![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
The reform of the Chinese script in the direction of an alphabet is generally seen as a largely post-imperial development. This paper takes a different view, arguing that numerous scholars in the Ming and Qing periods sought to improve the Chinese writing system by phonographic notations and techniques that are most appropriately called alphabetical. Indian, European, and later Manchu scripts influenced efforts to improve methods of spelling Chinese syllables. Writers then began using the Manchu script directly to record Chinese sounds, and phonographically written Chinese in imperially sponsored publications defined an officially sanctioned pronunciation of the language. The efforts to spell a prestigious version of Chinese culminated in some of the script-reform proposals of the turn of the twentieth century. The paper maintains that recent efforts to change the Chinese language have a long history involving the specifics of late imperial literary culture and the administration of a multilingual empire.
Acknowledgments
I thank Nathan Vedal, the two anonymous reviewers, and Jing Tsu for their help with this article.
Notes
1 William Warburton, “The Divine Legation of Moses”, in The Works of the Right Reverend William Warburton, vol. 2 (1737–1779; repr. London: John Nichols, 1788), 403 (book 4, section 4).
2 James Boswell, The Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D., ed. Percy Fitzgerald (London: Sands, 1900), 357.
3 China Miéville, Embassytown (London: Macmillan, 2011), 109–10.
4 Elisabeth Kaske, “Mandarin, Vernacular and National Language: China's Emerging Concept of a National Language in the Early Twentieth Century,” in Michael Lackner and Natascha Vittinghoff, eds., Mapping Meanings: The Field of New Learning in Late Qing China (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 265–304.
5 Jerry Norman, Chinese (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), chap. 8, sections 2 and 6. Just what kind of Northern pronunciation was considered normative changed during the course of the late imperial period: W. South Coblin, Modern Chinese Phonology: From Guānhuà to Mandarin (Paris: École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, Centre de Recherches Linguistiques sur l'Asie Orientale, 2007). “Northern vernacular,” as used in this paper, should not be understood as synonymous with “Beijing dialect.”
6 In the sense used in Ignace J. Gelb, A Study of Writing, 2nd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963), not in Jacques Derrida, De la grammatologie (Paris: Éditions de minuit, 1967).
7 David Porter, Ideographia: The Chinese Cipher in Early Modern Europe (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2001), chap. 1.
8 Paolo Rossi, The Dark Abyss of Time: The History of the Earth and the History of Nations from Hooke to Vico, trans. Lydia G. Cochrane (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), chap. 29–31 and 33.
9 Roy Harris, “On Redefining Linguistics,” in Hayley J. Davis and Talbot J. Taylor, eds., Rethinking Linguistics (London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2003), 20–1; Roy Harris, The Language-Makers (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1980), 9–11.
10 John DeFrancis, “How Efficient is the Chinese Writing System?,” Visible Language 30, no. 1 (1996): 7–44.
11 John DeFrancis, Nationalism and Language Reform in China (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1950), chap. 3.
12 Viviane Alleton, “L’écriture chinoise : normes et pratiques contemporaines,” in Françoise Bottéro and Redouane Djamouri, eds., Écriture chinoise : Données, usages et représentations, Collection des Cahiers de Linguistique d'Asie Orientale 9 (Paris: École des hautes études en sciences sociales, Centre de Recherches Linguistiques sur l'Asie Orientale, 2006), 140.
13 Jean-Pierre Jaffré, “Écritures et structures linguistiques : Propos sur un éternel conflit,” in Bottéro and Djamouri, Écriture chinoise, 241.
14 Robert F. Port, “The Graphical Basis of Phones and Phonemes,” in M. Munro and O. Schwen-Bohm, eds., Second Language Speech Learning: The Role of Language Experience in Speech Perception and Production (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2006), 349–65; Robert F. Port, “Language Is a Social Institution: Why Phonemes and Words Do Not Have Explicit Psychological Form,” Ecological Psychology 22 (2010): 304–26.
15 David B. Lurie, Realms of Literacy: Early Japan and the History of Writing (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center, 2011), 341.
16 Joseph R. Levenson, Confucian China and Its Modern Fate: A Trilogy, vol. 1 (1958; repr. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968), chap. 4.
