun in this book deepens our understanding of the phonological situation between the Song, Jin, and Yuan dynasties, enriches the content of phonological research in this period, and advances the study of phonology in this era by a significant margin. Another outstanding contribution of Professor Ning Jifu's book is the comprehensive of the development and inheritance relationships of the Guangyun and Jiyun systems, proposing many new perspectives. The most important ones are:
1. Wang Wenyu's Newly Published Yunlue (Jin Dynasty) is a revision, expansion, and supplementation of the Jingde Yunlue.
2. Liu Yuan's Newly Published Yunlue (Renziqin) is a revision of Wang Wenyu's Newly Published Yunlue.
3. The Lipu Yinyun is a simplified version of the unfinished manuscript of the Jiyun and has no inheritance relationship with the Jingde Yunlue.
4. The Mongolian Yunlue is a revision and recompilation of the Pingshui Yinyun. The Mongolian Yunlue is the same as the Mongolian Ziyun and is not two different books.
These new perspectives have clarified many traditional or popular misconceptions, such as Liu Yuan being the founder of the Pingshui Yinyun, the Lipu Yinyun being a revision of the Jingde Yunlue, and the Mongolian Ziyun and Mongolian Yunlue being different books. Due to the solid evidence, meticulous analysis, and compelling arguments, these new perspectives are highly convincing. With these new insights, we can correctly understand the origins and relationships of these books and make full use of them in phonological research.
Taking the Lipu Yinyun as an example, once we know it is a simplified version of the unfinished manuscript of the Jiyun, it can play a crucial role in studying the Jiyun. First, we can use it to understand some of the editorial processes of the Jiyun. For example, the Jiyun has some important phonological features, such as the update of general rules, the separation of clear and dark labial sounds, the confusion between the zhang and chuan initials, the change of labial and nasal sounds in the zhong rhyme into the hou rhyme, the interconnection of the yan, yan, and fan rhyme systems, the palatalization of dental and retroflex sounds in the second and fourth tones, the arrangement of small rhymes roughly according to the place of articulation of initials, and so on. It is not difficult to find that these features are already present in the Lipu Yinyun. On the one hand, this can serve as evidence of the close relationship between the Lipu Yinyun and the Jiyun, while on the other hand, it tells us that these important contents of the Jiyun were largely determined in the early stages of compilation. However, some important features are not yet seen in the Lipu Yinyun and only appear in the Jiyun. For example, in the Lipu Yinyun, wan is cut as "wu han" in the san rhyme, while in the Jiyun, it is revised to "wu xian" and moved to the shan rhyme. Similarly, in the Lipu Yinyun, huo is cut as "hu mai" in the mai rhyme, while in the Jiyun, it is revised to "hu mo" and moved to the xi rhyme. These changes, though minor, affect the rhyme allocation of a batch of small rhymes.
Another notable feature of the Jiyun is the mixing of open and close tones, which is only seen in a few or isolated cases of the zhen, zun, and ge, ge rhyme systems in the Lipu Yinyun, while other relevant groups show no such mixing. This also indicates that large-scale mixing occurred later and was a result of revisions in the Jiyun.
There are also changes in the pairing of the upper and lower characters in the cuts, which are discussed in detail in Section 6 of Chapter 2 of this book. Readers can refer to it.
Second, the Lipu Yinyun can serve as an important basis for collating the cuts of the Jiyun. It is well-known that the Leiwen is extremely important for collating the Jiyun because it was adapted from the Jiyun according to the radicals. However, due to the lack of understanding of the special relationship between the Lipu Yinyun and the Jiyun, it has been overlooked. Although Fang Chenggui's Corrections to the Jiyun occasionally cites some cuts from the Yunhui adapted from the Lipu Yinyun, it is indirect. Under such circumstances, it is inevitable to often rely solely on the Leiwen to determine correctness. However, isolated evidence is not very reliable, especially for cuts with the same phonetic but different characters. For example, in the yang rhyme, some editions cut "kuang" as "huang," while others cut it as "huang." The Leiwen aligns with the latter, and Fang Chenggui concluded that the character "huang" was correct. In fact, both "hu" and "huang" are characters belonging to the xiao initial, and "huang" is less commonly used than "hu." Fang Chenggui's judgment is accurate and reliable. Upon checking, the Lipu Yinyun uses "hu" and not "huang," making Fang Chenggui's collation even less reliable. If we use the Lipu Yinyun in conjunction with the Leiwen, and both agree, the judgment becomes much more reliable. For example, in the zheng rhyme, the zhang initial "cheng" is cut as "shi zheng," where "shi" belongs to the zhang initial, deviating from its own tone. In the geng rhyme, the zhang initial "dai" is cut as "chu geng," where "geng" belongs to the geng rhyme, also deviating from its own rhyme. Although this deviation does not conform to the Guangyun, both the Lipu Yinyun and the Leiwen cuts align with them, suggesting that the original Jiyun text was so.
Similarly, in the zhi rhyme, the shui initial "shui" is cut as "shui gu," where "shui" belongs to the sheng initial, deviating from its own tone. In the xin rhyme, the qin initial "qin" is cut as "qi zhong," where "zhong" belongs to the zhen rhyme, also deviating from its own rhyme. However, both the Lipu Yinyun and the Leiwen cut "shui" as "shi gu" and "qin" as "qi zhong," neither deviating from their own tones, indicating that the deviation was a later error in transmission.
Another example is the xian rhyme, where the jing initial "jian" is cut as "zi xian" in some editions, while "you" is cut as "jiang xian" in others. In the ge rhyme, the character "a" is cut as "yu he" in some editions and as "ku he" in others. "Zi" and "jiang" have the same initial, while "he" and "he" have the same final vowel. This is an example of the same phonetic but different characters. Both the Lipu Yinyun and the Leiwen cut "jiang" and not "zi," and "he" and not "he," proving that "jiang" and "he" align with the original text.
There are many such examples, and we can list a long list.
From this, we can see that by using the Lipu Yinyun, we can confidently collate a large number of Jiyun cuts that cannot be well-collated with the Leiwen alone.
Taking the Lipu Yinyun as an example, we can clearly see the importance of Professor Ning Jifu's numerous new conclusions about the inheritance relationships of rhyming books in phonological research.
Based on a thorough and detailed comparison of these rhyming books, the book also makes many corrections and supplements for the Yunhui, Zengyun, Tongkao, and Mongolian Ziyun. Especially commendable is the use of the Newly Published Yunlue to supplement the Mongolian Ziyun, correcting many omissions of previous scholars and achieving the most significant results.
In summary, Professor Ning Jifu's book has made remarkable achievements in analyzing and researching the phonetic system of the Yunhui series of rhyming books, clarifying the inheritance relationships of the Guangyun and Jiyun systems, and correcting and supplementing the omissions of various rhyming books. It has made important contributions to the phonological research of Chinese, especially the phonological study of this historical period.
I had the pleasure of reading the manuscript of Professor Ning Jifu's book and deeply appreciated the opportunity to review it in advance. I am very willing to recommend such a masterpiece to a broad readership, and thus I gladly wrote this preface.
Shao Rongfen
March 1, 1996
Beijing, Zizhuyuan, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences