'Self-fulfilling prophecy': How Chinese characters
confer independent status on elements that were not originally independent
(This is a side note to the page The
Chinese Writing System)
By breaking polysyllabic forms into
individual syllables, Chinese characters give them an independence they
would not normally have. This has created something of a 'self-fulfilling prophecy',
as though English broke 'rabbit' into two words, 'rabb' and 'it', and people
then assumed that 'rabb' could be used freely to create new words like 'rabb-hunt'
or 'rabb-stew'.
An excellent example of this is the naming of the wren-babblers in
Chinese.
The Chinese word for 'wren' is jiao1liao2 (simplified  ) an
age-old word that is written with two characters. Although consisting of two
syllables and written in two characters, jiao1liao2 is
a single word -- the character jiao1 is
never used alone or in any other character combination, and liao2 is
used in the names of the mynahs but
nowhere else. It is only the writing system that splits jiao1liao2 into
two parts.
It seems clear that the 'wren babblers', species of small birds that form
part of a far larger group of 'babblers', were originally regarded as a kind
of 'wren', jiao1liao2, at
least in their naming.
However, naturalists tend to feel uncomfortable with misleading bird
names, so Mainland scientists understandably tidied things up. They added mei2 'babbler'
to the names of the 'wren babblers' in order to make it clear that they are,
in fact, 'babblers' and not 'wrens'. They then went on to create separate
names for different species of wren-babbler using the two characters in jiao1liao2.
- The first character,
jiao1,
was combined with mei2 'babbler'
to make a composite name for wren-babblers in the genera Napothera and Pnoepyga:  jiao1 mei2.
- The second character,
liao2,
was combined with mei2 to
make another composite name for the genera Rimator, Spelaeornis,
and Sphenocichla:  liao2 mei2
In this way, the single, originally indivisible word jiao1liao2,
has been split into two individual parts for word-building purposes.
This kind of phenomenon is described by Hannas as follows:
Because Chinese characters represent both morphemes and syllables, linguists
use the term "morphosyllabic" to identify the system within the
taxonomy of world orthographies. Does this mean all Chinese morphemes are
made up of one syllable? Not at all. Although this is largely the case
in modern standard Mandarin, particularly as it is written, it was not
true of the archaic language, nor does it apply to the spoken language
in its many varieties. Rather, the monosyllabism of Chinese morphology
is an artifact of character-based writing, which imposes a one-to-one relationship
on the language's sound, script, and meaningful units. Given the holistic
relationship between characters, their meanings, and their sounds, characters
as the most conspicuous units in that triad define all legs of the relationship,
including the link between sound and meaning -- a link that is reinterpreted
in terms of the writing system's requirements.
[Owing to the character writing system] there is significant pressure on
users to impute meaning to each character of a multi-syllable morpheme, even
when the morpheme's one meaning is expressed over all of the syllables. The
fact that Chinese feel obliged to assign as many characters to a term as
there are syllables in the term is a function of the shift that occurred
in the typology of Chinese writing to a phonetic-based system. This change
did not, however, nullify the practice of associating a meaning with each
character. If two characters in a single term share the same meaning, one
character tends to take on the meaning of the whole term. That character
is then used alone or in new compound terms with different morphemes, in
a de facto validation of the reduction process.
(See Chinese
Writing at Pinyin Info, which reproduces the first chapter from
The Writing on the Wall: How Asian Orthography Curbs Creativity by William
C. Hannas, 2003.)
More on the writing of disyllabic words can be found at The
addition of a meaningful radical in creating Chinese characters. |