17 Xigui Qiu, Chinese Writing, trans. Gilbert L. Mattos and Jerry Norman (Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China, Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, 2000), 23. I should note that Redouane Djamouri (“The Development of the Writing System in Early China: Between Phonographic Necessity and Semiographic Efficiency,” in Bottéro and Djamouri, Écriture chinoise, 17) asserts that the Chinese script is “not fundamentally morphemic.”
18 Hu Yuzhi, “Zenyang dadao fangkuai zi?,” (How can we defeat the tetragraphs?), Taibai, 1st ser., no. 1 (1934): 10–1.
19 Anita Auer et al., “Historical Sociolinguistics: The Field and Its Future,” Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics 1, no. 1 (2015): 6.
20 Jing Tsu, Sound and Script in Chinese Diaspora (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010), 235.
21 Hirata Shōji, “Sha Reiun Jūshi onkun jo no keifu: kakyo seido to Chūgoku goshi daiichi” (The pedigree of Xie Lingyun's Shisi yinxun xu: China's linguistic history and the civil service examination system, part 1), in Takata Tokio, ed., Chūgoku goshi to shiryō to hōhō (Kyōto: Kyōto daigaku jinbun kagaku kenkyūjo, 1994), 33–80; Victor H. Mair and Tsu-lin Mei, “The Sanskrit Origins of Recent Style Prosody,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 51 (1991): 375–470; Norman, Chinese, chap. 2.
22 Edwin G. Pulleyblank, “Chinese Traditional Phonology,” Asia Major, 3rd ser., 12, no. 2 (1999): 105. Also described in David Prager Branner, “The Suí-Táng Tradition of Faˇnqiè Phonology,” in Sylvain Auroux et al., eds., History of the Language Sciences/Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaften/Histoire des sciences du langage, vol. 1 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2000), 36–46.
23 W. South Coblin, “Reflections on the Shŏuwēn Fragments,” in David Prager Branner, ed., The Chinese Rime Tables: Linguistic Philosophy and Historical-Comparative Phonology (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2006), 99–122.
24 Li Xinkui, Hanyu dengyun xue (Chinese rhyme-table studies) (1983; repr. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2008), chap. 5.
25 Jiang Yong, Yinxue bianwei (Discerning the subtleties of phonology), vol. 253, Xuxiu Siku quanshu: jingbu, facsimile of xylograph (1759; repr. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1995), 19a (73).
26 Stephen Owen, “Salvaging Poetry: The ‘Poetic’ in the Qing,” in Theodore Huters, Roy Bin Wong, and Pauline Yu, eds., Culture & State in Chinese History: Conventions, Accommodations, and Critiques (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997), 105–25.
27 The following discussion of the simplification of fanqie is informed by my reading of Luo Changpei, Hanyu yinyun xue daolun (Introduction to Chinese phonology) (1956; repr. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1980), 91–120; Li Xinkui, Hanyu yinyun xue (Chinese phonology) (Beijing: Beijing chubanshe, 1986), 94–102; Geng Zhensheng, Ming-Qing dengyun xue tonglun (Comprehensive discussion of Ming-Qing rhyme table learning) (Beijing: Yuwen chubanshe, 1992), chap. 1–2; Wang Songmu, “Ming-Qing dengyun jia zhi fanqie gailiang fang'an ji qi sheji linian” (Ming-Qing rhyme table phonologists’ schemes to improve syllabic spelling and the ideas behind their construction), Wen yu zhe 15 (2009): 195–252; Yang Xiumin, “Jiyun yilai de fanqie gailiang guocheng yanjiu” (Research on syllabic spelling reform since the Collected rhymes) (master's thesis, Fujian shifan daxue, 2011).
28 As illustrated in Elinor Ochs, “Transcription as Theory,” in Elinor Ochs and Bambi B. Schieffelin, eds., Developmental Pragmatics (New York: Academic Press, 1979), 43–72.
29 Geng Zhensheng, “Qingjiao zazhu zuozhe jiguan kao” (Examination of the geographical origin of the writer of Qingjiao zazhu), Zhongguo yuwen, no. 2 (1987): 144–5.
