Shang Oracle-bone Inscriptions Research Articles

Executive Qi in Shang Oracle-Bone Inscriptions

Executive Qi in Shang Oracle-Bone Inscriptions

The origins of specialized pottery and diverse alcohol fermentation techniques in Early Neolithic China

In China, pottery containers first appeared about 20000 cal. BP, and became diverse in form during the Early Neolithic (9000-7000 cal. BP), signaling the emergence of functionally specialized vessels. China is also well-known for its early development of alcohol production. However, few studies have focused on the connections between the two technologies. Based on the analysis of residues (starch, phytolith, and fungus) adhering to pottery from two Early Neolithic sites in north China, here we demonstrate that three material changes occurring in the Early Neolithic signal innovation of specialized alcoholic making known in north China: (i) the spread of cereal domestication (millet and rice), (ii) the emergence of dedicated pottery types, particularly globular jars as liquid storage vessels, and (iii) the development of cereal-based alcohol production with at least two fermentation methods: the use of cereal malts and the use of moldy grain and herbs (qu and caoqu) as starters. The latter method was arguably a unique invention initiated in China, and our findings account for the earliest known examples of this technique. The major ingredients include broomcorn millet, Triticeae grasses, Job's tears, rice, beans, snake gourd root, ginger, possible yam and lily, and other plants, some probably with medicinal properties (e.g., ginger). Alcoholic beverages made with these methods were named li, jiu, and chang in ancient texts, first recorded in the Shang oracle-bone inscriptions (ca. 3200 cal. BP); our findings have revealed a much deeper history of these diverse fermentation technologies in China.

Some New Insight into the Historical Source of the Chinese Copula Shì/*deʔ 是 (關於繫詞“是”歷史來源的新思考)

The present study is mainly concerned with the nature of the demonstrative shì 是 as the historical source of the copula shì. Tracing the development of shì in bronze inscriptions from the 11th to 3rd centuries bce and comparing the patterns of change against two purportedly contemporary texts, Shī jīng 詩經 and Shàng shū 尚書, it argues that shì is not a typical demonstrative in origin because it only occurs pronominally and is strongly associated with the structural expression of focus in its early stage of development. On the basis of these observations, shì is analyzed as a special demonstrative that combines anaphoric and focalizing force to highlight and contrast a constituent that has been introduced into the discourse. It is then compared with the expressions wéi zhī 唯之and huì zhī 惠之 with the same function in the Shang oracle-bone inscriptions (13th–11th centuries bce). The investigation of whether shì is derived from wéi zhī only finds evidence indicating a morphological relationship with zhī, while the etymological link with wéi remains speculative. In conclusion, this study claims that the focalizing force of shì is important in answering the question why it is the only demonstrative evolving into a copula. The observed development of shì confirms that the origination of copulas is often related to the morphosyntactic expression of features of information structure. 本文擬對指示詞“是”的最初歷史來源進行探討。根據學界近年對指示詞的研究成果，本文提出“是”很可能在產生之初即具有促發其向繫詞轉變的特徵。通過對西周至春秋戰國金文資料中指示詞“是”的全部用例的研讀以及與《詩經》、《尚書》中用例的比照，本文發現“是”的早期用法均為復指，且僅出現在焦點位置，其產生與商代甲骨語言中獨有的“唯／惠之”的表達方式大有關聯，極大可能是“之”在焦點位置的形態變體。“是”以及“唯／惠之”在語篇中具有同樣的復指及聚焦的雙重功能，是焦點的句法表達手段，反映了繫詞產生與焦點的句法表達之間的密切聯繫。

The Prehistory of the “Sino-Barbarian Dichotomy”: The Awareness of “Self” and “Others” during the Shang and Zhou Periods

