Encyclopedia of Chinese Language and Linguistics

Volume 3
Men–Ser

For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV

 General Editor
Rint Sybesma
(Leiden University)

Associate Editors
Wolfgang Behr
(University of Zurich)
Yueguo Gu
(Chinese Academy of Social Sciences)
Zev Handel
(University of Washington)
C.-T. James Huang
(Harvard University)
James Myers
(National Chung Cheng University)

For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV

 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF
CHINESE LANGUAGE
AND LINGUISTICS
Volume 3
Men–Ser

General Editor
Rint Sybesma

Associate Editors
Wolfgang Behr
Yueguo Gu
Zev Handel
C.-T. James Huang
James Myers

LEIDEN • BOSTON
2017

For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV

Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface.

ISBN 978-90-04-18643-9 (hardback, set)

ISBN 978-90-04-26227-0 (hardback, vol. 1)
ISBN 978-90-04-26223-2 (hardback, vol. 2)
ISBN 978-90-04-26224-9 (hardback, vol. 3)
ISBN 978-90-04-26225-6 (hardback, vol. 4)
ISBN 978-90-04-26226-3 (hardback, vol. 5)

Copyright 2017 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Nijhofff, Global Oriental and Hotei Publishing.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or
otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for
internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid
directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.

This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV

609 Rime Tables and Rime Table Studies
The information above is summarized in the
chart.
Polysemy in both traditional Chinese phono-
logical terminology and the English words that
have been used to render those terms has the
potential to create confusion and ambiguity in
writing. While a standardization of English ren-
derings based on meaning (rather than on the
particular Chinese term being translated) might
be desirable, the current profusion of English
terms, many of which are already well estab-
lished among diffferent schools of scholars, make
the prospects for such a standardization unlikely
in the near future.
Zev Handel
Rime Tables and Rime Table Studies
Rime tables (děngyùntú 等韻圖 ‘graded rime
syllabary tables’) embody a traditional system
for representing the phonology of Chinese that
has had a deep and lasting influence on the
study of historical Chinese linguistics. The rime
tables have provided many of the basic concep-
tual tools and terminology used in the theory
and methodology of Chinese phonology even
today, as well as presented scholars with a rich
source of evidence about the nature of Chi-
nese pronunciation and its evolution from the
earliest times to the present. The tradition of
using the rime tables in Chinese phonological
research, as well as the study and research of
the tables themselves in the present and in the
past has come to be called děngyùnxué 等韻學
‘rime table studies’. The rime tables are distinct
from the → yùnshū 韻書 ‘rime dictionaries’ in
that they are not dictionaries that provide exten-
sive inventories of Chinese characters, or mor-
phemes, but rather are fairly concise tabular
syllabaries that present one representative graph
per syllable type within the framework of the
phonology they represent.
The collective name of these syllabary tables,
děngyùntú, is derived from a four-part division of
each rime (a collection of rhyming characters) in
the table grids of the rime tables in the earliest
mode of the tradition. In those tables, charac-
ters representing the syllables of the rimes (one
For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV
character for each existing combination of ini-
tial, fijinal, and tone) are distributed among four
rows called děng 等 ‘grades, ranks, divisions’,
within which each character is also placed into
a column corresponding to the initial of the
syllable it represents. The interpretation of the
exact phonetic or phonological basis of the děng
is problematic. (→ Děng, → Historical Phonology,
and → Middle Chinese Phonology for explication
of the phonological and phonetic basis for the
děng. Further discussion can also be found in
Branner 2006a and Ferlus 2009.) Most important
to note is that the modern study of Chinese pho-
nology has developed two notions of děng that
should be kept distinct: that of rank, which is
the number of the line on which a syllable actu-
ally occurs on a rime table, and that of division,
which more generally refers to the category to
which whole rimes belong in the phonological
system (Norman 2006).
The rime tables were originally developed as
keys to help interpret information in the rime
books. The tables served as practical tools for
the interpretation of the two-character pronun-
ciation glosses in the yùnshū known as → fǎnqiè
反切, which make use of principles of rhyme
and alliteration (diéyùn 迭韻 and shuāngshēng
雙聲 respectively) to specify the pronunciation
of a syllable. Specifijically, the rime tables origi-
nated in the late Táng or early Sòng dynasties
as attempts to explicate the fǎnqiè of the Qièyùn
切韻 (preface 601) rime book tradition and learn
how to correctly pronounce characters within
its conventions (Lǐ 1983:44). The Chinese lan-
guage had changed substantially since the time
of the compilation of the Qièyùn and as a result
the fǎnqiè often proved highly problematic to
interpret in late Táng and Sòng pronunciation.
The tables served as keys to help overcome those
problems. The earliest rime tables are closely
associated with Buddhist scholars who likely
used the yùnshū for guidance on the correct
pronunciation of characters in religious texts
(Lǐ 1983:45–49).
Specifijic methodologies were developed for
using the rime tables in the interpretation of
fǎnqiè. These methodologies became known as
ménfǎ 門法 ‘interpretive methods’, and were
often described in prefaces and appendices that
accompanied the tables. Over time the ménfǎ
 rime tables and rime table studies
came to serve a critical role in untangling vari-
ous inconsistencies that had arisen between the
fǎnqiè, the yùnshū, the yùntú, and the languages
of the users, due to their diffferent periods of
origin and sound changes that had inevitably
occurred between them (Lǐ 1983:124–153; Gěng
1992:94–97; Coblin 2006).
One problem in interpreting the fǎnqiè was
with regard to the syllable initial (the onset).
Homophonic sets of syllables with the same
initial onset were grouped together in the rime
books between little circles called niǔ 紐 ‘but-
ton’. But aside from the initial speller in the
fǎnqiè formula and the niǔ grouping, initials
were not explicitly identifijied in the yùnshū and
thus often proved most vexing to construe. One
solution that had arisen early on was the prac-
tice of zhùniǔzì 助紐字 ‘characters to assist in
the apprehension of initials under a niǔ’, which
were pairs of syllables that alliterated with each
other and with a given initial speller in a fǎnqiè
formula. These pairs were memorized and then
matched to, and recited together with, the fǎnqiè
to come up with the pronunciation of the glossed
syllable. Eventually this practice led to the inde-
pendent isolation of specifijic initials, called zìmǔ
字母 in the tradition, each of which was then
given a name that was itself also an exemplar
syllable having the same initial as that it was
intended to represent. These zìmǔ were then
adopted for use in the rime tables (Lǐ 1983:31).
At about the same time that the zìmǔ were
being worked out, various notions from the San-
skrit tradition of phonological analysis appear
to have made their way into China with the
effforts to translate Buddhist texts into Chinese
(Branner 2006c:7–11). These notions provided
ways to classify the individual initials more spe-
cifijically, with regard to their place and manner
of articulation. The early rime table compilers
adopted these notions and used them to label
each of the zìmǔ categories in their system. The
Yùnjìng 韻鏡, a rime table of unknown author-
ship compiled in the early 11th century, included
seven place categories labeled chúnyīn 唇音 ‘lip
sound’, shéyīn 舌音 ‘tongue sound’, chǐyīn 齒音
‘tooth sound’, yáyīn 牙音 ‘molar sound’, hóuyīn
喉音 ‘throat sound’, bànshéyīn 半舌音 ‘partial
tongue sound’, and bànchǐyīn 半齒音 ‘partial
tooth sound’, and listed four manner categories
For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV
610
labeled qīng 清 ‘clear’, cìqīng 次清 ‘semi-clear’,
zhuó 濁 ‘turbid’, and qīngzhuó 清濁 ‘clear-
turbid’. Altogether 36 initials were identifijied in
the Yùnjìng and described within this scheme.
(→ Traditional Chinese Phonology for a list of the
Sòng rime table initials with an explanation and
interpretation of these categories as well as the
other terms mentioned below.) The specifijicity
of these descriptive categories was undoubtedly
of immense help to those consulting the rime
tables for assistance with the identifijication of
character readings.
In addition to the classifijication of rimes by
děng and place and manner descriptions for ini-
tials, other innovations that the early rime tables
brought to the description of pronunciation for
features not revealed by the fǎnqiè of the rime
books included: kāikǒu 開口 ‘open mouth’ and
hékǒu 合口 ‘gathered mouth’, nèizhuǎn 內轉
‘inner turning’ and wàizhuǎn 外轉 ‘outer turn-
ing’. Each of these pairs of terms are assumed to
refer to contrasting syllable features, although
the precise phonetic interpretation of each is a
matter of dispute. A further division of the rimes
into shè 攝 ‘groupings’ of rimes, probably on the
basis of shared vocalic features and syllable coda
type, was fijirst made in the late Sòng dynasty
by the Sìshēng děngzǐ 四聲等子 of anonymous
authorship (Lǐ 1983:17, 179–180; Coblin 2006:133).
The result of these innovations and their adop-
tion into the rime table schemes was a formal
system of analysis and representation that is
at once highly abstract as well as apparently
descriptively exact. Yet at the same time there was
a certain elasticity to the categories that allowed
for interpretation that could vary by speaker
according to their dialect background and era.
The Sòng period rime tables are generally the
most studied and cited, as they shed the great-
est light on Qièyùn phonology and the Middle
Chinese (MC) phonological system embodied
therein. The most well-known of the early rime
tables include Yùnjìng 韻鏡 [Mirror of rimes]
(published in 1161) edited by Zhāng Línzhī
張麟之 (c. 1130–after 1203); Qīyīnlüè 七音略
[Outline of the seven sounds] (published c. 1162)
compiled by Zhèng Qiáo 鄭樵 (1103–1162);
Sìshēng děngzǐ 四聲等子 [Four tones and rank-
ings] (probably dating from the Southern Sòng
1127–1279), of unknown authorship; Xīnbiān
611 rime tables and rime table studies
jīngshǐ zhèngyīn Qièyùn zhǐnán 新編經史正音
切韻指南, or simply Qièyùn zhǐnán 切韻指南
[Guide to the Qièyùn] (completed in 1336) attrib-
uted to Liú Jiàn 劉鑒 of the Yuán (1271–1368); and
Qièyùn zhǐzhǎng tú 切韻指掌圖 [Palm guide to
the Qièyùn] (preface dated 1203) of unknown
authorship, though it has been misattributed to
Sīmǎ Guāng 司馬光 (1019–1086). While the early
rime tables vary in their exact format and details
of their structure, they all share essentially the
same interpretative framework.
To illustrate the rime table structure and ana-
lytical scheme, Figure 1 provides an example of
one table from the Qièyùn zhǐnán. The far right
column on the table identifijies it as zhēn-shè
臻攝, wài(zhuǎn) 外(傳), and hékǒu 合口. The
far left column identifijies the eight rimes covered
by this table, beginning with hún 魂 and ending
with shù 術. The top two rows identify the 36
initials by their traditional names, column-by-
column, starting with jiàn 見 on the right and
ending with rì 日 on the left. They are ordered
according to place of articulation then manner
of articulation. The following set of four rows
are fijirst-děng (rank 1) syllables, followed by four
rows for second-děng (rank 2) syllables, then
by four rows for third-děng (rank 3) syllables,
with the last four rows containing fourth-děng
(rank 4) syllables. Within děng sets, the four
rows represent the four tones from top to bot-
tom, píng 平, shǎng 上, qù 去, and rù 入. Thus
for example, the character in the sixth row of
the second column from the right, gǔ 骨 ‘bone’,
marked with a blue circle, is identifijied by the
table to be in the zhēn-shè (sharing main vowel
o or e and a dental consonant syllable coda),
in a hékǒu set of rimes (fijirst vowel is rounded),
under the fijirst děng (rank 1), in the rù tone
rime mò 沒 (Qièyùn/MC *mwot), with the initial
jiàn 見 (identifijied in the Qièyùn zhǐnán preface
as “qīng 清” and “yáyīn 牙音”, i.e., a voiceless
unaspirated velar *k), altogether thus represent-
ing the syllable *kwot (Qièyùn/MC follows Bax-
ter 1992). This can be compared to the Qièyùn
fǎnqiè for the graph: gǔ+hū 古忽切, Qièyùn/
MC *kuX+*xwot, which identifijies the initial
and fijinal within the contemporary phonology,
but provides no phonetic information. (→ Tradi-
tional Chinese Phonology for additional descrip-
tion of the basic layout of the early rime tables;
For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV
→ Historical Phonology and → Middle Chinese
Phonology also provide illustrative examples.)
The descriptive tools that the early rime tables
provided and the method of phonological analy-
sis they contained were adapted by succeeding
generations to describe and outline the pro-
nunciations of later period prestige varieties of
Chinese as well as contemporaneous dialects.
The Míng and Qīng dynasties, especially, saw
rime tables adopted for a wide variety of new
applications beyond the interpretation of tra-
ditional phonology, as well as innovations in
rime table layout and terminology. Most of these
innovations allowed rime tables to more accu-
rately present contemporary koiné or dialect
phonologies. Rime table compilers of the Míng
and Qīng often jettisoned the Qièyùn norms and
reassigned syllables to new (and often newly
named) initial, rime, or tone categories as nec-
essary for their purposes. They frequently also
freely devised their own fǎnqiè spellings to bet-
ter match and reflect the pronunciations of their
time and place, and even developed whole new
sets of initials and rimes.
For instance, in the Jiāotàiyùn 交泰韻 [Rimes
of mutual calm] by Lǚ Kūn 呂坤 (1536–1618)
of the late Míng, the syllable qíng 情 is glossed
with the fǎnqiè spelling ‘qī+yíng 戚迎’, which
perfectly renders the pronunciation in Manda-
rin (initial q- plus fijinal -íng yielding qíng). The
medieval fǎnqiè for qíng 情 is ‘jí+yíng 疾盈’,
which works for Middle Chinese but would yield
the incorrect reading jíng (or possibly /tsiŋ2/ in
early Mandarin). The fǎnqiè of the Jiāotàiyùn in
this way turns out to provide a fairly accurate
representation of Lǚ Kūn’s own Hénán dialect
(Lǐ and Mài 1993:240).
In another example of later innovation, the
Qīng scholar Lǐ Rǔzhēn 李汝珍 (c. 1763–1830)
set up an idiosyncratic set of 33 initials in his
Lǐ shì yīnjiàn 李氏音鑑 [Mr. Lǐ’s discriminat-
ing appraisal of rimes] (completed 1810), a rime
table that represents Mandarin pronunciation
of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. In his
system there is a series of initials that indicates
what modern scholars would identify as a high-
front vowel in the medial or main vowel of the
fijinal. For example, Lǐ lists both kū 枯 /kʻu1/ and
qū 區 /kʻy1/ (or /tɕʻy1/) under the same rime,
rime #4 zhū 珠 (representing /u/), and the vowel
 rime tables and rime table studies 612

Figure 1. Rime table section from the Qièyùn zhǐnán 切韵指南 (from Yù yuán cóngshū 芋園叢書,
ctext.org scanned facsimile edition in one juàn 卷, 19a–20a).

contrast is assigned to the initials: kōng 空 (for
kū 枯), and qī 溪 (for qū 區), with the vowel /i/ of
the latter to be interpreted as fronting the vowel
of the rime, from /u/ to /y/. Similarly, both jiāo
椒 /tsiau1/ and zāo 糟 /tsau1/ are listed under Lǐ’s
rime #5, zhāo 招 (representing /au/), with the
medial /i/ of jiāo 椒 indicated by the initial jiǔ 酒
/tsiou3/, in contrast to zāo 糟, which has initial
zuì 醉 /tsuei5/.
This organization of the initials has the advan-
tage of highlighting what came to be known as
the jiān-tuán 尖團 ‘sharp-round’ distinction that
was a prominent feature of the Mandarin koiné
(known as → Guānhuà 官話) that Lǐ Rǔzhēn
was portraying: jiǔ 酒 is a jiān initial (a dental
afffricate before a high-front vowel) and qī 溪
is tuán (a palatalized initial before a high-front
vowel derived from an original velar). But other
than through the use of diffferent initials, Lǐ did
not explicitly identify the jiān-tuán distinction.
Both jiǔ 酒 and qī 溪 fell into a category he called
“xì 細 ‘fijine’ ”, roughly indicating that they had a
high-front medial or main vowel (i.e., /i/ or /y/),
in opposition to the initials zuì 醉 and kōng 空,
which he called “cū 粗 ‘coarse’ ”, roughly indicat-
ing that they were without high-front medial or
main vowel (Lǐ 1983:392). (→ Mandarin, Varieties
of, for a description of the jiān-tuán distinction.)
Further highlighting the prominence he gave to
features of the initials, Lǐ Rǔzhēn’s rime table
also is primarily organized by initial, and then
by rime and tone (rime and tone make up the
rows and columns, respectively, on each initial’s
table), difffering from the Sòng rime tables that
are organized by rime fijirst then by initial and
tone.
Among the most important Míng-Qīng inno-
vations was the identifijication of the sìhū 四
呼 ‘four types of rime onset’, now known as
kāikǒu ‘open mouth’ (having non-close, non-
round vocalic onset, as in a Mandarin syllable
like gan /kan/), hékǒu ‘gathered mouth’ (having
back round vocalic onset, as in guan /kuan/),
qíchǐ 齊齒 ‘even tooth’ (having close, front non-
round vocalic onset, as in jian /tɕiɛn/), and
cuōkǒu 撮口 ‘puckered mouth’ (having close,
front round vocalic onset, as in juan /tɕyɛn/), a
four-part division of useful relevance in modern
dialect phonology that is fortuitously reminis-
cent of the four-way division of the děng. As rime
table compilers adopted these categories, they
often left behind the traditional concept of děng,
which was not readily applicable to the lan-
guages they were describing. For example, the
Yuányùnpǔ 元韻譜 [Manual of original rimes]
by Qiáo Zhōnghé 喬中和 (preface 1611) aban-
dons the traditional děng altogether and divides
rimes into four sets that correspond neatly with
the sìhū using his own terminology: gānglǜ 剛律
‘hard tone’, gānglǚ 剛吕 ‘hard pitch’, róulǜ 柔
律 ‘soft tone’, róulǚ 柔吕 ‘soft pitch’ (Lǐ and Mài
1993:245). Over the years rime table compilers
came up with a great variety of terms to identify
the sìhū. The set of names adopted as the modern