30 Sang Shaoliang, Qingjiao zazhu (Miscellaneous writings from the Green Fields), vol. 216, Siku quanshu cunmu congshu: jingbu, facsimile of xylograph (1593–1599; repr. Jinan: Qilu shushe, 2001), 25a (486).
31 Zhao Yintang, Dengyun yuanliu (Development of rhyme table phonology) (Shanghai: Shangwu yinshuguan, 1957), 131.
32 Lü Kun, Jiaotai yun (Interconnected rhymes), vol. 210, Siku quanshu cunmu congshu: jingbu, facsimile of xylograph (1603–1620; repr. Jinan: Qilu shushe, 2001) fanli:1a (4). The work was finished in 1603 and printed later.
33 Lü, Jiaotai yun, fanli:4b (6).
34 Ning Jifu, Hanyu yunshu shi (Mingdai juan) (History of Chinese rhyme books [Ming period section]) (Shanghai: Shanghai renmin chubanshe, 2009), 220.
35 Ning, Hanyu yunshu shi, 209–10.
36 Lü, Jiaotai yun, fanli:10a.
37 Lü, Jiaotai yun, fanli:10a–b.
38 Lü, Jiaotai yun, fanli:14a–b.
39 Uriel Weinreich, “Is a Structural Dialectology Possible?,” Word 10 (1954): 390.
40 David Prager Branner, “Some Composite Phonological Systems in Chinese,” in Branner, Chinese Rime Tables, 209.
41 Printed, posthumously, in 1708; reprinted in 1714. Chen's dates are inferred: Ning, Hanyu yunshu shi, 387–8. Li Xinkui and Mai Yun, Yunxue guji shuyao (Précis on historical sources on phonology) (Xi'an: Shanxi renmin chubanshe, 1993), 489–90.
42 Chen Jinmo, Yuanyin tongyun (Primordial sounds in control of the rhymes), red. Wu Renchen, vol. 215–6, Siku quanshu cunmu congshu: jingbu, facsimile of xylograph (1714; repr. Jinan: Qilu shushe, 2001), 1:19b (20); written before 1679.
43 Chen, Yuanyin tongyun, 1:14b (18).
44 Kevin Conrad Schoenberger, Jr., “Resonant Readings: Musicality in Early Modern Chinese Adaptations of Traditional Poetic Forms” (PhD diss., Yale University, 2013), 85–6.
45 The book was reprinted in 1649. Comparing the edition I used with the description in Li and Mai, Yunxue guji shuyao, 560–1, I conclude that I used the reprint.
46 The pronunciations of dong and weng (= w[o]ng) have become dissimilar in modern standard Chinese, but in the early eighteenth century, the two syllables rhymed in normative pronunciation. See Coblin, Modern Chinese Phonology, 64–5.
47 Shen Chongsui, Duqu xuzhi (Essential knowledge for composing tunes), xylograph (1639; Songling, 1649), shangjuan:32a–33b.
48 Shen, Duqu xuzhi, shangjuan:33b.
49 Joshua A. Fogel, “Chinese Understanding of the Japanese Language from Ming to Qing,” in Joshua A. Fogel, ed., Sagacious Monks and Bloodthirsty Warriors: Chinese Views of Japan in the Ming-Qing Period (Norwalk, CT: EastBridge, 2002), 66–7.
50 Zhao Yiguang, “Xitan jingzhuan” (The Siddhaṃ treatise and its commentary), in Rao Zongyi [Jao Tsung-i], ed., Xitan jingzhuan: Zhao Yiguang ji qi ‘Xitan jingzhuan,’ facsimile of xylograph (1611; repr. Taipei: Xin wenfeng chubanshe, 1999), fanli:13b (30).
51 Zhao Yiguang, “Xitan jingzhuan,” fanli:1b–2a (6–7).
52 Mao Ruifang, “Wang Zheng yu Xi-Ru ermu zi” (Wang Zheng and the Xi-Ru ermu zi), Huaibei Shifan Daxue xuebao (zhexue-, shehui kexue ban) 32, no. 6 (2011): 23–9; Tan Huiying, “Xi-Ru ermu zi” yuanliu bianxi (Examination of the origins of the Xi-Ru ermu zi) (Beijing: Waiyu jiaoxue yu yanjiu chubanshe, 2008), 23; Shen-Yi Luo, “Les premiers systèmes de notation alphabétique utilisés dans les études de phonologie chinoise,” in Edward J. Malatesta and Yves Raguin, eds., Succès et échecs de la rencontre Chine et Occident du XVIe au XXe siècle (San Francisco: Ricci Institute, 1993), 191–200.
