From Colloquialism to Metaphorical Expression: A Diachronic Study of Chinese Dialect Words Based on Chán Buddhist Literature

Abstract

Chán Buddhist literature is not only an important source for the study of religious thought during the Chinese late medieval and early modern periods, but also constitutes a treasure trove for investigating the development of the colloquial language of the respective periods, both in terms of semantics and syntactic constructions. Since the editors of Chán Buddhist literature—such as the Recorded Saying and Transmission of the Lamp texts—claimed to convey the “living words” of the patriarchs and masters, numerous vernacularisms were integrated in the dialogue sections of the texts, and the use of traditional Buddhist terminology was often reduced to a minimum. Frequently, Chán Buddhist texts are among the earliest sources in which these colloquialisms surfaced. In this paper, we focus on expressions which derive from the colloquial language of the late Táng and Sòng periods, and which were integrated in Chán Buddhist literature, often assuming a particular metaphorical meaning in the rhetorical structure of the texts. We reconstruct their original meaning, their use in the Chán texts, as well as their further development in Sinitic languages and dialects. Besides contributing to a better understanding of the vocabulary used in the enigmatic language of Chán literature and the metaphorical mapping of originally colloquial expressions in a religious context, in this preliminary study, we also hope to contribute to a better understanding of the development of semantic items from the perspective of historical linguistics, their complex paths of metaphorical extensions, as well as their usage in local linguistic contexts. In addition, the case studies also illustrate the transformative force of religion on the development of language, and the complex interplay between religious ideas and linguistic expression.

1. Introduction

Buddhist texts have played a crucial role in the research on the diachronic development of the Sinitic languages. Whereas the majority of texts of the Medieval Chinese (MC) period (ca. 100–1100) were written in a form of Literary Chinese (LC; wényánwén 文言文)—a written medium modelled after the language of the 3rd century BCE and to a certain extent standardized during the Hàn period, Buddhist texts were frequently rendered in a type of “hybrid” language, incorporating features of LC, in addition to new lexical items which were coined in the process of translating from Indic languages, as well as structures and vocabulary drawn from colloquial Chinese of the respective periods and regions. In this process, expressions used in regional varieties of Chinese occasionally found their way into predominantly Buddhist texts of the Medieval period.1 On the one hand, Buddhist texts often reflect colloquialisms and dialect words which were incorporated into textual material; on the other hand, Buddhist discourse occasionally also coined or transformed lexical items which eventually were integrated into the spoken languages of a specific period.2

During the Late Medieval period (Late Middle Chinese/LMC; ca. 700–1100), we can observe a significant increase concerning the extant materials on spoken varieties of Chinese, comprising several literary genres and including secular and Buddhist lexicographic materials. Among the regional varieties of LMC, Northwestern Medieval Chinese (NWMC)3 and the language spoken in the capitals Cháng’ān and Luòyáng have received intense scholarly attention and are relatively well reconstructed in terms of phonology and semantics.

Specifically, early Chán Buddhist literature preserved among the Dūnhuáng manuscripts (with the earliest Chán texts dating from ca. 700 CE) is an important source for studying the development of early vernacular expressions and colloquial grammatical constructions. However, copies of fully vernacular texts did not appear before the late 9th and 10th centuries, and in this respect, especially the Transformation Texts (biànwén 變文) and related performative prosimetric genres are of great significance.4 The 10th century also witnessed the emergence of the colloquial Chán Buddhist Transmission Texts.5 In the last decades, scholarship has focused on these materials to reconstruct the formative period of báihuà 白話 or “plain language”. There is one aspect which thus far has received only limited attention by researchers, concretely, the “regional” words preserved in the Chán Buddhist texts of the late Táng (618–907), Five Dynasties (907–960) and especially the Sòng period (960–1279). In this paper, we focus on material of the Sòng period6 and attempt to trace and analyse regional expressions contained in it. An investigation of these types of words preserved in modern Chinese dialects gives rise to a number of questions: Were those lexical items already identified as “dialect” items in the (late) Medieval period, or did they become defined as such in later periods and in specific regions (e.g., lexical items which became obsolete in Northern China but which were brought to other regions by population movements, and became part of the local language there)? An additional question concerns the path of development of these lexical items. What were their semantics during the Táng and the Sòng (and possibly earlier periods), and how were they used in modern varieties of Chinese? Can the path of these changes be traced from a chronological perspective? Which lexical items and terms were originally coined in the Buddhist context and subsequently entered the colloquial language of specific periods and regions? What transformations did these words undergo? In this paper, based on a careful investigation of Sòng dynasty source materials, we try to identify and analyse a number of regional expressions and present them in case studies, tracking their diachronic development and distribution in the contemporary Sinitic languages.7 The identification and interpretation of regional usages of words is often a difficult task, since Chán Buddhist texts regularly employ a very specific vocabulary and use a highly enigmatic idiom. As such, some colloquialisms and regional expressions surface for the first time in this metaphorical environment, rather than in their “basic meaning”.

Historically, “regionalisms/regional expressions” (fāngyán 方言)8 have received scholarly attention from an early date on in China. The earliest extant major work is the Fāngyán 方言 in thirteen fascicles, compiled during the Hàn dynasty by the scholar Yáng Xióng 揚雄 (53 BCE–18 CE), with several later commentaries on this text, such as the Fāngyán zhù 方言注 (“Commentary on the Fāngyán”), compiled by Guō Pú 郭璞 (276–324) during the Jìn Dynasty (266–420). Whereas in pre-Táng times regional expressions are only sporadically spotted, mostly in texts translated or compiled in the framework of Buddhism, the Táng and the Sòng witnessed the emergence of genres which occasionally show highly vernacular and/or regional features. In subsequent periods, and especially during the Yuán (1271–1368) and Míng dynasties (1368–1644), the interest in regional expressions and vernacularisms peaked, as can be deducted from the many extant materials of these periods.

In addition to lexicographical works such as the Fāngyán, early references to regional expressions are spread in a variety of materials, such as the yīnyì 音義 genre (works documenting the sound and meaning of lexical items and/or Buddhist terms),9 the bǐjì 筆記 (“literary notes/short sketches”), and non-canonical text genres preserved among the Dūnhuáng manuscripts, to name a few.10

In the main part of the paper, we first focus on specific lexical items appearing in the Chán Buddhist genres of the Five Dynasties and Sòng periods, followed by a discussion of selected four-character phrases. Based on these few case studies, we show the evolution and transformation of these items, as well as their manifestations in modern Sinitic languages and dialects.

2. Monosyllabic and Polysyllabic Lexical Items

2.1. Duō 咄

Duō was occasionally used as exclamative in the dialogues of Medieval Chinese texts and assumed a very high frequency in vernacular Chán literature, with early examples in the Transformation Texts. Historically, duō can be traced to the Hàn Dynasty where it first appeared in a colloquial passage of the Shǐjì 史記 in which an official addresses the wet nurse of the emperor in the following way:

Retainer Guō immediately cursed her, saying: “Duō! Why does the old woman (i.e., you) not leave immediately! His Majesty (i.e., Hàn Wǔ dì 漢武帝) has already grown up, how could he need your milk to survive? What is the point of you turning your head and looking back [at him]?”

「郭舍人疾言罵之曰：『咄！老女子﹗何不疾行﹖陛下已壯矣，寜尚須汝乳而活邪？尚何還顧！’”』」

(Shǐjì, Huájī lièzhuàn 滑稽列傳 fasc. 66, vol. 10: 3204)11

In pre-Buddhist literature and translated Buddhist texts, duō (Early Middle Chinese/EMC: twot) has a relatively low frequency.12 However, multiple examples can be found in the first comprehensive Chán Buddhist genealogical work, the ZTJ, where it appears approximately 20 times. Duō continued to be used in the Chán works of the Sòng and later periods.

The master [Yàoshān Wéiyǎn 藥山惟儼] wrote the Chinese character 佛 (‘Buddha’) and asked Dàowú: “What character is this?” [Dào]wú answered: “This is the character for ‘Buddha’.” Master [Wéiyǎn] exclaimed: “Duō! This garrulous monk!”

師書一‘佛’字，問道吾：‘是什摩字？’吾曰：‘是‘佛’字。’師曰：‘咄！這多口阿師。’

(ZTJ, fasc. 4: 228; Yanagida 1984: 1.173)

In ZTJ and later Chán works, duō is consistently used as an exclamatory introducing a negative comment or appellation, or a straightforward insult, usually used by the master as an expedient mean to reprimand (and/or instruct) a student.13

Already in pre-modern material, duō is occasionally identified as a dialect expression. For example, the Qīng scholar Hǎo Yìxíng 郝懿行 (1757–1825) identified the word as a regional expression used in the Shānxī area (Fén-Jìn 汾晉).14 Duō with the original semantic of ‘to scold’ has become more or less obsolete in Modern Standard Chinese (the Taiwanese guóyǔ 國語 reading is duò). However, in the Cháoshàn dialect (a dialect of the Southern Mǐn group), the word tuaʔ² is preserved in several meanings, e.g., in lɯ⁵³ tuaʔ² tʰõĩ⁵³ 汝咄看？ (corresponding to Modern Mandarin/MM: 你再說一次試試看？) and mai⁵³ tuaʔ² i⁵⁵ 嫑咄伊 (corresponding to MM: 不要責怪他。)15 The usage ‘to scold’ of duō has survived in a number of modern Sinitic languages, such as in the Ānhuī Shèxiàn 歙縣 region [tuot⁴],16 or the Mǐn spoken in Shàntóu 汕頭 of Guǎngdōng Province [tuaʔ²].17 In the Wú dialect spoken in the Zhèjiāng and Níngbō regions it is used for expressing discontent or regret (təʔ² ‘utter a big sigh’; HYFYDCD: 3357).

2.2. Ái 捱 (挨) ‘to Delay; to Procrastinate’

This is a word frequently encountered in Sòng Dynasty Chán works, as for example in the following passage:

“If you go on pilgrimage in this way, and you meet people (i.e., masters) in this way, then the benefit will be very slight, and the damage will be severe. Delaying/postponing until your head (i.e., hair) has become white and your teeth yellow, being a lonely shining light;18 this really cannot compare to an intensely practicing farmer with a “white karma” (i.e., unsullied and pure) who goes forth to dwell in liberty (i.e., reaches salvation).”

「若如是行脚。如是見人。則其利甚輕。其害甚重。捱到頭白齒黃。孤燈獨照之時。遠不如精修白業底田舍翁去住自由。」

(Xūtǎng héshàng yǔlù 虛堂和尚語錄 fasc. 4, CBETA: T47n2000_p1015b05-08)

The Shuōwén jiězì 說文解字 and the Guǎngyùn 廣韻 do not contain any mention of ái 捱, and the earliest dictionary reference can be found in the mid-11th century Jíyùn 集韻 (p. 62) where it is defined as ‘to refuse; resist’ and as having the fǎnqiè reading 宜佳 (捱，拒也。宜佳切, corresponding to EMC ngea). In the Míng dynasty, Zìhuì 字彙 (p. 403), ái 捱 is glossed as yán’ái 延捱 ‘prolong; extend; delay’, with the pronunciation indicated as 涯 (捱﹐音涯﹐延捱). In the 17th century Zhèngzì tōng (p. 984), the sound is glossed as 厓 (宜才切) and the item is explained as sú 俗 ‘vulgar/colloquial’:19 “If one expresses ‘to delay’ in a colloquial way, then one says ái 捱.” (俗曰延緩曰捱).

(Gāo 1995): 42 has pointed out that ái developed a peculiar semantic referring to procrastination, but also being stuck in a difficult situation or encountering straitened circumstances. This meaning can be frequently found in the vernacular literature since the Yuán and the Míng periods. However, the word originated earlier, and we found two examples in the Sòng dynasty Zhūzǐ yǔlèi 朱子語類:

“[As for] reading books, there is no other method, solely be concerned about reading, and that’s the [right] method. It is just like a foolish person, waiting around/enduring (lit. ‘keep on dragging out time’ 拖延來、拖延去), and who himself does not want to establish an own opinion. Empty-minded he should just be concerned about reading, and keep on reading, and then he will be naturally able to understand.”

“讀書別無法，只管看，便是法。正如獃人相似，捱來捱去，自家都未要先立意見。且虛心只管看，看來看去，自然曉得。”

(Zhūzǐ yǔlèi fasc. 19: 294; the second example can be found on p. 437)

In the example above, ái combines with the verbal complements lái (‘come’) and qù (‘leave’), ái-lái ái-qù 捱來捱去, emphasizing the durative aspect of the phrase (and paralleled by the phrase kàn-lái kàn-qù 看來看去 ‘read-come-read-go > keep on reading; engage in reading’), and can best be translated with ‘continuously endure.’20

In Modern Standard Chinese ‘to procrastinate; to delay; to put off’ is usually expressed by the verbs tuōyán 拖延, tuīyán 推延, and yánchí 延遲, but in several other Sinitic languages, compounds with ái are still used, such as áiyán 捱延 (ue⁵⁵ tsʻian³⁵) in Mǐn 閩, meaning ‘to procrastinate’.21 In the Mandarin spoken in Héběi and Shāndōng there is still the expression ái used in the meaning ‘to delay; put off’.22 Compare also the phrase ái rìzǐ (ai⁵⁴ ni⁴² tsiɛ²¹) 捱日子 ‘suffer through one’s days’ (Mǐn dialect of the Jiàn’ōu 建甌 region of Fújiàn, glossed as 困難地度過日子). Ái in similar meanings is still used in the Beijing dialect23 and in Southwestern Mandarin (HYFYDCD: 5341).

2.3. Suǒ 索/Sè 色 ‘to Seek’

In a Dūnhuáng fragment of a vernacularized version of an account of Buddha’s life, we find the following phrase:

When seeing his wife of former kalpas, he then smiled (lit. ‘broke the face’) at her; seeking to get her as his wife, he put a golden ring on her middle finger. Thereupon the drums of joy were beaten, and they became a couple.

見前劫婢女破面與笑，色（=索）取中脂（=指）上金脂（=指）環，便打喜鼓，便與成親。

(S.3096; the copy probably dating from the 10th century)

Here, we find a particular phonetic loan/character substitution, sè 色 (which usually means ‘color’, or in Buddhist texts often ‘form’, translating Skt. rūpa; however, these meanings do not make sense here), most probably representing suǒ 索 ‘to seek’. The phonological profiles of 色 (MC ʂək/ʂik) and 索 (MC sak/ʂəijk) are similar.24 This usage of 色 is not unique but can be also found in another vernacular Dūnhuáng text, the Yákè shū 齖䶗書: “Afterwards, when you search for a wife for your son, you should be extremely diligent!” (已後與兒色婦，大須穩審。).25

The Southern Sòng 宋 dynasty Lǎo xué ān bǐjì 老學庵筆記 (fasc. 10) explains suǒ fù 索婦 as “archaism”: “People today refer to ‘taking a wife’ as 索婦; this is an archaism” (citing the example from the Sānguó zhì).26 The author of the Lǎo xué ān bǐjì, Lù Yóu 陸游 (1125–1210), was a person from Shānyīn 山陰 in Yuèzhōu 越州 (today’s Shàoxīng 紹興 in Zhèjiāng), and it is possible that the expression suǒ fù 索婦 for searching for a wife was current in the Wú dialect during the Sòng period.

In modern dialects, the expression is still used in Central Mandarin of Shānxī27 and in the Jìn 晉 dialect.28

2.4. Dòuhé 闘合/Dòu 鬭/Dòu 逗 ‘to Encounter; to Meet’

In the ZTJ, we find two orthographical representations of dòu, meaning ‘to encounter’ (闘/逗). For an example of the dissyllabic version dòuhé 闘合, see below:

The preceptor said: “As for the matter of last evening, the great assembly [of monks] doubts what you have said, the two old fellows performed in advance ‘Encounter Chán’. Since you already have a viewpoint, it is the [same] phrase spoken in front of the great assemble.”

和尚云：“昨夜事，大眾卻疑，你道兩個老漢預造闘合禪。你既有見處，大眾前道得一句語。”29

Here, dòu is used as part of a Chán Buddhist term (“encounter Chán”, a type of practice based on a verbal exchange between two masters, or between a master and a student). We find the monosyllabic version of the word in another passage of the ZTJ: The master said: “A square [piece of] wood encounters (i.e., fits into) a round hole.” (師云：“方木逗於圓孔。”).30 Historically, this meaning ‘to meet; encounter’ is recorded in the Shuōwén jiězì, written as 鬥, glossed as ‘two scholars encountering/facing each other’ (p. 35: 鬥，兩士相對) or as 鬭, glossed as ‘to meet’ (p. 58; 鬭，遇也). The graph 逗 is glossed as ‘to stop’ (p. 35; 逗，止也。) and is etymologically related to the above ones via the graph 住.31

The HYFYDCD (p. 928) and Sìchuān fāngyán cídiǎn (Wáng 1986: 88) gloss 闘 (təu²¹³) as meaning ‘to meet; encounter’, a semantic still current in Southwestern Mandarin. This word is also circulating in Hakka (Méizhōu: teu⁵; Wǔpíng: tɛ⁵; Ruìjīng: tə⁵)32 and is usually written as 鬥 (təɯ⁵), meaning ‘join together.’33 In order to avoid confusion with the meaning ‘to fight’, it is often written as 逗 in Modern dialects in the meaning ‘to meet; encounter’ (e.g., in Chéngdū: 逗 təu²¹³). The related word in Southwestern Mandarin, the homophonous 逗 has the meaning ‘to join together; assemble’ (Kūnmíng: təu²¹²).34

2.5. Línglì 伶俐 ‘Quick-Witted; Clever; Smart’

This colloquial word is frequently used in medieval Chán Buddhist literature and shows the following orthographic variations: 靈利/伶俐/伶利/伶俐:

[Preceptor Chángqìng] renounced home at the age of thirteen. When he first met Xuěfēng, his studies were arduous, and not long [after] he attained línglì (i.e., insight).

年十三出家，初參見雪峯，學業辛苦，不多得靈利。”35

In this passage, it seems to be indicated that the monk has gained enlightenment or profound insight. The expression is frequently used in the Wǔdēng huìyuán 五燈會元.36 According to historical reference materials, it was a dialect word and the Zhèngzì tōng 正字通 has the following gloss: “俐 is a vernacular word and in today’s dialect, if one wants to express ‘smartness/intelligence’ (黠慧), one says 伶俐.” (俐﹐俗字。今方言謂黠慧曰伶俐。).37

The HYFYDCD explains 伶俐 in the following way: ‘agile; quick; quick-witted’, and refers to it as a word still used in the Wú (in the Zhèjiāng and Wēnzhōu 溫州 regions pronounced leŋ²¹lei⁴⁵), Hakka (e.g., Méizhōu: laŋ¹¹li⁵²), and Mǐn languages (Fújiàn 福建 and Xiàmén 廈門 dialects, pronounced liŋ⁵³li²²).38

2.6. Cuānduō 攛掇 ‘Urge Somebody; Instigate; Incite; Egg Somebody On’

An early occurrence of this word can be found in the 13th century Xūtáng héshàng yǔlù 虛堂和尚語錄, fasc. 6:

“The expression solemn and stern, the fierce breath like a cloud. Inciting block heads (i.e., dumb people with heads like wooden blocks) to climb up a tree upside down.”

“面目嚴冷，很（=狠）氣如雲。攛掇翁木大，顛倒上樹。”

(CBETA, T47n2000_p1032b29-c01)39

The word also appears in a Neo-Confucian Recorded Sayings text:

Emerging in the poetry, established in the rites, and coming to completion in the music: the sage sets out to do a task in order to let the student hear it and naturally enjoy it; [then the student] harbors the wish to enter this path, and when walking in the four directions and on the eight sides, [the sage] instigates (i.e., encourages) him to walk on this path.

“興於詩，立於禮，成於樂：聖人做出這一件物事來，使學者聞之自然懽喜；情願上這一條路去，四方八面攛掇他去這路上行”

(Zhūzǐ yǔlèi fasc. 35: 931)

There is another passage in the Zhūzǐ yǔlèi (fasc. 125; p. 1985) which confirms the meaning ‘to urge’ (“…he urged Gāozǔ to enter the pass…” 攛掇高祖入關).

Based on the use in Sòng Dynasty material, the meaning of cuānduō is ‘to incite’, and the word is usually used with positive connotations. The Míng Dynasty Zhèngzì tōng, however, gives a rather negative definition of the word, “a vernacular expression for enticing somebody to do something bad” (俗謂誘人為惡).40

In the Jīnpíng méi, the word is used in three meanings, ‘prepare, take care of’; ‘urge’, and ‘instigate, incite’ (Gǔ 2012). Today, the word is still commonly used in the meaning to ‘urge’ in Southwestern Mandarin. (ts’uæn⁵⁵ tuo²; HYFYDCD: 7048).

2.7. Pǒnài 尀耐 ‘Unbearable; Intolerable’

This dissyllabic word is already recorded in the lexicographical material of the Táng period, concretely, in the Zìbǎo suìjīn 字寶碎金,41 extant in several Dūnhuáng manuscripts. In this collection of colloquial expressions of the Táng, only the reading is provided (pǒnài 尀耐 is glossed as pōnài 頗奈 MC /phanaj/), without any explanation of the semantic. The form 尀耐 is also found in the 10th c. Dūnhuáng manuscript copy of the Pò Mó biàn 破魔變 Transformation Text (‘Transformation [Text] of the Destruction of Māra’).42 In later material, the word has several orthographic variations, including pǒnài 叵耐.

“One might have thought that there is a dharma (teaching) one can give to people; having asked, [people] cling to the words and do not [really] understand, however. This entails that the descendants of later generations all become mad dogs chasing after a lump of earth. Although they wish to establish the essential tenets of the [Chán] school, they certainly will get it wrong. If you are going to examine this closely, then it really causes people to feel unbearable.”

“將謂有法與人，問著却言不會。引得後代兒孫，盡作韓獹逐塊。雖欲扶竪宗乘，奈何東倒西儽。子細檢點將來，直是令人叵耐。”

(Dàhuì Pǔjué chánshī yǔlù 大慧普覺禪師語錄 fasc. 7; CBETA, T47n1998A_p0838b18-21)

“Just at that time, it’s a really good season (period). Xuěfēng, this unbearable old fellow, was driving nails into the empty space (sky), and was rolling up three wooden balls, to the effect that posterity will not be able to understand [him].”

“正當恁麼時，也好箇時節。叵耐雪峰老漢，却向虗空裏釘橛，輥三箇木毬43，直至後人構占不上。”

(Jiātài pǔ dēnglù 嘉泰普燈錄 fasc. 7; CBETA, X79no1559_p0331b11-13)

The HYFYDCD has an entry for pǒnài (spelled 尀耐), with a similar meaning (glossed as kěhèn 可恨; kěwù 可惡 ‘regrettable; despisable’), and with references to the Mandarin of the Yuán dynasty.44 Although the two words are certainly related, the HYFYDCD glosses pǒnài 叵耐 separately as ‘disgusting; unbearable’ (kěhèn 可恨; bù kě róngrěn 不可容忍), still used in the Mǐn dialect of the Cháoshàn area 潮汕 of Guǎngdōng and pronounced as pʻɔ⁵¹-nai³⁵.45

For kènài 克耐, the antonym of pǒnài, there is likewise an entry in the HYFYDCD, with references to the Mǐn of the Jiēyáng 揭陽 area in Guǎngdōng 廣東, and pronounced as k’ak²-³ nai⁵³-³⁵.46 An example sentence of this usage is tui²¹³ i³³ hioŋ⁵⁵ kʻak² poʔ⁵ i³³ ŋẽ³² hoũ⁵³ kʻiok²-nai³⁵ m⁶ kʻɯ²¹³ 對伊向刻薄，伊硬虎克耐唔去 “If you are so harsh to him, he certainly will not be able to bear it.”47 The development of pǒnài is interesting, since there are examples of its use in the Northern Mandarin of the Yuán Dynasty. Eventually, the word ceased to be used in the north but was preserved in some versions of Mǐn in the south. Remarkably, it is also one of the few semantic items which were identified as “colloquial/regional” already in the Táng dynasty.

2.8. Tiánshènù 田厙奴

Tiánshènù is a peculiar phrase appearing in Chán material and at first glance does not make any sense (lit. ‘field-NAME-slave’). However, when we look at the earliest Recorded Sayings collection, the ZTJ, it becomes clear that the phrase should be read 田舍奴 (lit. ‘field-lodging-slave’)48 and that 厙 is a rare phonetic substitution of 舍.49 That the reading should be 舍 is also confirmed by a passage in the Tàipíng guǎngjì (where the expression appears as tiánshèhàn 田舍漢) and in the Xīn Táng shū (tiánshèzǐ 田舍子) where we also find variations of this phrase.

Somebody asked [master] Zhàozhōu: “A person of old said that the ultimate truth is without difficulties, one just has to avoid picking and choosing.’50 How is the method of ‘not picking and not choosing’?” [Zhàozhōu] answered: “Above heaven, below heaven, I am the only honored-one!”51 The monk said: “This is just like the teaching of picking and choosing.” [Zhào]zhōu responded: “Villain! Above heaven, below heaven, I am the only honored-one! Where could there be any picking and choosing?”

“有人問趙州：「古人道『至道無難，唯嫌揀擇』，如何是不擇揀底法？」趙州云：「天上天下，唯我獨尊。」僧云：「此猶是揀擇底法。」州云：「田舍奴。天上天下唯我獨尊，什摩處是揀擇？」”

(ZTJ, fasc. 11; ed. Yanagida 1984: 3.102; CBETA, B25n0144_p0519b05-09)

Because of the graphic similarity between 厙 and kù 庫, the latter character was erroneously used in the passage below, where the phrase is explained in the following way by the famous Japanese scholar-monk Mujaku Dōchū 無著道忠 (1653–1745) in his Kattōgo sen 葛藤語箋:

田庫奴 is a regional expression of the Fútáng (i.e., ancient Fúzhōu) people, to insult [somebody], and does not seem to make any sense. Master Qí Yún said: ‘[The phrase] appears in the Collection of Táng Poetry, and is a vernacular expression of the Táng period.’52

“「田庫奴乃福唐人鄉語﹐罵人﹐似無意智相似。」○齊雲師云﹕「《唐詩類苑》有之﹐唐時俗話。」”

(Kattōgo sen 葛藤語箋: 121)53

In the Sòng period Zǔtíng shìyuàn 祖庭事苑, there is also a comment on this mistake:

“田庫 has the fǎnqiè 式夜 [LMC: /sy + (j)ae/] and is a family name; there is no meaning and [庫] should be [written as] 舍 [LMC: /syae/]. In Chán records it is frequently written as 庫 and is learned based on this repeated mistake. If somebody is called ‘田庫奴’ then it is probably a cause to be ridiculed by the Chán monks (lit. ‘Chán seats’).”

“「田庫，式夜切。姓也。非義。當作舍。禪錄多作庫。而復誤後學。有呼為田庫奴者。適所以發禪席之大噱也。」”

(CBETA, X64n1261_p0338c07-09)

There is actually an early reference in the Jí yì jì 集異記: “[Wáng] Zhīhuàn then mocked two guys, saying: ‘Field-lodging slaves, how could I be deluded?’”54

The expression is still used in contemporary slang, referring to an uncultured person from the countryside (written as 田舍漢/田舍儿/田舍奴/田舍郎). The literary meaning is ‘field and cottage slave’ and was probably originally an expression used in the Fúzhōu area.55 Checking a large database for MM texts, the PKU/CCL databases, only one search result is found (Lǐ 1989: 81); however, it is a citation from historical sources.

3. Regional Expressions in Four-Character Phrases

Four-character phrases in Chán texts are notoriously difficult to interpret based on their extended and metaphorical meanings. However, sometimes it is not only difficult to interpret the phrases in the specific doctrinal contexts they appear in, but also based on the semantics of the individual words. As it turns out, some of the phrases are impossible to understand, unless one interprets some characters as representing regional readings of words. Below, we analyse various examples from the Sòng Dynasty.

3.1. Bíkǒng Léi Chuí 鼻孔纍垂/Bíkǒng Liáo Tiān 鼻孔遼天

Below is the likely earliest extant source of this phrase:

The two patriarchs obtained the bone marrow (i.e., the essence of the teaching): The younger and elder brothers themselves gave free rein to their capabilities; there was only the elder brother’s bones-piercing poverty. Bowing three times, he rose without [uttering] a word, his nostrils hanging down and covering his upper lip.

“二祖得髓：弟昆各自逞功能，獨有家兄徹骨貧。三拜起來無一語，鼻孔纍垂蓋上脣。”

(Jiātài pǔ dēnglù 嘉泰普燈錄 fasc. 28;56 CBETA, X79n1559_p0470a24-b02)

In Chán texts, “nostrils” (bíkǒng) are sometimes metaphorically referring to everybody’s endowment with Buddha-nature (i.e., everybody having a nose is like everybody being in possession of Buddha-nature), and the ‘nostrils hanging down’ implies that someone has understood the principles of Chán. Léi chuí 纍垂 is a dissyllabic word meaning ‘to hang down’, an expression which is still preserved in Cantonese, lœy¹¹sœy¹¹ (with varying orthographies, e.g., 羸垂/累垂/累瘁/累悴). Today, it is usually used in another extended meaning, ‘to hang down > lack vitality/energy’ (HYFYDCD: 5485).

The phrase is frequently encountered in Chán literature in various forms (鼻孔遼天/鼻孔撩天). As for the meaning of 遼/撩, there are several explanations which have been proposed by scholars. Yuán Bīn glosses it as “摩天，飛向天空 (to touch heaven, fly up into empty space)” (B. Yuán 1990: 9). The original meaning of liáo seems to be ‘to face upwards’. In Chán literature, it usually appears in four-character phrases, as for example in Yúnmén Kuāngzhēn chánshī guǎnglù 雲門匡真禪師廣錄 (fasc. 2):

He ascended the hall and said: ‘Meeting a person, then the nostrils face towards heaven.’ [Having said this] he then descended from his seat.

“上堂云：‘遇人即鼻孔遼天。’便下座。”

(CBETA, T47no1988_p0564b25-27)

The same phrase, in the spelling 鼻孔遼天, appears in the Wànsōng lǎorén píng chàng Tiāntóngjué héshàng sònggǔ cóngróng ān lù 萬松老人評唱天童覺和尚頌古從容庵錄 (fasc. 1):

“If you want to point with the heel to the ground and with the nostrils upwards to heaven, it is really necessary that you penetrate the tangles of wine (i.e., solve the complications or problems) here!”

“若要脚跟點地鼻孔撩天，却須向這葛藤裏穿過始得。”

(CBETA, T48n2004_p0226c22-23)

(Zhān 2006): 248 proposes a similar interpretation as Yuán Bīn, whereas (Léi 2010): 294 interprets the phrase in the context of Chán thought, and the “nostrils facing upwards” as an allusion to the narrative of Śākyamuni pointing with one hand upward right after his birth and claiming to be the “most honored one in the world”. (B. Yuán 1990): 23–26 points out that 撩 could actually be a dialect word of Chángshā 長沙 in Húnán (read liāo) and glosses it as ‘push/rush upwards’ (向上衝), whereas (Wáng 2015): 34 interprets 撩 as ‘touch upon; bump into’ (觸碰).

In order to arrive at a better understanding of the expression, we trace it in contemporary works. In the Sòng dynasty text Zǔtíng Shìyuàn 祖庭事苑 by Mùān Shànqīng 睦庵善卿 (active 1088–1108) the phrase 鼻孔遼天 is commented on in the following way: “遼 should be 撩 and means ‘to grasp/to take’, referring to lifting/raising (something) up. 遼 means ‘remote’ and does not have any meaning [here].” (遼，當作撩。撩，取也。昂視之貌。遼，遠也。非義。; CBETA, X64n1261_p0319c11-12). As such, 撩 is identified as the “correct” character. In several Chán works 遼天/撩天 is used contrastively to other expressions, such as pū dì gāo fēi 撲地高飛 (Zǔ Liàngqǐ chánshī yǔlù 祖亮啟禪師語錄; CBETA, J39nB449_p0459c03-04) and liāo tiān pū dì 撩天撲地 (Jiè Ānjìn chánshī yǔlù 介菴進禪師語錄; CBETA, J29nB233_p0359c10-11), describing the movement of birds, “soaring/surge upward towards heaven and plunge down towards earth.” It is evident that the semantic of 撩/遼 indicates an upward movement (‘rush/soar upward’). In the Wú dialect, the word is used in the sense of ‘to lift something up (which is hanging down)’ (such as hair, or a skirt), pronounced liɔ⁵³ (Shànghǎi), liɔ¹³ (Sūzhōu), and liɔ²² (Zhèjiāng).57 As such, Léi Hànqīng’s interpretation is the most likely the correct one, “raise one’s nostrils towards heaven/upwards”, in the Chán context alluding to the statement of young Śākyamuni and by extension to a state of great confidence after realizing the truth. The word is also used in MM; however, it is more frequent in written Chinese as compared to oral communication.

3.2. Cún Cǎo Bùtóu 村草步頭

This is a phrase which in several variations appears in Sòng dynasty Chán Buddhist material. The probably earliest context in which this phrase appears is in an early Sòng Recorded Sayings text:

[Biography of Preceptor Mǐcāng:] There was a monk who newly arrived to join [the assembly], and he circumambulated the master three times and then knocked at the meditation platform, saying: “If I do not meet the master of the house [an expression which is also sometimes used for realizing ‘Buddha-nature’], then I will definitely not join the monks’ assembly!” The master said: “Where did your deluded mind go to?” The monk said: “Indeed, it is not here.” The master hit him once with his staff and the monk said: “Ha! You almost fell into your deluded consciousness!” The master said: “At the river crossing of a small hamlet, when you meet somebody, what should one say?” The monk said: “[I] am going to join the monks’ assembly.”

“有僧新到參，繞師三匝敲禪床曰：‘不見主人翁，終不下參眾。’師曰：‘什麼處情識去來？’僧曰：‘果然不在。’師打一拄杖。僧曰：‘幾落情識呵呵。’師曰：‘村草步頭逢著一箇，有什麼話處。’僧曰：‘且參眾去。’”

(Jǐngdé chuándēng lù 14, CBETA, T51n2076_p0314a05-09)58

On the surface, this expression makes little sense, in particular bùtóu 步頭 (lit. ‘step-SUFFIX’). However, there are some early references concerning the semantic of 步 which most probably should not be interpreted as ‘step’ here. In the Shù yì jì 述異記 of the Liáng Dynasty (502–557), there is the following note: “The edge of the water is called 步. [The area] 瓜步 is in Wú, and the people of Wú read 瓜 as ‘riverbank’, and use it as a [geographical] name. In Wújiāng (i.e., the Sūzhōu region), there are also [the names] 魚步 and 龜步. In Xiāng (i.e., Húnán), there is 靈妃步. [Rén]fǎng [任]昉 comments: ‘In the area of Wú and Chǔ one calls a riverbank 步 [EMC bɔ^h; LMC p^huɔ]. Saying this (i.e., using this word) is a mistake.’”59

In Liǔ Zōngyuán’s Táng dynasty text Yǒngzhōu tiělú bù zhì 永州鐵爐步志, there is the following reference: “The bank of a river (hǔ 滸) generally refers to the location where ships can anchor and one can enter or leave them; this [location] is called 步.”60 There are several examples of this usage of 步 in Táng dynasty texts, e.g., the Liǔzhōu Luóchí miào bēi 柳州羅池廟碑 (p. 493) by Hán Yù 韓愈: “A residence has a new room, a 步 has a new[ly arriving] boat.” (宅有新屋，步有新船). In the Sòng dynasty Qīngxiàng zájì 青箱雜記 there is an even more thorough explanation: “In Lǐngnán (i.e., the areas of Guǎngdōng and Guǎngxī), one calls a river ford 步, describing that one wades through it in order to reach [the other shore of the river]. Therefore, there are zēngbù 罾步 and that refers to the place where fisherman deploy their nets; there are chuánbù 船步, which is where people get ferried over; today, one also calls them 步; therefore, in [the language of] Yángzhōu [a prefecture of Jiāngsū] there are guābù 瓜步, in Hóngzhōu (an area in Jiāngxī) there are guānbù 觀步, and in Mǐn a shore is referred to as xībù.”61 There are also many examples of the usage of this word during the Míng and the Qīng dynasties.

As such, the phrase in the example above refers to a river crossing of a small hamlet. The character bù 埠 is probably a derivation of 步. According to the Míng dynasty Tōngyǎ 通雅, bùtóu 埠頭 is defined as ‘border of the river > water’s edge/riverside’ (shuǐbīn 水瀕).62 The etymology of 步 can be reconstructed in the following way: During the Northern and Southern dynasties period, in the language of the Wú and Chǔ areas, 浦 was referred to as 步, expressing the meaning ‘river side’ or ‘water crossing’. Besides the phonetic similarity, there might also be an extension of meaning of 步: ‘step > wade through > cross water’. 步 with this semantic can be frequently observed in Táng dynasty texts. In order to distinguish this meaning from the regular semantic of 步, the graph 埠 was eventually coined and was used in Míng and Qīng dynasty works. Whereas in the north, the riverbank was mainly referred to as 務,63 步/埠/埗 is still circulating in southern varieties of Chinese,64 frequently in the compound 步頭, such as in Wú (bu²¹²-²¹dao²²)65 and Xiāng (pu⁵⁵təu¹²);66 monosyllabic versions are preserved in Gàn (p’u¹¹)67 and Mǐn (pɔ¹¹; see HYFYDCD: 2610). Among the Yuè dialects, Hongkongnese has a reference to this word in the placename Sham Shui Po 深水埗 (sam⁵⁵seoi²⁴bou²⁴).

