Sūnshì Tángyùn kǎo 孫氏唐韻考
Examination of Sūn Miǎn’s Tángyùn by 紀容舒 (Jì Róngshū, 1686–1764, zì Chísǒu, hào Zhúyá; father of Jì Yún, the Sìkù zǒngcuàn)
About the work
A 5-juàn mid-Qīng philological reconstruction of the lost Táng-period Tángyùn of Sūn Miǎn 孫愐 (Tiānbǎo 10 / 751), based on the fǎnqiè spellings preserved in Xú Xuàn’s 徐鉉 Yōngxī 3 / 986 recension of the Shuōwén jiězì. The methodology: Xú Xuàn explicitly took fǎnqiè readings from the Tángyùn (per his Jìnshū biǎo) — i.e., from the yet-pre-1011 rhyme-book line — for his Shuōwén glosses. Since fǎnqiè upper-character preserves initial-class and lower-character preserves rhyme-class, Jì Róngshū back-extracts the lower-characters from Xú Xuàn’s Shuōwén into Sūn Miǎn’s original Táng rhyme-classification, recovering the Tángyùn’s rhyme-class assignments. The reconstruction documents four kinds of Tángyùn / Guǎngyùn divergence: (1) graphs in Tángyùn but not in Guǎngyùn (e.g., 詷, 营, 㤨 in dōng class); (2) graphs sharing form between books but in different rhyme-classes (e.g., 賨 — Guǎngyùn in dōng via zàngzōng qiē, Tángyùn in dōng via cúhóng qiē; 瓏 Guǎngyùn in dōng via lúhóng qiē, Tángyùn in zhōng via lìzhōng qiē); (3) graphs entered in two Tángyùn classes but only one Guǎngyùn class (e.g., yú class 㡹 — Guǎngyùn says “yòu zǐyú qiē” but the yú class 子余切 entry omits 㡹); (4) Guǎngyùn mis-edits where the rhyme-class changed but the fǎnqiè did not (e.g., 麕 / 荺 / 囷 / 頵 moved from zhūn to zhēn but retain the zhūn fǎnqiè). The Sìkù tíyào praises the work as methodologically clean and useful for xiǎoxué.
Tiyao
The Sūnshì Tángyùn kǎo in 5 juàn. Composed by Jì Róngshū of the present dynasty. Róngshū, zì Chísǒu, hào Zhúyá, of Xiànxiàn. Kāngxī guǐsì (1713) jǔrén; rose to Yáoānfǔ zhīfǔ. — Originally Suí Lù Fǎyán 陸法言 composed the Qièyùn; the Táng Lǐbù used it for examinations; in Tiānbǎo, Sūn Miǎn expanded it as Tángyùn; later Sòng Chén Péngnián 陳彭年 and others re-edited as Guǎngyùn; Dīng Dù 丁度 et al. produced the Lǐbù yùnlüè — a single dynasty’s exam-format. Sūn’s book gradually fell from circulation; the Táng-period rhyme-books no longer survive in complete form. Only Yōngxī 3 (986) Xú Xuàn’s collation of Xǔ Shèn’s Shuōwén — pre-Dà-zhōng-xiáng-fú revised Guǎngyùn — used fǎnqiè entirely from the Guǎngyùn per Xú’s presentation memorial. Róngshū observes: fǎnqiè upper-character must be same-initial; lower-character must be same-rhyme — this is yīnhé (regular spelling); lèigé method occasionally borrows the upper-character’s initial only, never borrows the lower-character’s rhyme. Therefore, by cross-checking the lower-characters of the Shuōwén fǎnqiè spellings, the original Táng rhyme-classification can be recovered. So he takes the Shuōwén’s recorded Tángyùn fǎnqiè and analyses each — sorting them into their rhyme-classes — and produces this book. — Newly known: the Guǎngyùn rhyme-divisions follow the Tángyùn; only the entry-graph set differs. Some graphs are in Tángyùn but not in Guǎngyùn: e.g. dōng’s 詷 / 营 / 㤨; some shared between books but in different rhyme-classes: 賨 Guǎngyùn in dōng with zàngzōng spelling, Tángyùn in dōng with cúhóng spelling; 瓏 Guǎngyùn in dōng with lúhóng, Tángyùn in zhōng with lìzhōng; some in two Tángyùn classes but only one Guǎngyùn class: e.g. yú 㡹 Guǎngyùn says “yòu zǐyú qiē” matching Tángyùn, but the yú class 子余切 in Guǎngyùn does not list 㡹; some mis-edits where Guǎngyùn changed the rhyme-class but kept the old fǎnqiè: e.g. zhūn class graphs 麕 / 荺 / 囷 / 頵 moved into zhēn class but retaining the zhūn spelling; shān class 鰥 moved into shān class but retaining the shān spelling; some Tángyùn graphs had double-readings but Xú Xuàn took only one: e.g. 規 with jūzhuī qiē in zhī class — but cross-checking 隓 xǔguī qiē and 闚 qùsuī qiē, 規 should also have jūsuí qiē and belong in the zhī class as well. — His reconstruction is orderly; the Tángyùn / Guǎngyùn divergence and the post-1011 re-edits can both be partially recovered. Useful for xiǎoxué cross-reference. Presented Qiánlóng 46 / 11 (1781). General Editors Jì Yún, Lù Xīxióng, Sūn Shìyì; Chief Collator Lù Fèichí.
Abstract
The Sūnshì Tángyùn kǎo (composed in Jì Róngshū’s mature career, between his 1713 jǔrén and his 1764 death) is a methodologically exemplary mid-Qīng philological reconstruction of the lost Táng-period Tángyùn. The reconstruction works by back-extracting fǎnqiè lower-characters from Xú Xuàn’s 徐鉉 986 Shuōwén jiězì recension into Sūn Miǎn’s 孫愐 original Táng rhyme-classification — a clean-and-rigorous philological technique. The book also documents four kinds of Tángyùn / Guǎngyùn divergence, providing material for the textual history of the rhyme-book tradition. Modern phonology (Zhōu Zǔmó 1966 Tángdài yùnshū kǎo) builds extensively on Jì Róngshū’s reconstruction. The author is the father of Jì Yún (1724–1805), the principal zǒngcuàn of the Sìkù quánshū itself — a small irony: Jì Yún preserves and assesses his father’s book in the imperial set he himself oversees.
Translations and research
- Zhōu Zǔ-mó 周祖謨. 1966. Tángdài yùn-shū kǎo 唐代韻書考. — Standard reconstruction of the Táng-period rhyme-book tradition; builds on Jì Róng-shū.
- Wáng Lì 王力. 1985. Hàn-yǔ yǔ-yīn shǐ. — Discussion of Jì Róng-shū’s reconstruction.
Other points of interest
That the zǒngcuàn Jì Yún’s father appears as the author of one of the Sìkù-preserved books is a small biographical curio of the Sìkù enterprise. The book’s methodological cleanliness — back-extracting fǎnqiè from a different document into a lost source’s rhyme-classification — is one of the more elegant pieces of Qīng philology and a model still in use.