For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV

613 rime tables and rime table studies
standard (given above) appears to have been fijirst
used with an assortment of several other terms
describing syllable onset in the Yùnfǎ zhítú 韻
法直圖 [Rime methodology in straightforward
tables] published in 1612 of anonymous author-
ship. This was whittled down to the current four
by Pǔ Yǐnzǐ 樸隱子 in his Shīcí tōngyùn 詩詞通韻
[Comprehending rimes for poetry and verse]
completed in 1685 (Gěng 1992:64–65, 241). But
Pǔ’s terminology did not immediately take hold;
for example the rime tables in the Kāngxī zìdiǎn
康熙字典 [Kāngxī imperial dictionary] com-
piled 1716 used a diffferent set of names: kāikǒu
zhèngyùn 開口正韻 ‘open-mouth primary-rime’,
kāikǒu fùyùn 開口副韻 ‘open-mouth secondary-
rime’, hékǒu zhèngyùn 合口正韻 ‘gathered-
mouth primary-rime’, hékǒu fùyùn 合口副韻
‘gathered-mouth secondary-rime’.
The result of centuries of development and
innovation was a multitude of descriptive and
prescriptive works that used rime table prin-
ciples to achieve a variety of ends. Lǐ Xīnkuí 李
新魁 (1983) classifijies the various types of rime
tables into several broad categories based on the
phonology they represent:
1. Rime tables that explicate Middle Chinese,
actually Qièyùn, phonology, such as the Yùn-
jìng 韻鏡 mentioned above;
2. Rime tables that explore Old Chinese phonol-
ogy, such as Shēnglèibiǎo 聲類表 [Chart of
initial types] by Dài Zhèn 戴震 (1723–1777);
3. Rime tables that present Míng and Qīng
period literary reading pronunciations, for
example Zìxué yuányuán 字學元元 [Essen-
tial source for the study of syllables] (preface
1601) by Yuán Zǐràng 袁子讓 of the late Míng;
4. Rime tables that outline the pronunciation of
prestige Mandarin varieties of the Míng and
Qīng periods, such as the Jiāotàiyùn by Lǚ
Kūn cited above. Rime tables in this category
are characterized by a flexible yet realistic
classifijication of rimes according to actual
contemporary pronunciations;
5. Rime tables that reflect dialect pronuncia-
tion and phonology, including both northern
and southern dialects. An example is Huìyīn
miàowù 彙音妙悟 [Marvelous apprehen-
sion of collected rimes] by Huáng Qiān 黃謙,
completed in 1800, which presents the
For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV
phonology of Quánzhōu 泉州 in Fújiàn (Lǐ
1983:351); and
6. Rime tables that present heterogeneous or
mixed phonologies, for example Lǐ Rǔzhēn’s
Lǐ Shì Yīnjiàn cited above. Lǐ was working at
reconciling the northern and southern forms
of the Guānhuà koiné prevalent in his time
and his book thus presents a conflation of
northern and southern Mandarin phonolo-
gies (Lǐ 1983:391–395). In this regard, it is
similar to the efffort undertaken by Lù Fǎyán
陸法言, the compiler of the Qìeyùn rime
book, which also strove to include northern
and southern distinctions and gave original
impetus and inspiration to the whole rime
table tradition.
We can add to this list a category of what are
essentially modern versions of rime tables and
still very much in use: the “Běijīng yǔyīn biǎo 北
京語音表” ‘Table of the speech sounds of the
Běijīng dialect’ and the Fāngyán diàochá zìbiǎo
方言調查字表 [Dialect fijieldwork charts]. The
“Běijīng yǔyīn biǎo” is included in many Chinese
language textbooks and other reference works
to serve as a summary of the pīnyīn 拼音 spell-
ing system and the pronunciation of Standard
Chinese (for example Běijīng yǔyán xuéyuàn
1994). Versions of the chart generally adopt the
sìhū in their organization, often simply labeling
them with the numbers 1 to 4; though a recent
version titled “Hànyǔ yīnjié biǎo 汉语音节表”
[Chinese pīnyīn syllabary] explicitly identifijies
the sìhū (in Cài and Kǒng 2014:547–548). The
Fāngyán diàochá zìbiǎo (hereafter simply Zìbiǎo)
is an exhaustive modern redaction of the rime
tables in the Qièyùn tradition and is derived
from fijieldwork charts developed by Y.R. Chao
(Simmons 2006a). As Qièyùn phonology has long
been assumed to be ancestral to all varieties of
modern Chinese aside from the Mǐn dialects,
the Zìbiǎo has served as the principal tool for
Chinese dialect research in China for several
decades. Figure 2 provides an example of a page
from the Zìbiǎo, on which we can see that the
phonological information for the graph gǔ 骨
‘bone’ is identifijied under the same confluence
of variables as in the 14th century Qièyùn zhǐnán
切韵指南 of Figure 1: zhēn-shè, hékǒu, fijirst děng
(division 1 in this case), rù tone, rime mò, with
 rime tables and rime table studies 614