53 Nicolas Trigault [Jin Nige], Xi-Ru ermu zi (Western classicists’ resources for the ears and eyes), red. Lü Weiqi, with Wang Zheng, vol. 259, Xuxiu Siku quanshu: jingbu, facsimile of xylograph (1626; repr. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1995), yiyin shoupu:wenda:56a (577).
54 Trigault, Xi-Ru ermu zi, 58b–59a.
55 Trigault, Xi-Ru ermu zi, yiyin shoupu: wenda:57a–61b (577–9).
56 Huang Xueqing, “Xi-Ru ermu zi de fanqie gailiang” (Improvement of syllabic spelling in the Xi-Ru ermu zi), Guizhou Shifan xueyuan xuebao 31, no. 1 (2015): 32–3. Huang gives 60% but includes the nonzero initial conventionally named xiǎo (and its originally voiced, later homophonous, counterpart xiá) in that number. Reduction to “around half” is my conjecture.
57 Zhao Yintang, Dengyun yuanliu, 223–6.
58 Fang Yizhi, Tongya (The comprehensive [Approaching of] elegance), facsimile of xylograph (1666; repr. Beijing: Zhongguo shudian, 1990), 50:30a (614); written in 1641.
59 Quoted in Luo Changpei, “‘Shengyun tongran ji’ can'gao ba” (Note on what remains of the draft of “Shengyun tongran ji”), in Luo Changpei wenji, vol. 8 (1929; repr. Jinan: Shandong jiaoyu chubanshe, 2008), 111.
60 Peter T. Daniels, “The Study of Writing Systems,” in Peter T. Daniels and William Bright, eds., The World's Writing Systems (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), 4.
61 Mårten Söderblom Saarela, “The Manchu Script and Information Management: Some Aspects of Qing China's Great Encounter with Alphabetic Literacy,” in Benjamin A. Elman, ed., Rethinking East Asian Languages, Vernaculars, and Literacies, 1000–1919 (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 173–7.
62 Zhao Shaoji, Zhuoan yunwu (Phonological realizations from the clumsy man's hut), vol. 257, Xuxiu Siku quanshu: jingbu, facsimile of chirograph (1674; repr. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1995), 650. Zhao Yintang, “Qingchu shenyin jia Zhao Shaoji jiqi gongxian” (Early Qing phonetician Zhao Shaoji and his contributions), Furen xuezhi 3, no. 2 (1932): 10. A Manchu influence is suggested in Li Xinkui, Hanyu dengyun xue (Chinese rhyme-table studies) (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1983), 93.
63 Liu Xianting, “Guangyang zaji (youguan yuwen ge tiao zhailu)” (Guangyang miscellany [excerpts on language and script]), in Wenzi gaige chubanshe, ed., Liu Xianting (Beijing: Wenzi gaige chubanshe, 1957), 37–9; excerpted passages written 1690–1695.
64 Xiong Shibo, Dengqie yuansheng (Fundamental sounds, spelled and arranged in grades), 4 vols., xylograph (Shangyou Tang, 1709), National Taiwan Normal University Library, 8:Yue ‘Ermu zi’:13b–14a.
65 Xiong, Dengqie yuansheng, 8:Yue ‘Qingshu zitou’:5b.
66 Luo Changpei, “Wang Lansheng yu Yinyun chanwei” (Wang Lansheng and the Yinyun chanwei), in Luo Changpei wenji, vol. 8, 430–63; cf. Lin Qingxun, “Yinyun chanwei” yanjiu (Research on the Yinyun chanwei) (Taipei: Taiwan xuesheng shuju, 1988), 2–19.
67 Li Guangdi, Rongcun quanji (Complete collection from Banyan Village), vol. 160, Qingdai shiwenji huibian, facsimile of xylograph (1736; repr. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2009), 20:17a; written before 1718.