3.3. Qián Bù Gòu Cūn 前不搆村

An early source of this phrase can be found in the Fóguǒ Yuánwú chánshī bìyán lù 佛果圜悟禪師碧巖錄, fasc. 7:

Xuědòu and Nánquán were walking hand-in-hand, having finished their discussion on a [Chán] phrase (i.e., had the same judgement on a gōng’àn case). The head monks of the two [meditation] halls, having no place to rest, are just stirring up smoke everywhere, it is unbearable. Thanks to Nánquán and him [i.e., Xuědòu] cutting through (i.e., solving) this gōng’àn (i.e., riddle-like phrases used in Chán pedagogics), [they] were able to obtain utmost purity. How can it be that they neither can move forward nor backward. Therefore, it is said: ‘Thanks to Nánquán being able to give the order, ‘cutting into two with one stroke [of the sword] all kind of one-sided views (e.g., prejudice)’.

雪竇與南泉把手共行，一句說了也。兩堂首座，沒歇頭處，到處只管撥動煙塵，柰何不得。賴得南泉與他斷這公案，收得淨盡。他爭柰前不搆村，後不迭店，所以道：“賴得南泉能舉令，一刀兩段任偏頗。”

(CBETA, T48n2003_p195a8-13)

In other Chán works, there are certain variations of the phrase 前不構村，後不迭店, such as in the Chánlín lèijù 禪林類聚: “前不至村後不至店” (fasc. 11, CBETA, X67n1299_p0066b7), the Wǔdēng huìyuán xùlüè 五燈會元續略: “前不遘村後不迭店” (fasc. 4, CBETA, X80n1566_p0523c19), and the Mì’ān héshàng yǔlù 密菴和尚語錄: “前不至村。後不迭店。” (fasc. 1, CBETA, T47n1999_p0958a6-7).68

The phrase 前不搆村 is frequently combined with 後不造店 (造 sometimes being replaced by 迭 or 至). Literally, it means ‘in front, unable to reach the village ahead; behind, unable to arrive at the inn (from which one set out on the travel).’ In Chán scriptures, it seems to have the transferred meaning, ‘being unable to move forward or backward > be stuck (in the middle).’ 搆 is preserved as 夠 in Southwestern Mandarin, meaning to ‘to stretch; extend’ in the Wǔhàn area and pronounced as kou³⁵ (in phrases such as 頸子夠酸了 ‘overstretch one’s neck’ or 夠到頸子看 ‘stretch one’s neck to look’, etc.).69

3.4. Yī Ái Yī Zā 一挨一拶

The earliest occurrence of this phrase can be found in the Recorded Sayings literature of the Sòng period:

“One asking, one answering, one approaching, one squeezing, one going out, one coming in; it is just like peeing on the meditation platform with open eyes, having a dream while standing up. If you are a fellow of clear understanding (lit. ‘bright eyes’), you must know it is not like what is handed down as essential matter [of the teaching].70 One just needs an extraordinary person who directly is able to sit [in meditation], cutting off the tongue of the people of this world.”

“一問一答、一挨一拶、一出一入，正如開眼尿床，立地作夢，若是明眼漢，須知不恁麼所以從上來事。只要箇奇特人直下承當得坐斷天下人舌頭。”

(Yuánwù Fóguǒ chánshī yǔlù 圓悟佛果禪師語錄, fasc. 10; CBETA, T47n1997_p0756b20-25)

In this passage, 一挨一拶 is part of a series of antonyms, and it can be assumed that 挨 and 拶 are also used as antonyms—or at least contrastive concepts—here, such as ‘lightly probing’ (āi) and ‘deeply checking’ (zā) in an encounter situation. However, in most texts, āizā is used as a compound ‘to probe into; inquire’ or “to put a question to someone to probe the depth of his understanding of Chan” (DDB; entry “挨拶”), such as in “This monk wants to probe that [Master] Zhàozhōu…” (這僧要挨拶他趙州; Fóguǒ Yuánwù chánshī Bìyán lù 佛果圜悟禪師碧巖錄; CBETA, T48n2003_p0182a20).71

The original meaning of āi is ‘to approach; come close’ and of zā ‘to squeeze; press’, as a compound āizā means ‘to check; to probe’. In the Chán Buddhist context, it obtained the extended meaning ‘(to approach and squeeze >) to probe into one’s understanding of Chán; to put forth a question to test somebody’s understanding’, and ‘to engage using questions and answers’ (Nakamura 2001: 2). Gradually, the word developed the meaning ‘to greet; greeting’.72 After the word was “exported” via Buddhist texts and Chinese travellers to Japan in medieval times, it gradually became part of colloquial Japanese, pronounced aisatsu あいさつ, a general word for ‘to greet sb. (formally)’. It is not quite clear where the general meaning ‘to greet’ developed, already in China or after its arrival in Japan.

The word has become obsolete in most Chinese dialects, but—based on the close contact with Japanese—it was probably reintroduced into Mǐnnánhuà in Taiwan (sometimes pronounced as ai³⁵sat⁵tsuh³). Based on the Japanese pronunciation, it should be regarded as a (reimported) loanword.

3.5. Pō Láng Pō Lài 潑郎潑賴/潑狼潑賴

In this expression, two semantic items are “nested” into each other, pōpō 潑潑 (‘lively; active’)73 and lánglài 狼賴, the meaning of the latter being more difficult to retrieve. Below is an example of the phrase, with a tentative translation:

[The master] ascended the hall and said: “The sun can be frozen and the moon can be heated up. The crowd of demons cannot destroy true words! Assembly, how about ‘genuine words’? If you are too relaxed, it will be too late (lit. believe-not-reach) [for you] to believe [in the genuine words]. Báiyún told you the following: ‘Firstly, it is necessary that the people of the assembly understand [the genuine words], secondly, it is necessary that the dragon-spirits know [them].’” He then grasped his monk’s robe with the tips of his fingers and said: “This is genuine red color, firmly state that it is dark red!”

上堂云：“日可冷，月可熱。眾魔不能壞真說。大眾，作麼生是真說？潑狼潑賴，若信不及。白雲為你道：‘一要眾人會，二要龍神知。’”乃拈起法衣云：“者箇真紅色。剛然道是緋。”

(Gǔzūnsù yǔlù 古尊宿語錄 fasc. 20, CBETA, X68n1315_p0136c24-p0137a03)74

Lánglài 狼賴 expresses the meaning as ‘relaxed; unrestrained; without control’,75 and it is preserved in Hakka (e.g., in Xīngníng) as lɔŋ²⁴lai³¹.76 Thus, the whole phrase in the text above means ‘to engage freely and unrestrained in an activity’ (in the Chán context usually referring to an enlightened person who has transcended all barriers; however, here the phrase has a negative meaning, ‘be [too] relaxed’). Pōlài 潑賴 is likewise preserved in Hakka (e.g., in the Méizhōu area), in the expression tai⁴pad⁵lai⁴ (Zhāng 1995: 172), referring to a small child starting to cry uncontrollably and in rage when it does not get what it wants (Yáng 2012: 112).

3.6. Xiáér Luójié 黠兒落節

In the mid-12th century Zhèng fǎyǎn zàng 正法眼藏, the four-character phrase appears in the following context:

When Huángbò was the head of the saṃgha hall at Nánquán’s, the acolyte Gānzhì requested him to make a donation. [Huáng]bo said: “Material riches and the Dharma (i.e., the Buddhist teaching), these two types of donations, they are without difference.” The acolyte took up the coins and left the hall. After a while, he asked again: “I request a donation.” [Huáng]bo repeated: “Material riches and the Dharma, these two types of donations, they are without difference.” [Gān]zhì thereupon used the money [himself]. Acolyte Gānzhì, this smart boy had real understanding. How could one have ever dreamt about Huángbò giving a donation?