Norman 2014); and, as we have seen, the rime

Figure 2. Portion of page 58 from the 20th century
Fāngyán diàochá zìbiǎo 方言調查字表.
the initial jiàn (Zhēn-shè hé-kǒu yī-děng rù-shēng
mò-yùn jiàn-mǔ 臻攝合口一等入聲沒韻見母). 
Yet the relationship of the Chinese dialects
to Qièyùn phonology is problematic and not
as straightforward as has usually been assumed
(Simmons 2006b; Norman and Coblin 1995;
tables evolved as a way to interpret Qièyùn pho-
nology so that later speakers could more easily
adopt their own speech to that tradition. Hence
the Qièyùn branch of the rime table tradition
was more prescriptive than descriptive. As a tool
for the diachronic study of dialect phonology,
the Zìbiǎo should therefore be used cautiously
and not be allowed to obscure a more accurate
and nuanced understanding of the history of
the Chinese dialects and their relationships to
each other.
On the other hand, many of the later rime
books had a more direct connection to the
speech of their compilers. While many or most
were conceived as prescriptive works, their ready
reflection of actual contemporary pronuncia-
tions makes them useful sources for understand-
ing the premodern forms of dialects, Mandarin
and non-Mandarin. Thus, for example, the vari-
ous Míng and Qīng rime books have much to
tell us about the history and relationships of the
Chinese dialects, as well as that of the Guānhuà
koiné, if judiciously studied and analyzed.
Further Illustrations

Figure 3. From Zìxué yuányuán 字學元元 (1601) showing the traditional 36 initials with
rimes grouped with 4 tones together under 4 separate divisions ( juàn 卷 2, pp. 2b–3a).
[Source: Wǔ xiān táng Zìxué yuányuán 五先堂字學元元, ctext.org scanned facsimile
edition. Same as Xù xiū Sìkù Quánshū 續修四庫全書 edition.]

For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV

615 rime tables and rime table studies

Figure 4. Yīnshēng jìyuán 音聲紀元 [Sounds of the era] (preface 1611) by Wú Jìshì
吳繼仕. Has a set of 66 initials (identifijied by the dark circles) that include the medial
( juàn 2, pp. 32a–b). [Source: Xù xiū Sìkù Quánshū 續修四庫全書 edition.]

Figure 5. From the Fǎnqiè dìngpǔ 反切定譜 [Manual for determining fǎnqiè] a rime table focusing on initials
that is appended to Shīcí tōngyùn 詩詞通韻 (1685) showing early identifijication of rimes in qíchǐhū 齊齒呼. On
this table all examples are in píng tone arranged in columns by initial within “four hū and seven yīn 音”, while
rows share a common fijinal within the groupings. [Source: Shīcí tōngyùn 詩詞通韻 ctext.org scanned facsimile
edition, Appendix following juàn 卷 5, pp. 3a, 8a–b.]

For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV

 rime tables and rime table studies 616

Figure 6. From the Mandarin rime table in the Kāngxī zìdiǎn 康熙字典 [Imperial Dictionary]
(1716) using the traditional set of 36 initials but showing syllables in the píng 平 tone with
traditional zhuó 濁 (voiced) initials that have followed the Mandarin shift to the cìqīng 次清
(voiceless aspirated) column. [Image from kangxizidian.com]

For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV

617 rime tables and rime table studies

Figure 7. From Lǐshì yīnjiàn 李氏音鑑 (completed 1810) showing syllables under the
initial qīng 清 with the 5 tones of the Guānhuà koiné (yīnpíng 陰平, yángpíng 陽平,
shǎngshēng 上聲, qùshēng 去聲, and rùshēng 入聲), and no classifijication by děng
( juàn 6, pp. 12a–b). Each syllable is listed with its fǎnqiè spelling in Lǐ’s system to the
left of which is a set of shorthand numbers (1 through 9 indicated with Sūzhōu mǎzǐ
蘇州碼子: 〡〢〣〤〥〦〧〨〩) that identify the specifijic initial, rime, and tone
of the syllable. These numbers were used in a practice called shèzì 射字 ‘targeting
syllables’ that was popular with rime table afijicionados. It was a kind of game in
which the code number for the rime, initial, and tone would be tapped out on a
drum or a table to challenge participants to name the syllable being indicated (Lǐ
1983:42–43). [Source: Xù xiū Sìkù Quánshū 續修四庫全書 edition.]

