« AnteriorContinuar »
orthography for use in different cases. If this be so, it has been adopted into the Ningpo dialect, for some unknown reason, as a substitute for the mandarin genitive affix teih, and its use has thus been extended.
The genitive case is the only one marked by a regular enclitic. Even this is sometimes dropped when the connexion of the words is sufficiently clear. The instrumental, dative, ablative, and locative senses, are all expressed by prepositions or particles following the noun?
II. The sign of the Plural is almost confined to the pronouns. Only a few nouns used in address are, in the court dialect, treated in this respect like pronouns.
(1) In the Classical Chinese the plural sign is different for each of the three persons. Thus: Singular.
*(10549) E (1933), or Pe
E-tăng, or pe-tăng (9885)
They. (8330)' Pe-tăng is rather ‘he and his associates,' "he and such as he' (cf. oi trepi). In this sense tăng is also used with the pronouns of the first and second persons; whilst chae and tsaou are their proper enclitics for the mere plural. Chae means originally 'class' or 'company;' and tsaou, meeting,' 'order, 'class.' Tăng is a word of the same kind as chae and tsaou ; but, if I am not mistaken, retains its distinctive meaning, and does not degenerate so completely as they do into a mere sign of the plural. Its senses are both verbal and substantive; e.g. 'to compare, to be of the same kind, to wait for,' and 'kind or quality, class, rank, &c.' (Morrison). In the Ningpo colloquial tăng stands for 'with,' 'and,' like yu in the classical, and ho in mandarin.
(2) In the Mandarin colloquial, the plural for all three persons alike is formed by the particle mun (7817); a compara
1 E. gr. in the Classical style, e with, earlier classical style; nor do I recollect yu to, wei for, yew from.
an example in a classical book of any 9 shang upon, nuy or chung within. 3rd pers. pl. of the pronoun. 3 E is not used in this sense in the
* T€ (979)
tively modern word compounded of the symbols for 'man,' and 'gate,' the latter of which is also pronounced mun.
According to Morrison the meaning of the word is 'full' or 'plump. But I do not recollect to have met with it anywhere except as the sign of the plural. The mandarin pronouns are as follows: Singular, Wo, I; Ne
Te(7918), Thou; Tha
(9686)' Plural, Wo-mun, We; Ne-mun, Ye; T'ha-mun, They. A few nouns such as yay (11988)'
a father or other venerable person; heung (3389), a brother ; neang (7944), a lady; are treated like pronouns in respect of the plural. Thus Yay-mun, sirs;
(9979) -heung-mun, brothers; 'K00 (6471) -neang-mun, ladies.
(3) In the Ningpo colloquial the word lăh is the sign of the plural; thus: Singular, Ngô° (=Wo), I; Ng (= ? Ne), Thou; Gun (Ke), He. Plural, Ah-lăh, We; Ng-lăh, Ye; Gyi-lăh, They.
The irregularity of the first person plural may perhaps be traced through the dialect of Shaou-shing, a department conterminous with that of Ningpo, its chief city being 80 miles to the west of Ningpo. There we find Ngo, I and Ngah-lah (for Ngo-lah), we; which, dropping the initial ng, gives the Ningpo word ah-lah. this,' and Na 'that,' for the nearer and re
(7857) moter subject respectively, are much used in mandarin. Their plural is formed by means of the adjective seay (8899) · 'small,' or 'few.' Thus, chay-seay, “these,' na-seay, 'those.'
i Tha is by Morrison written Ta. He was careless almost as much of aspirates as of tones.
2 Te is the younger brother, heung the elder; koo a term of respect, literally ‘yielding,' gentle'.
3 Here the orthography is that adopted by the Protestant missionaries at Ningpo;
6=English aw, and
The nasal ng without a vowel is not found in mandarin. The Ningpo dialect adopts it frequently, e.g. in place of ne thou, woo (ngwoo) five, and yu a fish.
Gy represents a consonant between the hard and soft g. The counterpart of Gyi in mandarin pronunciation is Ke(6194).