黃檗在南泉作首座，甘贄行者請施財。檗云：“財法二施，等無差別。”行者舁錢出堂。須臾復云：“請施財。”檗云：“財法二施，等無差別。”贄便行錢。甘贄行者黠兒落節，黃檗施財何曾夢見。

(Zhèng fǎyǎn zàng 正法眼藏, fasc. 1; CBETA, X67n1309_p0578c08-11)77

In the Yúnmén Kuāngzhēn chánshī guǎnglù 雲門匡真禪師廣錄, fasc. 2, the phrase is written as 點兒落節, which obviously contains the mistake of 點 for 黠, based on the structural similarity between these two graphs. In this phrase, xiáěr 黠兒 refers to a ‘crafty/smart boy.’78 The expression luòjié appears quite frequently in Chán Buddhist contexts. Originally, it meant ‘to fail; to lose (money in one’s business) or an opportunity’;79 Mujaku Dōchū also explained this word as vernacular expression, meaning ‘to lose/suffer defeat’ (“俗語，猶言失利也”);80 however, in Chán Buddhism, it seems to have assumed a positive connotation, ‘to stop one’s delusion’, and—by implication—‘enlightenment’.81 (compare the entry in DDB). As such, the above phrase is meant as a praise of the acolyte Gānzhì. According to the HYFYDCD (p. 7399,)82 xiá 黠 is defined as ‘clever; smart; intelligent’, a dialect word of Old Ancient Northern Chinese of the Héběi and Liáoníng areas.83

The HYFYDCD has under the header “黠” the following polysyllabic entries: xiázhà 黠詐 (‘crafty; cunning’), xiágū 黠孤 (‘spoiled; broken’), xiáhuá 黠猾 (‘clever; crafty’), xiázázi 黠雜子 (‘crafty; clever person’), xiázázi 黠詐子 (‘crafty; clever person’), etc. The early 20th century scholar Lǐ Dǐngchāo 李鼎超 (1894–1931) still includes an entry in his Western Gānsù dialect dictionary (Lǒngyòu fāngyán 隴右方言): “Nowadays, when expressing ‘intelligent’, we say ‘黠猾’, read 吉骨 [jígǔ]; for ‘cunning’ we say ‘黠詐’, read like ‘戛詐’.” (今謂巧慧曰‘黠猾’，讀 ‘吉骨’二音。狡賴曰‘黠詐’，讀如‘戛詐’。”) (Lǐ 1988: 142). However, after the early 20th century 黠 in the meaning ‘cunning/intelligent’ seems to have become obsolete in the northern dialects.84

3.7. Jì Sǐ Chánhé 伎死禪和/徛死禪和

An early occurrence of this phrase can be found in the Liándēng huìyào 聯燈會要:

At one time there was the visiting monk Chéngyī asking the woman: “Why does [master] Nánquán have few opportunities (or: few devices of teaching)?” The woman cried out: “Pitiful, painful!” [Chéng]yī did not know what to do. The woman said: “Do you understand?” [Chéng]yī joined the palms of his hands and [just] stood there. The woman said: “Lifeless Chán monk! Like hemp, just like grain!” Later, Chéngyī brought this up to Zhàozhōu, who said: “When this stinking old woman will be interrogated by me, I will teach her how to shut up!” [Chéng]yī said: “How will you ask her?” [Zhào]zhōu then hit [him]. [Chéng]yī asked: “Why are you beating me?” [Zhào]zhōu answered: “You, this lifeless monk! What else can I do other than beat you!”

時有澄一禪客問婆云：“南泉為甚麼少機關在？”婆哭云：“可悲，可痛！”一罔措。婆云：“會麼？”一合掌而立。婆云：“伎死禪和，如麻似粟。” 後澄一舉似趙州。州云：“我若見這臭老婆問，教他口啞。”一云：“和尚作麼生問他？”州便打。一云：“為甚麼却打某甲？”州云：“儞這伎死禪和，不打更待何時。”

(fasc. 5; CBETA, X79n1557_p0054b01-06)

The phrase 伎死禪和, literarily meaning ‘standing [while] dead monk’, was already noticed by Mujaku Dōchū in his Kattōgo sen.85 As for the meaning 伎 here, the Lǎoxué àn bǐjì 老學庵筆記 glosses it as lì 立 ‘stand up straight’ (“When the rolled-up lotus is emerging from the water, it is standing up straight, therefore it is called jì hé”; 卷荷出水面，亭亭植立，故謂之伎荷。).86

The expression appears in several variations in Chán texts, and in the parallel passage of the Jǐngdé chuándēng lù, it is written as qì sǐ chánhé 徛死禪和 and qì sǐ hàn 徛死漢.87 In addition, 伎死 is occasionally also written as jù sǐ 距死 and in the northern Sòng Zǔtíng shìyuàn 祖庭事苑, with the following comment: “距死 should be written 倚死. 倚 has the fǎnqiè 巨綺 and the meaning ‘to stand’. 距 has the sound 巨, and the meaning ‘chicken leg’. It is also written 伎, meaning ‘together with/give’, which does not have any meaning here (i.e., indicating that it is used phonetically).’” (距死□當作倚死。倚。巨綺切。立也。距。音巨。雞距也。或作伎。與也。竝非義).88 As such, the work identifies 倚死 as the “correct” orthography. In the earlier Zhàozhōu héshàng yǔlù 趙州和尚語錄, based on material of the Táng Dynasty, jì is written as lì 立 in the phrase rútóng lì sǐ hàn 如同立死漢 (‘just like a dead fellow standing up’; CBETA, J24nB137_p0366c05-07). Compare also the Wǔdēng huìyuán 五燈會元 which features the phrase “[they] are all dead fellows standing on the ground” (盡是立地死漢; CBETA, X80no1565_p0234a05-07).

Here we may ask the question why was lì 立 ‘to stand’ eventually replaced by jì 徛/倚/奇? The answer may be found in the regions where the Chán texts were compiled. Whereas the Zhàozhōu héshàng yǔlù probably reflected a Mandarin variety spoken in the north, works such as the Jǐngdé chuándēng lù (compiled between 1004 and 1007) occasionally featured intrusions of the Wú language as spoken during the Sòng Dynasty, since its compiler Dàoyuán was a native of a Wú speaking region. Since Chán collections frequently aimed at reflecting “living words” (i.e., the contemporary vernacular), the vocabulary was sometimes adjusted to the local colloquial language.

The meaning ‘to stand’ is preserved in several central and southern dialects (Cantonese: kei5/kei¹; Gàn: qi⁵; Hakka: khî/ki¹; Mǐn: kiê/khiā/khiǎ /khǎ/kia⁶; Xiāng: ji⁵).89

4. Discussion and Conclusions

Although colloquial expressions retrieved from Late Medieval Chinese texts have been under scholarly scrutiny for several decades—with the various semi-vernacular genres preserved in Dūnhuáng manuscripts constituting an extremely rich source—relatively little attention has been paid to the study of colloquial Chán materials of the Five Dynasties and Sòng periods in this respect. One of the reasons might be the great obstacles which the highly metaphoric and enigmatic language of these texts pose for linguistic analysis. However, a systematic reading of these sources proves to be highly rewarding, and frequently, this type of Chán text constitutes the earliest extant source for colloquial and regional lexical items.90 In this preliminary study, we have focused on investigating words which are still preserved in contemporary Sinitic languages and dialects and have attempted to reconstruct their paths of development.

During the Táng and the early Sòng, many colloquial and/or regional expressions surfaced in a written form for the first time. Since the Chinese writing system was traditionally designed to express lexical items of Literary Chinese, committing expressions of the spoken language of specific periods to a written form posed great difficulties, based on the non-alphabetic/non-syllabic nature of the Chinese writing system. Chinese characters were nonetheless often used for their phonetic value to render colloquial words, including those which derived from non-Sinitic lexical layers.

