<I>yu</I>

The Omission of the Co-verb Yu ©ó in Classical Chinese-- with Special Reference to the Hsun-tzu ¯û¤l

Sue-mei Wu
The Ohio State University

Abstract:

The conditions for the omission of yu ©ó in Classical Chinese texts have remained a mystery. Several factors, such as dialect variation, adjustment of syllable number for parallelism, the author's individual style, and the verb preceding yu are thought to be related to its omission. This investigates the extent to which the parallelism factor determines the omission of yu. Its aim is to evaluate whether or not parallelism alone provides a sufficient and appropriate explanation for the omission of yu. The examples are selected primarily from the Hsun-tzu.

I. The omission of yu in ancient texts

The omission of yu is common but seemingly arbitrary in Classical Chinese texts. Note how the presence or absence of yu seems to be arbitrary in these examples of location phrases.

(1)

¦b :

(a)¦b¤ý©ÒªÌ,ªø¥®¨õ´L¡C (©s¤l¼ð¤å¤½¤U)

(b)¦b©ó¤ý©ÒªÌ,ªø¥®¨õ´L¡C (©s¤l¼ð¤å¤½¤U)

¤J:

(a)¤l¤J¤Ó¼q,¨C¨Æ°Ý¡C (½×»y,¤K¨Û)

(b)¹ª¤è¨û¤J©óªe,¼½¥üªZ¤J©óº~,¤Ö®v¶§À»¿kÁ¸¤J©ó®ü¡C (½×»y, ·L¤l)

¯A:

(a)µS¯A®üÆwªe¦Ó¨Ï¤å°Ýt¤s¡C (²ø¤l,À³«Ò¤ý)

(b)§g¨ä¯A©ó¦¿¦Ó¯B©ó®ü¡C (²ø¤l,¤s¤ì)

Each of the above pairs of sentences are from the same texts and have a verb followed by a phrase indicating location. In group (b), the location is indicated by yu, while in group (a) the location is presented without yu.

As exemplified by group (2) below, the presence or absence of yu also seems to be arbitrary in phrases that do not indicate location.

(2)

®®:

(a)®®¿Ë¦³¹D¡C (©s¤l, Â÷°ú)

(b)¤Ï¨¤£¸Û,¤£®®©ó¿Ë¨o¡C (©s¤l,Â÷°ú)

Æ[:

(a)©TÆ[©ó®üªÌÃø ¤ô,¹C©ó¸t¤H¤§ªùªÌÃø¬°¨¥¡C (©s¤l,ºÉ¤ß)

(b)Æ[¤ô¦³³N,¥²Æ[¨äÄi¡C (©s¤l,ºÉ¤ß)

©ú:

(a)¦¹§^©Ò¿×©ú²Ó¦Ó¤£©ú¤j¤]¡C (¾¥¤l,¤Ñ§Ó¤¤)

(b)«h¬O¤Ñ¤U¤h§g¤l¬Ò©ú©ó¤p¦Ó¤£©ú©ó¤j¡C (¾¥¤l,¤Ñ§Ó¤U)

From the examples in (1) and (2), it seems that the presence or absence of the co-verb yu is arbitrary, and several studies have attempted to explain this phenomenon. A frequently suggested explanation is that the presence or absence of yu is for the sake of parallelism; it can be added or taken away in order to equalize the number of characters in two adjacent phrases or clauses. In the following example parallelism does seem to be a factor.

(3)

(a)¾ï¥Í²a«n«h¬°¾ï,¥Í©ó²a¥_«h¬°ÏL¡C (®Ë¤l¬K¬î, ¤º½gÂø¤U²Ä¤»)

(b)¤é¥XªF¤è¦Ó¤J©ó¦è·¥¡C (²ø¤l,¥Ð¤l¤è)

In the above example, the yu indicating location is absent in the first sentence or clause, but present in the second. In (3a), the two sentences are parallel sentences each consisting of two clauses connected by the conjunction ze «h. As we know, the verb sheng ¥Í can occur with or without yu to indicate location, and most importantly, the presence or absence of yu does not seem to result in any semantic difference. In (3a) the first yu is apparently omitted to equalize the number of characters with the first clause of the second sentence. Similarly, in (3b), which consists of parallel clauses connected by the conjunction er ¦Ó, the co-verb yu appears to be omitted in order to have only four characters in the first clause. In this way, the number of characters in both clauses is identical. These two examples demonstrate that adjusting character number for parallelism can be a factor in the determination of the omission of the co-verb. Given this, we would like to know how important of a factor it is. Also, are there any better or more appropriate explanations for this phenomenon? This study investigates this factor closely with special reference to the Hsun-tzu.

2. Parallelism in the Hsun-tzu

As we know, the Hsun-tzu is reputedly written by Hsun Ch'ing ¯ûë. In total there are thirty-two chapters in the work. Liang Ch'i-ch'ao ±ç±Ò¶Wholds that chapters one through 26 were written by Hsun-tzu himself, but chapters 27 to 32 were written by some Han dynasty Confucians. One of the most striking features of the Hsun-tzu is its parallel sentences. Hsun-tzu is known to have paid great attention to rhetorical aspects of writing, and his work was regarded as that of a scholar. Since parallelism is very common in the Hsun-tzu text, we should keep this factor in mind as a clue to help us better understand the meaning. The following passage illustrates this point.