68 Li, Rongcun quanji, 20:17a.
69 Li, Rongcun quanji, 20:18a.
70 Li, Rongcun quanji, 29:22a–b.
71 Li Guangdi and Wang Lansheng, Qinding yinyun chanwei (Imperially authorized elucidation of the subtleties of phonology), in Wenyuan Ge Siku quanshu, chirograph (1726; repr. Beijing: Wuying dian, 1782), digitized, fanli:1b.
72 Li and Wang, Qinding yinyun chanwei, fanli:7b. Other examples in Lin, “Yinyun chanwei” yanjiu, 24. On development of f- in Chinese (no reference to the dictionary), see Edwin G. Pulleyblank, “Dentilabialization in Middle Chinese,” in John McCoy and Timothy Light, eds., Contributions to Sino-Tibetan Studies (Leiden: Brill, 1986), 345–64.
73 11.6%. Lin, “Yinyun chanwei” yanjiu, 56.
74 Li and Mai, Yunxue guji shuyao, 141.
75 Du-si-de, Huangzhong tongyun (Rhymes to be used with the yellow bell tonic), vol. 185, Siku quanshu cunmu congshu: jingbu, facsimile of xylograph (1753; repr. Jinan: Qilu shushe, 2001), juan xia:24a (755).
76 Tsu, Sound and Script, 38.
77 Qinding tongwen yuntong (Imperially authorized rhyme systems in standard script), by Yun-lu, vol. 723, Gugong zhenben congkan, facsimile of xylograph (1750; repr. Haikou: Hainan chubanshe, 2001), zouyi:2a.
78 Qinding tongwen yuntong, zouyi:4a.
79 Yuzhi zengding Qingwen jian (Imperially commissioned mirror of the Manchu language, expanded and emended), ed. Fu-heng, xylograph (Beijing: Wuying dian, 1771–3).
80 Studied in Ochiai Morikazu, “Zōtei Shinbunkan jūni jitō no sangō setsuon” (Tripartite spellings of 12 heads in Zengding Qingwen jian), Shizuoka Daigaku Kyōyōbu kenkyū hōkoku 20, no. 2 (1985): 75–99.
81 Yuzhi Manzhu, Menggu, Hanzi sanhe qieyin Qingwen jian (Imperially commissioned Manchu, Mongol, and Chinese script mirror with tripartite spellings), xylograph (Beijing: Wuying dian, 1780).
82 Yuzhi zengding Qingwen jian, original printed edition (unpaginated), juwan juwe uju:at et it; upper characters are here transposed for clarity.
83 Martin J. Heijdra, “Typography and the East Asian Book: The Evolution of the Grid,” in Perry Link, ed., The Scholar's Mind: Essays in Honor of Frederick W. Mote (Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 2009), 115–46.
84 Joseph Edkins, A Grammar of the Chinese Colloquial Language Commonly Called the Mandarin Dialect, 2nd ed. (Shanghai: Presbyterian Mission Press, 1864), part 1, 79.
85 E.g., Ling Shaowen and Chen Kechen, eds., Xinke Qingshu quanji (Complete collection of Manchu writing, newly cut), xylograph (Nanjing: Tingsong lou, 1699), vol. 5 (“Man-Han qieyao zayan”/manju nikan-i oyonggo gisun).
86 Hi Hiya, annot., Man-Han quanzi shier tou (The 12 heads in complete Manchu and Chinese characters), xylograph (Beijing: Hongwen ge, 1733), xu.
87 Walter Fuchs, “Miszellen zu mandjurisch-chinesischen Drucken,” Zentralasiatische Studien 5 (1971): 123.
88 Chunhua, “Qianlong chixiu Qinding Qing-Han duiyin zishi ji qi yingxiang” (Qianlong's imperially edited Qinding Qing-Han duiyin zishi and its influence), Lishi dang'an, no. 1 (2008): 54–9.
89 Shi-jin [Shi Linting], Qingyin bian (Distinguishing clear sounds), with afterword by Tai-guang, 1837 xylograph based on a text written in 1737, Fu Ssu-Nien Library, Academia Sinica, Taipei; Cunzhi Tang, Yuanyin zheng kao (Rectification and examination of rounded sounds), ed. Wen-tong, xylograph (1743; repr. Beijing: Sanhuai tang, 1830).