The idea of recording the “living words” (as opposed to the “dead words” of the sūtra translation and commentary literature in Literary Chinese/Buddhist Hybrid Chinese) in the compilations of the teachings of Sòng Dynasty Chán masters did not only facilitate the surfacing of many colloquial expressions of the contemporary standard language, but also furthered the intrusion of regional expressions, since the works often were the product of compilers of local Buddhist lineage systems. In this study, we have focused on lexical items which are still used in modern Sinitic languages.

The path of development of many of these lexical items is highly interesting. They appeared in various types of written materials of different periods and left various textual “traces” in their individual development. Several of them disappeared in the Northern Mandarin areas where they were sometimes superseded by new layers of lexicon which often replaced more “archaic” vocabulary, as well as dialect words and expressions which had a non-Sinitic background. However, many of these items were preserved regionally in the Modern Sinitic languages and local sub-varieties.

Several of the lexical items investigated in this paper—such as línglì 伶俐 and pǒnài 叵耐—were regularly used in the literature of the Míng and Qīng periods, and as such, gradually lost their regional features and became part of the common language of these periods.

Ái 捱 (挨) is frequently encountered in Sòng Dynasty Chán works, and there are no references to this word in historical dictionaries prior to the 11th century where it is defined as ‘to refuse; to resist’. The Buddhist textual corpus under investigation here is thus the earliest source for the meaning ‘to prolong; to delay’, a meaning not recorded in lexicographical material prior to the Míng Dynasty. Already at that time, the word was identified as a regional expression, and the specific meaning ‘to procrastinate’ survived in Mǐn, as well as some Mandarin dialects spoken in Héběi and Shāndōng.

Likewise, the Five Dynasties/early Sòng Buddhist 10th century Chán Buddhist transmission text Zǔtáng jí seems to be the earliest source for the disyllabic word dòuhé 闘合 in the meaning ‘to meet; encounter’, although its monosyllabic form in various orthographies (闘/鬭/逗/鬥) can be traced back to earlier periods, including the Shuōwén jiězì. The meaning ‘meet; encounter > join together’ is preserved in Southwestern Mandarin and Hakka.

Cuānduō 攛掇 nearly simultaneously surfaces in Neo-Confucian and Chán Buddhist literature of the Sòng, in the meaning ‘to urge; to pressure; to encourage’, and somewhat later more negatively, ‘incite somebody (to do something bad)’. The original meaning is attested in contemporary Southwestern Mandarin.

The path of development of āizā 挨拶, lit. meaning ‘to approach and squeeze’, is highly remarkable. It surfaces for the first time in the metaphorical meaning ‘to probe and squeeze (during a meeting) > to engage in a discussion/debate (about the Buddhist teaching)’ in Sòng dynasty Buddhist texts. After its introduction to Japan (probably during the 13th century when great numbers of Sòng dynasty Chán works were transmitted to Japan), it gradually developed the more general meaning of ‘(to encounter >) greet’, used first in a monastic and later in a common context. In China, the word seemed to have fallen into oblivion, but has been reintroduced locally to Taiwan via Japan.

Some expressions originally appeared in earlier periods of language development and developed extended/metaphorical meanings in Sòng dynasty Buddhist texts. For example, duō 咄 can be traced to the Hàn dynasty, the meaning as a full verb being ‘to curse; scold’. Subsequently, its semantic transformed, and in the Chán Buddhist texts of the late Táng and Sòng, it surfaced as an exclamative with high frequency, usually in the context of derogatory statements. In the pre-modern period, another regional meaning seems to have been circulating, ‘to address somebody (a meaning already mentioned in the Shuōwén jiězì) > a superior addressing a person of inferior rank’. In modern regional varieties of Chinese, the original meanings of ‘curse; scold’, in addition to ‘sigh’ are preserved.

The colloquial word línglì 靈利 surfaced in Táng dynasty texts in the meaning ‘quick-witted; intelligent’ and was frequently encountered from the Sòng onward in the extended meaning ‘intelligent > insightful > enlightened’. From early on, it was identified as a regional expression in Southern Sinitic languages, such as Wú, Hakka, and Mǐn. Xiá 黠 has a similar semantic and appears occasionally in the phrase xiáér luójié 黠兒落節 which contains another colloquialism, luójié 落節 ‘to fail; lose’. As in the case of 厙, the word’s meaning was frequently obscured based on the misspelling of 黠 as 點. When luójié surfaced in Sòng Buddhist literature, it also assumed positive connotations.

Another frequently used expression in Chán dialogue literature is pǒnài, which can be traced to the Late Táng period. Remarkably, it was already identified as colloquialism in Táng dynasty lexicographical material. It seems to have circulated in the meaning ‘unbearable’ until approximately the Yuán dynasty in the north and was eventually replaced by other synonymous expressions; however, the original meaning is preserved until today in some varieties of Southern Mǐn.

Suǒ 索 is an ancient word (Ancient Chinese: [s]ˤak) for ‘to search’ and is also encountered in Late Medieval Buddhist vernacular literature in the form of 色 (probably functioning as phonetic loan character), with the specialized meaning ‘to search for a wife’. It is already identified in historical texts as a regional and “archaic” expression. This meaning of suǒ is still extant in some Central Mandarin dialects and in the Jìn language (which is known for having preserved many Ancient Chinese features as compared to other northern dialects).

The meaning of colloquialisms is especially difficult to reconstruct in idiomatic four-character phrases. Early examples of lánglài 狼賴 are only encountered in “nested” idiomatic phrases of Chán literature, meaning something like ‘be (too) relaxed (and lacking seriousness)’. It is preserved in present-day Hakka, meaning ‘unrestrained; without control’.

Another expression appearing in idiomatic phrases of Sòng dynasty Chán works is gòu 搆. In this type of text, bù gòu seems to have a transferred meaning ‘not to be able to arrive at’, and by extension ‘to be stuck, unable to move’. A more basic meaning of the word is preserved in the Mandarin of Wǔhàn and the southwest, meaning ‘to (over-) stretch; extend’.

Léichuí 纍垂 first appeared as part of idiomatic phrases in Chán material, lit. meaning ‘(the nostrils are) hanging down’. Its original meaning is difficult to reconstruct but seems to be ‘to drop’, also based on the co-appearance with the antonym liáo(tiān) 撩(天) (‘raise up’). The meaning ‘to drop’ is preserved in the Wú dialect.

We also located regional expressions with differing and sometimes erroneous spellings which made the words difficult to interpret for subsequent generations. Tiánshènù 田厙奴 is a particular expression surfacing in Sòng dynasty Chán texts, and its meaning seems to have become enigmatic from early on, also based on the frequent confusion of the characters 厙 and (kù) 庫. The phrase seems to be specifically used in this type of literature as a derogatory expression for an uneducated person coming from the countryside.

Likewise, the surface meaning of bùtóu could be easily confused based on the orthography 步頭 in early sources. It seems to be the transcription of an originally non-Sintic word of the Wú and Chǔ areas, referring to a river crossing. It was early on identified as regional expression and later de-ambiguized in the form of 埠頭. The word is still used in the Guǎngdōng area and appears frozen in numerous place names.

Within the limited scope of this study, we hope to have shown that the thorough study of lexical items of colloquial Buddhist texts of the Táng and Sòng periods still can yield important insights concerning the diachronic development of the semantics of words preserved in modern Sinitic languages and dialects. Obviously, these developments are often “non-linear” but are influenced by a variety of parameters, such as the genre features of the texts they first surface in, the origin of the author/compiler, the paths of (over-regional) spread of the texts, their frequency of use in genre-specific contexts, their integration into the common language of a respective period and a specific speech community, as well as many other factors. A thorough and more systematic understanding of these processes of semantic developments and transformations, as well as a detailed knowledge of semantic and metaphorical extensions in the context of Chinese Buddhist literature, will necessitate further studies in this field.