(4)

¬G¥²±N¦³®vªk¤§¤Æ,Â§¸q¤§¹D,µM«á¥X©óÃãÅý,¦X©ó¤å²z¦ÓÂk©óªv¡C

The word ®v could be construed as a verb in the phrase ®vªk¤§¤Æ. But if we are aware of the parallelism aspect, we know that ®vªk is a unit parallel to Â§¸q. Thus we can arrive at the correct interpretation for the passage.

3. The omission of yu for parallelism

While it appears that adjusting character number for parallelism can be a factor for the omission of yu, we do not consider this a sufficient explanation, or even the major factor, for all yu omission phenomena. We will argue that the crucial determining factor is the nature of the verb which precedes the yu phrase. Parallelism is only a secondary criterion. The first clue leading to this conclusion is that yu can be either present or absent in non-parallel sentences as well as parallel sentences. Consider the following examples of yu with the verb ©ú.

Non-parallel:

(5)©ú:

(a)©T©ú©ó¤Ñ¤H¤§¤À¡A«h¥i¿×¦Ü¤H¨o¡C(¤Ñ½×17)

(b)©T³àÂ§ªÌ¡AµL¥L²j¡A©ú¦º¥Í¤§¸q¡A°e¥H«s·q¡A¦Ó²×©PÂÃ¤]¡C(Â§½×19)

Parallel:

(c)ª¾ªÌ©ú©ó¨Æ¡A¹F©ó¼Æ¡A¤£¥i¥H¤£¸Û¨Æ¤]¡C(¤j²¤11)

(d)©úÂ§¸q¥H¤Æ¤§¡A°_ªk¥¿¥Hªv¤§¡A«¦D»@¥H¸T¤§¡C(©Ê´c23)

In (5a) and (5b) we do not have parallelism as an explanation for the seemingly arbitrary presence of the yu. Consider also the following example:

(6)

¥Í©ó°ª¤s¤§¤W¦ÓÁ{¦Ê¥Q¤§²W¡A¤ì²ô«D¯àªø¤]¡A©Ò¥ßªÌµM¤]¡C(ÄU¾Ç1)

Example (6) is a parallel sentence which indicates the two locations °ª¤s¤§¤W and ¦Ê¥Q¤§²W. However, the number of characters in each of the two clauses connected by the conjunction er is not equal. If adjusting character number for parallelism is a crucial factor in the omission of yu, why not add a yu after Á{ or delete the yu after ¥Í? It seems that it would be acceptable to have yu either present or omitted in both clauses. After examining the concordance for occurrences of the verb lin Á{ in the Hsun-tzu text, we find that it always occurs without yu. So the absence of yu in the second clause is due to the presence of Á{. Now let's turn to the verb ¥Í. As we know, it is common for ¥Í to occur either with or without yu. Why not omit the yu in the first clause for the sake of adjusting character number? Let's examine another parallel example as follows.

(7)«C¡B¨ú¤§©óÂÅ¦Ó«C©óÂÅ; ¦B¡B¤ô¬°¤§¦Ó´H©ó¤ô¡C(ÄU¾Ç1)

These two sentences are parallel with each other. The topics are indicated first, «C and ¦B. Each sentence consists of two clauses connected by er. As we can see, the first clause in the first sentence, ¨ú¤§©óÂÅ, having four characters, differs from the other parallel clauses which have three characters. But it could easily be adjusted. First of all, ¤§ can be omitted resulting in ¨ú©óÂÅ¦Ó«C©óÂÅ. Second, if yu is omitted based on adjusting character number then it should be omitted here. But yu cannot be omitted in this case due to the transitive verb ¨ú. In this case, the transitive verb ¨ú combines with ¤§ as a VO construction. Since ¨ú itself doesn't carry the location sense, when the VO is followed by another phrase indicating the location, yu must be present. Let's examine the transitive verb ¨ú as follows.

First of all, the transitive verb ¨ú needs an object as its argument. For example,

(8)¦Ê¨½¤§¦a, ¥i¥H¨ú¤Ñ¤U¡C(¤ýÅQ11)

A transitive verb, such as ¨ú here, usually combines with its object to form a verbal phrase. Moreover, the verbal phrase can be followed by a yu phrase as shown in (9).

(9) ¤W¦n³g§Q¡A«h¦Ú¤U¦Ê¦O¼¬O¦Ó«áÂ×¨ú¨è»P¡A¥HµL«×¨ú©ó¥Á¡C (§g¹D12)

In this case, the yu phrase indicates the location (source). We propose that in this case, when the yu phrase comes after the verb ¨ú, the yu phrase serves as the focus in the predicate, resulting in a shift of emphasis. (This paper focuses on the omission of yu. Therefore, we will not discuss this shift further here.)

When the transitive verb combines with an object to form a VO construction, if there is a yu phrase indicating location, since the verb ¨ú does not imply location sense, the yu must be present to indicate the location.