Figure 8.
From Xīnjuān Huìyīn miàowù 新鐫彙音妙悟 by Huáng Qiān
黃謙 (completed in 1800), which presents the phonology of
the Quánzhōu 泉州 dialect in Fújiàn organized in columns by
tone. [Source: Xù xiū Sìkù Quánshū 續修四庫全書 edition, p. 73;
traditional pagination unclear.]

For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV

 rime tables and rime table studies 618

Figure 9. Tóngyīn zìbiàn 同音字辨 [Distinguishing homophonic graphs] by Liú Wéifāng 劉維坊 (preface 1849)
in which rimes are grouped in columns by tone with initials forming rows ( juàn 4, pp. 2ab). [Source: Xù xiū Sìkù
Quánshū 續修四庫全書 edition.]

Bibliography and Historical-comparative Phonology, Amsterdam:

Běijīng shèhuì kēxuéyuàn yǔyán yánjiūsuǒ 北京社會
科學院語言研究所 [Běijīng academy of social sci-
ences language institute], Fāngyán diàochá zìbiǎo
方言調查字表 [Character tables for dialect fijield-
work], Běijīng 北京: Shāngwù 商務印書館, [1981]
2004.
Běijīng yǔyán xuéyuàn 北京语言学院 [Běijīng lan-
guage institute], Jīchǔ Hànyǔ kèběn 基础汉语课本
Elementary Chinese Readers I, Běijīng 北京: Sino-
lingua, 1994.
Baxter, William Hubbard, A Handbook of Old Chinese
Phonology, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1992.
Branner, David Prager, ed., The Chinese Rime Tables:
Linguistic Philosophy and Historical-comparative
Phonology, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2006a.
 语文出版社, 1992.
Branner, David Prager, “Simon Schaank and the Evo-
lution of Western Beliefs about Traditional Chi-
nese Phonology”, in: David Prager Branner, ed.,
The Chinese Rime Tables: Linguistic Philosophy and
Historical-comparative Phonology, Amsterdam: John
Benjamins, 2006b, 151–167.
Branner, David Prager, “What are Rime Tables and
What Do They Mean?”, in: David Prager Branner,
ed., The Chinese Rime Tables: Linguistic Philosophy
John Benjamins, 2006c, 1–36.

Cài Liánhóng 蔡莲红 and Kǒng Jiāngpíng 孔江平,
Xiàndài Hànyǔ yīn diǎn 现代汉语音典 [Compen-
dium of modern Chinese phonetics], Běijīng 北京:
Qīnghuá dàxué 清华大学出版社, 2014.
Coblin, W. South, “Zhang Linzhi on the Yunjing”, in:
David Prager Branner, ed., The Chinese Rime Tables:
Linguistic Philosophy and Historical-comparative
Phonology, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2006,
123–150.
Ferlus, Michel, “What Were the Four Divisions of
Middle Chinese?”, Diachronica 26/2, 2009, 184–213.
Gěng Zhènshēng 耿振生, Míng Qīng děngyùnxué
tōnglùn 明清等韵学通论 [Survey of rime table
studies in the Míng and Qīng], Běijīng 北京: Yǔwén
Lǐ Xīnkuí 李新魁, Hànyǔ děngyùnxué 汉语等韵
学 [Chinese rime table studies], Běijīng 北京:
Zhōnghuá 中华书局, 1983.
Lǐ Xīnkuí 李新魁 and Mài Yún 麦耘, Yùnxué gǔjí shù
yào 韵学古籍述要 [Essential ancient texts in rime
studies], Xī’ān 西安: Shǎnxī rénmín 陕西人民出
版社, 1993.
Norman, Jerry, “Modern Chinese and the Rime Tables”,
in: David Prager Branner, ed., The Chinese Rime tables:

For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV

619 Roman Alphabet in China
Linguistic Philosophy and Historical-comparative Pho-
nology, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2006, 183–188.
Norman, Jerry, “A Model for Chinese Dialect Evolu-
tion”, in: Richard VanNess Simmons and Newell
Ann Van Auken, eds., Studies in Chinese and Sino-
Tibetan Linguistics: Dialect, Phonology, Transcription
and Text / Hànyǔ yǔ Hàn-Zàng-yǔ yánjiū: fāngyán,
yīnyùn yǔ wénxiàn 漢語與漢藏語研究：方言、音
韻與文獻, Language and Linguistics Monograph
Series 53, Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia
Sinica 中央研究院語言學研究所, 2014, 1–26.
Norman, Jerry and W. South Coblin, “A New Approach
to Chinese Historical Linguistics”, Journal of the
American Oriental Society 115/4, 1995, 576–584.
Simmons, Richard VanNess, “Common Dialect Phonol-
ogy in Practice—Y.R. Chao’s Field Methodology”, in:
David Prager Branner, ed., The Chinese Rime Tables:
Linguistic Philosophy and Historical-comparative Pho-
nology, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2006a, 189–207.
Simmons, Richard VanNess, “How Rime Book Based
Analyses Can Lead Us Astray”, in: David Prager
Branner, ed., The Chinese Rime Tables: Linguistic
Philosophy and Historical-comparative Phonology,
Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2006b, 171–181.
Richard VanNess Simmons
Roman Alphabet in China
Through the ages, the Roman alphabet has
played diverse roles in Chinese society, ranging
from a marginal foreign script to an essential
tool in primary education, and from a one-time
rival to character orthography to today’s secure
niche as a popular keyboard interface.
Early Chinese acquaintance with the Roman
alphabet arose through contact with merchants,
missionaries, and adventurers, but its use in
China was long restricted to foreign tongues.
The fijirst systematic romanization of a Chinese
language was presented in Matteo Ricci’s Xī zì
qíjì 西字奇跡 [Marvels of Western characters],
published in 1605. Printed in double lines of
Chinese and “Western characters” (Figure 1), it
demonstrated the use of the Roman alphabet
to capture the consonants, vowels and tones of
Nánjīng 南京 Mandarin, the spoken standard of
the day (Coblin 2000:538–540).
In the following centuries, romanizations
(→ Transcription Systems, Overview) were devel-
oped for many Sinitic languages and dialects,
but their distribution was limited to scholars
For use by the Author only | © 2017 Koninklijke Brill NV
of China and expatriate circles in China. Native
interest increased in the 19th century, which
marked the beginning of an era of turbulent
changes in linguistic attitudes. National recogni-
tion of the Roman alphabet came with the 1926
Republican adoption of Gwoyeu Romatzyh tran-
scription (Guóyǔ Luómǎzì 國語羅馬字 ‘Latin
characters for the National Language’, or GR for
short; see also → Transcription Systems: Gwoyeu
Romatzyh). The Gwoyeu Romatzyh system was
conceived by the linguist → Yuen Ren Chao
(Zhào Yuánrèn 趙元任, 1892–1982). It is unique
in its use of Roman letters instead of diacritical
marks to spell Mandarin tones, as illustrated by
the Gwoyeu Romatzyh spellings guo, gwo, guoo,
guoh for Pīnyīn guō, guó, guǒ, guò; and Gwoyeu
Romatzyh iu, yu, yeu, yuh for Pīnyīn yū, yú, yǔ, yù.
In the war-torn 1930s and 1940s, educational-
ists in communist-controlled areas abandoned
Gwoyeu Romatzyh and fell back on a Chi-
nese romanization system known as Latinxua
(Lādīnghuà 拉丁化 ‘Latinization’), developed in
the Soviet Union. Aiming at Mandarin-speaking
minorities in the Soviet Union, Soviet linguists
had ruled out using the Cyrillic alphabet to
signal a break with Tsarist assimilation poli-
cies (DeFrancis 1950:107), opting for the Roman
alphabet instead. In China, Latinxua writing
(also renamed Sin Wenz, Xīn wénzì 新文字 ‘New
Script’) gained some popularity among linguists
and social activists in the 1930s, but interest died
out in the 1940s. After 1949, the People’s Repub-
lic combined script reform movements with
effforts to spread the use of Mandarin as the com-
mon Chinese language. Romanized transcrip-
tion served both purposes, and its standarization
became a national priority.
One decisive factor in the fate of the Roman
alphabet in China was the vexed question
whether it should replace Chinese character
orthography altogether, or serve no more than
an auxiliary role in language instruction. Dur-
ing the 1940s, discussion of this question was
postponed in communist circles, possibly for
fear of losing popular support (Norman 1988:262;
but after the communist revolution, the issue
continued to haunt script reform movements.
Many archives are now lost (Bökset 2006:210),
but the question seems to have been settled