At Ningpo we use keh, perhaps a corruption of chay, in place of both these demonstratives, and form its plural by the syllable sing ; keh-sing, 'these,' or 'those.' Our native scholars have adopted for this sing a symbol (9476), which means, 'a star,' and also, says Morrison, dots, single unconnected things.'
The plural of nouns is implied rather than expressed by the juxtaposition of a numeral or some word implying plurality; such as chung, 'many,' soo, 'some,' keae, 'all,' &c.
It has been affirmed that words of class, rank, &c., such as pei (8470), luy (7431) are used as affixes to form the plural of nouns,' so that v. gr. e-pei means 'foreigners,' the plural of
'a foreigner. Pei and tăng are in fact so defined by Morrison. But to the best of my recollection I have never met with a single place in which the proper sense,-class? or kind, was not preferable as a rendering for pei, tăng, &c., to treating them as mere signs of the plural. In the large majority of instances all nouns are written alike and without affix®, whether they be singular or plural. And when we find a noun with the affix in question, it is surely reasonable to enquire whether the ordinary sense of the affix will hold before we conclude it to be a mere sign of the plural.
With regard to keae Professor Max Müller has, I think, mistaken the Chinese construction. He says': 'man in China is gin (jin), kiai (keae) means the whole or totality. This added to gin gives gin-kiai which is the plural of man.'
To the best of my belief there is no proper 'plural of man' in Chinese. But in fact keae ought not to be treated as an affix at all; though, as Prémare (pp. 47, 144) rightly says, it must be put after' its noun. Two of Prémare's examples, one from the mandarin the other from the classical part of the Notitia, will serve to illustrate the real construction of keae :
So that e-pei should mean "the class of people called e or "barbarian;' jin-luy, 'mankind,' not simply 'men' the plural of man; and so forth.
? E. gr. jin meaning 'man,' 'a thousand men' is yih(12175) -t'hseen (10697) jin not yih-t'hseen jin-keae or jin-pei.
And sheep' (as in English) whether singular or plural is always yang (11864). Yang-luy or yang-che-luy, if it occurred, would mean the ovine species; not a mere plural of yang.
3 Lectures on the Science of Lan. guage. First Series, p. 43.
(1) ‘Jin keae yew ping, singuli homines habent morbum;' and (2) the well-known Confucian aphorism, 'Sze hae che nuy keae heung te yay, in toto terrarum orbe omnes sumus fratres.' Here ‘singuli' and 'omnes' of the translator are as much the prefix and affix respectively of 'homines' and of the clause 'in toto terrarum orbe,' and as little integral parts of speech, as keae is a mere plural affix or has ceased to sustain its part as an adjective.
The interest with which a missionary, whose field of duty lies in China, is naturally drawn to the speculations and discussions of scholars and scientific men when they touch upon Chinese is the writer's excuse for having ventured to contribute to this journal.
GEORGE E. MOULE.
Journal of Philology. VOL. II.
NOTE ON THE HEBREW ROOT up
THE discussion of this root is important as leading up (S VII) to the great crux of Gen. vi. 3: “And the LORD said, My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh.'
I. There are many passages in which wpia may be sufficiently rendered by some such general expression as 'snare;' and that, without any attempt to distinguish it from other words (such as mə), which might be rendered in certain cases by the same word 'snare.' But it becomes needful in respect of certain passages to attempt a more exact definition of the meaning of the root wp and its derivatives; and this is especially the case with the passage subjoined:
•Can two walk together, except they be agreed? will a lion roar in the forest, when he hath no prey? will a young lion cry out of his den, if he have taken nothing? Can a bird fall in a snare upon the earth, where no gin (wpis) is for him? shall one take up a snare from the earth, and have taken nothing at all ? Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the Lord hath not done it?' (Amos iii. 3—6).
The verse italicized suggests (in connexion with its con that the root wp' may refer to the baiting of a trap. The prophet is arguing from the necessary correspondence of cause and effect:
° Can two things go together, except they correspond? When an effect is observed we can argue to the occurrence of its natural cause; its corresponding cause must go with it. When the lion's growl is heard, we infer that he has taken
הילכו שנים יחדו בלתי אם נועדו