(10)¤W¨ú¶H©ó¤Ñ¡A¤U¨ú¶H©ó¦a¡A¤¤¨ú«h©ó¤H¡C (Â§½×19) (11)¤W«h¨úÅ¥©ó¤W¡A¤U«h¨ú±q©ó«U¡C («D¤Q¤G¤l6)

(10) and (11) are parallel sentences but yu is present due to the verb preceding it. This phenomenon can be further illustrated by the following examples.

(12)¤£¥H±o¸o©ó¤ñ«U¤§¤H¤]¡C (×¨2)

(13)¦Ó¯Á¤§©ó¥½¡C (Ä³§L15)

(14)¤µ¤k¤£¨D¤§©ó¥»¡C (Ä³§L15)

(15)©¼±N¤é¤é®À¹yºÜ¤§©ó¤³¼Ä¡C (Â§½×19)

These examples show that when a transitive verb combines with its object in a VO construction which is followed by a location phrase, the yu needs to be present.

Now go back to example (7):

«C¡B¨ú¤§©óÂÅ¦Ó«C©óÂÅ;¦B¡B¤ô¬°¤§¦Ó´H©ó¤ô¡C(ÄU¾Ç1) Though it is a parallel sentence, the number of characters in each of the two clauses is not identical. The presence or absence of yu in this case is due to the verb preceding the yu phrase, ¨ú, which needs yu to indicate the location. Here we see that it is the verb's intrinsic property that is determining the presence or absence of yu, while the factor of parallelism turns out to be less important.

Let's re-examine examples (3a) and (3b) in order to give a better explanation of the omission of yu.

(3)

In these two examples, the verbs, ¥Í, ¥X and ¤J, intrinsically carry a sense of location. Thus, the yu which follows indicating the location can be present or omitted. If the author is concerned with having a parallel number of characters, these particular verbs allow both the presence or absence of yu without any semantic difference. That is, these two examples further support that the crucial determining factor of the omission of yu is the nature of the verb which precedes it. Factors such as adjusting the number of characters in a line are secondary.

Now, let us take the verb ¦b as a further example to illustrate this point. Since the verb ¦b itself carries the location sense, the author feels free to either include or omit yu for the sake of parallelism without resulting in any semantic difference.

(17)½´¥Í³Â¤¤,¤£§ß¦Óª½,¥Õ¨F¦b¯I ,»P¤§Ñ¶Â¡C (ÄU¾Ç1)
(18)¨¸Â©¦b¨¡A«è¤§©Òºc¡C (ÄU¾Ç1)
(19)ñ¯Æk¤@ÅD¡A¤£¯à¤Q¨B¡F¾q °¨¤Q¾r¡A¥\¦b¤£ªÙ¡C (ÄU¾Ç1)

Examples (17) to (19) are all parallel sentences. The verbal phrase ¦b occurs without yu. In the following parallel examples, ¦b co-occurs with yu for the sake of number of characters in a line.

Conclusion:

From investigating the yu omission phenomena in the Hsun-tzu, We have demonstrated that adjusting the number of characters in a line or sentence for parallelism is not the crucial determining factor in yu omission. The crucial factor is the verb which precedes the yu phrase. When the verb itself does not carry location sense and is followed by a location phrase, yu must be present. When the verb itself carries some sense of location, the yu may be omitted for parallelism. We see that the presence or omission of yu is not arbitrary, and it is only with certain verbs that allow either its presence or omission, namely verbs with intrinsic location sense, that parallelism may become a factor.

References

Fung Yu-lan. ¶¾¤ÍÄõ. 1948. A Short History of Chinese Philosophy. 1985 reprinted by Taipei: Shuangye Shudian.

________. Zhongguo Zhexue Shi-Fububian ¤¤°êõ¾Ç¥v--ªþ¸É½s. Taipei: Landeng Bookstore.

Huang Liuping ¶À¤»¥. 1974, <<º~»y¤å¨¥»yªkºõn>>, »´ä, ¤¤µØ®Ñ§½.

Liang Chi-chao ±ç±Ò¶W. "¯ûë¤Î¯û¤l", <<¤¤°ê¥j¥v¬ã¨s²Ä¥|¥U>>.

Liu Jingnong ¼B´º¹A. 1956, <<º~»y¤å¨¥»yªk>>, ¥_¨Ê, ¤¤µØ®Ñ§½.

________. 1981, <<¥j¥Nº~»y>>(×q¥»), ¥_¨Ê, ¤¤µØ®Ñ§½.

Watson, Burton. 1963. Hsun Tzu. New York: Columbia University Press.

Xong Gongzhe ºµ¤½õ. 1975. Xunzi Jinzhu Jinyi ¯û¤l¤µµù¤µÄ¶. Taipei: Taiwan Shangwu Yinshuguan.

Yang Bojun ·¨§B®m. 1963, <<¤å¨¥¤åªk>>, ¥_¨Ê, ¤¤µØ®Ñ§½.

The Omission of the Co-verb Yu ©ó in Classical Chinese-- with Special Reference to the Hsun-tzu ¯û¤l

Sue-mei Wu The Ohio State University

References

Sue-mei Wu
The Ohio State University