Page:Essays on the Chinese Language (1889).djvu/90

76 and phrases in use among literary men or derived from early classical writings. The compilers adopted the "P'ing-shui" rhyme-finals, with the exception of one which they regarded as a duplicate. In addition to the phrases from the orthodox literature, the "Yun-fu" gives also huo-t'ao (活套), that is, quotations in common use but of unknown origin; it has also proper names and phrases derived from Buddhist writings. The work was intended to be of practical utility to students, and its continued popularity with them testifies to the success of the intention. This popularity it has maintained notwithstanding the severe criticisms which have been passed on it by succeeding authors. According to one of these the compilers of the "Yun-fu" so ill-treated the "Shuo-wên" and the "Yun-liao" of Liu Yuan, that the latter and Hsü Shên must be crying for vengeance in Hades. The criticisms of these writers are apparently directed chiefly against the treatise in its early form when published in 1314. The Ming editor supplied many of the defects and corrected the errors which detracted from the value of that edition.

Another etymological treatise of the 14th century is the Chung-yuan-yin-yun (中原音韻), a Vocabulary of the Mandarin or standard language. The authorship of this book is ascribed to Chou Tê-ch'ing (周德清), a native of Kao-an (高安) in Kiangsi. There seems, however, to have been an early form of the work, with the title "Chung-yuan-ya-yin" (中原雅音), the Elegant words of China, that is, the Court language. In order to distinguish Chou's edition from this, the term "Kao-an" was prefixed to the former. As the work is now found in shops and libraries it is a small treatise in two chuan, and edited by two scholars of the Ming period. It gives a number of characters arranged under nineteen pairs of finals and four tones. The latter are Yin-p'ing, yang-p'ing, shang, and ch'ü. This distinction of a yin and a yang p'ing was not in the first form of the book. It was due to a scholar named Hsiao (蕭), and was not published until 1324, after Hsiao's death. This distinction is often said to