This paper studies the prehistory of the “Sino-barbarian dichotomy” which, many scholars believe, seems to have been created in the Spring and Autumn period. The widespread Erligang ritual bronzes began to show the homogenized Chinese cultural representation during the early Shang period. In the late Shang oracle bone inscriptions, the Shang distinguished themselves from the other marked by the suffix fang 方. But the fang was not a fixed concept, as many fang polities appear to have developed flexible relationships with the Shang. BR Unlike the Shang, the Western Zhou, originally one of the fang polities of the Shang, seems to have invented more inclusive concept of bang 邦 which coexisted with the Zhou under the Mandate of Heaven (tianming 天命). Locating in the center of the numerous bang, the Zhoubang 周邦 distinguished themselves from the other bang (tabang 他邦). But the numerous other bangs were under the cosmology of the Zhou, as more peripheral polities adopted the Zhou style ritual bronzes. In addition to the ideological and political concept of the Zhoubang, Man Yi Rong Di 蠻夷戎狄 began to represent cultural and ethnic others in the Western Zhou period.

Agency in Ṛgveda Book 2: Comparative Examination and Philosophical Implications

This paper outlines observations concerning agency in Rgveda Book 2, which it compares to agency in Sumerian proverbs and wisdom literature and Shang oracle bone inscriptions. These observations indicate an affinity on important aspects of agency between the Rgveda 2 and Sumerian conceptions, on one hand, and a marked contrast with the outlook on agency that transpires from Shang oracle bone inscriptions, on the other hand. Rgveda 2 and Sumerian texts share a genetic conception of agency. Nevertheless, Rgveda 2 is distinctive in profiling a conception of agency that incorporates multiple determination, pluripotency, the explicit expression of universality, and mutual interaction. The paper will briefly explain these characteristics and their significance. All three conceptions of action, nevertheless, agree on one common feature: they do not present an inner driving power that brings about action. A broader implication of this study is that it is helpful to pay closer attention to generally under examined conceptions of agency, since they may reveal insights that are commonly overlooked.

Repetition in Shang Oracle Bone Inscriptions as Narrative

Repetition in Shang Oracle Bone Inscriptions as Narrative

The Origins of Chinese Writing: the Neolithic Evidence

In China, a number of signs from some Late Neolithic contexts suggest that recoding activities were well developed before Chinese writing became widespread during the Shang period. Archaeological and palaeographic evidence indicates that mature writing is likely to have evolved from these earlier signing systems as a result of the increasing social and political complexity of the societies of the Late Neolithic. This article analyses three Late Neolithic signing systems that may have led to the mature Chinese writing of the Shang oracle bone inscriptions, and argues that non-linguistic visual signing played a role in the emergence of writing systems.

The Graph for the Word “Time” in the Shang Oracle-Bone Inscriptions

The Graph for the Word “Time” in the Shang Oracle-Bone Inscriptions

TOWARDS A MORE RIGOROUS METHODOLOGY OF DECIPHERING ORACLE-BONE INSCRIPTIONS

This is a review article of Several of Oracular Inscriptions in Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, [and] Belgzum by Fr. Jean A. Lefeuvre.l The present volume forms a companion volume to the of Oracular Inscriptions in France (Taipei, Paris, San Francisco: Ricci Institute, 1985; hereafter French Collections), also authored by Fr. Lefeuvre. He deserves a great deal of credit for making the major collections of Shang oracle-bone inscriptions a+zailable to scholars.2 Since the book hereafter European Collections is divided into two parts, Catalogue and Commentary,3 I will divide this review in the same manner. In the first part I begin by providing a review of the Catalogue, and then address what ought to be a more important topic in the field, the methodology of reading the inscriptions. In the second part, I will attempt to establish some

The Early China Forum An Examination of Whether the Charges in Shang Oracle-Bone Inscriptions are Questions*