90 Yu-en, Yinyun fengyuan (Reaching the source of phonology), ed. Xi-en, vol. 258, Xuxiu Siku quanshu: jingbu, facsimile of xylograph (1840; repr. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1995), xu:3a–b.
91 Yu-en, Yinyun fengyuan, yuanji:2a (700), 5a (701).
92 Mårten Söderblom Saarela, “Shape and Sound: Organizing Dictionaries in Late Imperial China,” Dictionaries, no. 35 (2014): 195–97.
93 Elisabeth Kaske, The Politics of Language in Chinese Education, 1895–1919 (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 51.
94 Idzun, Zhengyin qieyun zhizhang (Correct pronunciation and spelled rhymes made easy), vol. 258, Xuxiu Siku quanshu: jingbu, facsimile of xylograph (1860; repr. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1995), youxu:3a–b; written in 1857.
95 Zhi-kuan and Pei-kuan, Duiyin jizi (Collection of characters for transcription), 2 vols., xylograph (Jingzhou: Jingzhou fanyi zongxue, 1890), copy at Capital Library, Beijing.
96 Wang Erkang, “Guanyu Hanzi gaige yundong de lishi qianzou yu jiemu ren” (On preludes to the Chinese-character-reform movement and its inaugurators), Xiamen daxue xuebao, no. 2 (1964): 87–98; Wang Erkang, “Zaoqi Hanzi gaige yundong yu Minnan fangyan” (Early Chinese-character-reform movement and Southern Min dialects), Zhongguo yuwen, no. 4 (1983): 290–7.
97 Aoki Masaru et al., Dui Zhongguo de xiangchou (Homesick for China), trans. Dai Yan and He Shengsui (Shanghai: Fudan daxue chubanshe, 2012), 91; Li Jinxi, Guoyu yundong shigang (History of the national language movement), new ed. (1934; repr. Beijing: Shangwu yinshuguan, 2011), 101; pace W. K. Cheng, “Enlightenment and Unity: Language Reformism in Late Qing China,” Modern Asian Studies 35, no. 2 (2001): 490.
98 Wang Zhao, Chongkan guanhua hesheng zimu xulie ji guanxi lunshuo (Mandarin initials and finals in combined sounds, reprinted with their arrangement and relations discussed and explained), xylograph (1903), held at Sun Yat-sen Library, Guangzhou, call no. 27387, 5b.
99 Zhang Taiyan, “Bo Kang Youwei lun geming shu” (Refutation of Kang Youwei's letter on revolution), in Taiyan wenlu chubian, facsimile of xylograph (1903; repr. Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 1992), 21a.
100 Wang, Chongkan guanhua hesheng zimu, 11b.
101 C. W. Kastler, “Die neuesten Versuche zur Vereinfachung der chinesischen Schriftzeichen,” Mitteilungen des Seminars für Orientalische Sprachen zu Berlin: Erste Abteilung 12 (1909): 207.
102 Qian Xuantong, “Guoyin yan'ge liu jiang” (Six lectures on development of the national pronunciation), in Qian Xuantong wenji, vol. 5 (1920; repr. Beijing: Zhongguo renmin daxue chubanshe, 1999), 77.
103 Li, Guoyu yundong shigang, 113, 131–2.
104 Lao Naixuan, “Dengyun yide” bupian (Complementary chapters to Dengyun yide), Juzhai suo xue, xylograph (Laishui Yuzhai, 1913), xu:1a.
105 Warburton, Divine Legation of Moses, vol. 2, 454 (book 4, section 4).
106 Erik Iversen, The Myth of Egypt and Its Hieroglyphs in European Tradition (1961; repr. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), 41.
107 Jan Assmann, Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997), 100–2.
108 Urs App, The Birth of Orientalism (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010), 2–3.
109 Alleton, “L’écriture chinoise,” 277–8.
110 Porter, Ideographia, 39.
111 Joseph W. Esherick, “How the Qing Became China,” in Joseph Esherick, Hasan Kayalı, and Eric Van Young, eds., Empire to Nation: Historical Perspectives on the Making of the Modern World (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2006), 229–59.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Mårten Söderblom Saarela
Mårten Söderblom Saarela is a postdoctoral fellow at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science in Berlin. He received his PhD from Princeton University in 2015.