Oracle-bone scholars have long uniformly read the charges (i.e., the portion that mentions the event being divined) of Shang oracle-bone inscriptions as questions. Since the 1970's, many foreign oracle-bone scholars have proposed a new view that the charges are never questions, or at least are generally not questions. Whether or not the charges are actually questions is a very important question bearing not only on oracle bone studies, but also on research on ancient divination and on ancient Chinese grammar. Based on an examination of a great number of Shang oracle-bone inscriptions, the author of this essay believes that charges that can now be determined to be questions are mainly those choice-type charges in early inscriptions that contain the final particles yi and zhi, and true-or-false type charges that contain yi. Charges of the type “V bu V” (such as “rain not rain” [yu bu yu]) and “V bu,” regarded by many as choice-type questions, are actually comprised of the charge and a verification or use notation, the “bu V” being a verification and the “bu” being either a verification or a use notation (similar to the notation bu yong, “do not use”). Charges that can now be determined not to be questions are mainly in those inscriptions with complex charges, such as “this *spring the king ought not ally with Wang Cheng to attack Xia Wei, (for if he does) he will not receive divine assistance” (jin ?chun wang wu bi Wang Cheng fa Xia? Wei, fu qi shou you you, and “On ren we ought not hunt, (for if we do) it will rain” (ren wu tian, qi yu), the syntax of which shows that they cannot be questions.

The “Question” Question*

When we read Shang oracle-bone inscriptions, we should distinguish between what the diviner is saying (in the “charge,” mingci) and what he is doing in the whole divination rite. What he is doing is not always seeking information; and even when he is doing this, what he says is usually not a question. This paper offers various arguments and examples to show this. For example, Li Xueqin's research proves that the oracle language possessed grammatical forms, such as final particles and final negatives, for marking a sentence as a question. Therefore, the first assumption should be that when a diviner does not use these forms, he does not intend a sentence to be understood as a question. And when two sentences in the same inscription — e.g., the charge and the prognostication — are alike in form (both of them being without final negatives or interrogative particles), it is a mistake to construe one of them as a question and the other as a statement.

19. Noun Phrases in the Oracle-Bone Inscriptions

ABSTRACTWhile nouns and noun phrases are only one aspect of the Shang language, they are an important constituent element which, together with a verb in a sentence, occur as topic, subject, direct or indirect object, or object of a particle. In order to have a better understanding of the inscriptional language as a whole, a good understanding of the noun phrases is desirable.This paper undertakes to present a systematic account of noun phrases in the Shang oracle-bone inscriptions. The examples are taken from an entire corpus of inscriptions from Period I to Period V, paying no particular attention to diachronic developments. Some diachronic descriptions -- changes over time in construction and meaning -- are also cited in notes whenever they are considered relevant.The main concern of the paper is two-fold: noun-phrase formations and elucidation of their intended meanings. A number of new interpretations, particularly of nouns, is presented in the “Notes” which are integral to the descriptions. The paper also, necessarily, pays close attention to the use of such conjunctive particles as you, ta, and yu.

The early archaic chinese word yu in the Shang oracle-bone inscriptions : word-family, etymology, grammar, semantics and sacrifice

The early archaic chinese word yu in the Shang oracle-bone inscriptions : word-family, etymology, grammar, semantics and sacrifice

Decipherment of the Word Yu in the Shang Oracle Bone Inscriptions and in Pre-Classical Chinese

The recent attempt by Professor David S. Nivison to show that (= yu )/ yu in early Archaic Chinese functioned as a “pronominal” word encourages one to think that the language of bone inscriptions, though arcane and difficult, is, after all, manageable, and that it may be used to understand the later, more evolved language, rather than the other way around. The various arguments in his theory are both well presented and accompanied by rich and meticulous documentation from inscriptions and from pre-Classical texts.Nivison takes the word yu as a pronominal adjective, variously rendered, according to the context, as “his,” “her,” “our,” “your,” “their,” “the,” “there,” “some,” “of it/them,” “about it,” and “in this matter.” These context-sensitive renditions are possible because yu is construed as a word whose grammatical functions, rather than its fixed meaning, are realized in these various readings. One major contribution of Nivison is that he has shown that the word yu, in certain contexts, functioned attributively. Whether it also did or did not function “pronominally” is the topic with which this paper is concerned primarily.