New Persian vowels transcribed in Ming China

SHINJIIDO NAGOYA UNIVERSITY NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA 1 RESUME Cet article analyse les mots neo-persans transcrits en caracteres chinois dans le huihuiguan zazi, un glossaire persan-chinois compile dans la Chine des Ming. Cette analyse revele une correspondance entre les oppositions vocaliques du tadj ik mo­ deme et ceux de la variete du neo-persan dont les mots sont presents dans le glos­ saire. En outre, sur la base de temoignages historiques, ]'article identifie cette va­ riante comme un type de neo-persan prirnitif du quinzieme siecle, qui etait employe pour l'usage diplomatique a la cour timouride de Samarcande. Mots-cles : persan modeme, tadj ik, dari, mandarin ancien, Timurides, huihuiguan zazi, dengyun tujing ABSTRACT This paper analyses New Persian words transcribed in Chinese script in huihuiguan zazi, a New Persian-Chinese glossary compiled in Ming China. The analysis reveals a correspondence between the vowel contrasts of modem Taj ik and those of the variety of New Persian whose words are recorded in the glossary. This paper also identifies, based on historical records, the variety as an early fifteenth­ century New Persian which had diplomatic currency in the Timurid court in Samarkand. Keywords: New Persian, Taj ik, Dari, Early Mandarin, Timurids, huihuiguan zazi, dengyun tujing The author acknowledges financial support for this research from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) #25370490). CAHIER DE STUD/A !RAN/CA 57, 2015, p. 99-136. 100 s. 100 1. INTRODUCTION The present paper analyses New Persian words (and some bound mor­ phemes) transcribed in Chinese script in huihuiguan zdzi @l@ltB�¥. a (1368- New Persian-Chinese glossary compiled during the Ming period 1644). The analysis reveals that 1) huihuiguan zdzi distinguishes six the system of transcription employed in vowels in the variety of New Persian whose words are transcribed in the glossary and that 2) the six vowels are in correspondence with those of modem Tajik. Since the analysis in this paper draws its data from huihuiguan zdzi, or more specifically from huihuiguan zdzi type 1 (see below), an explanation of the glossary is in order. Huihuiguan zdzi constitutes, depending on different copies,2 the sole or the main section of huihuiguan yiyii @I @I tB��� which in turn makes up a section of hudyi yiyii -����. a collection of Sino-Xenic glossaries that was compiled to aid the decipherment and translation of documents in for­ 3 eign scripts advanced to the Ming dynasty. Hudy{ yiyii has been subject to 4 extensive research since the early twentieth century, when the current cus­ tom of classifying various manuscripts and printed copies of hudyi yiyii into 5 the three types of A, B, and C was introduced by Ishida. The three types differ in their contents and formats. Hudy{ yiyii type A, whose compilation started in 1382 and lasted for seven years, does not contain any Persian data 6 and hence does not concern us in this paper. On the other hand, hudyi yiyii type B and type C respectively contain huihuiguan zdzi type 1 and huihuiguan zdzi type 2, which are the two known versions of huihuiguan zdzi. Huihuiguan zdzi type 1 (HZl), a manuscript of which serves as a source of data in this paper, differs partly from huihuiguan zdzi type 2 (HZ2) in their contents and formats, suggesting their different times and/or places 7 of compilation. In the manuscripts and printed copies of HZl, Persian lexi- 2 There is at least one copy of hufhufguiin yiyu that does not comprise hufhufguiin zazl; see Honda 1963, pp. 63-64 and Liu 2008, pp. 10-14 for bibliographical descriptions of hufhufguiin ylyu. Kanda 1948, p. 1. 4 See Endo et al. 2007. Ishida l 973a, pp. 10-24. These three types are respectively ki5 '13, otsu Z.,, and hei p;j in Japanese, in which he published his work. 6 Hudy[ ylyu type A consists only of a Mongolian-Chinese glossary and example sen­ tences. Some manuscripts of HZl also differ from those of HZ2 in accompanying examples of written communication in 'pidgin Persian' (see Honda 1963, pp. 71-73). NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA 101 cal items appear in both their original forms (i.e. in Arabic script) and in their transcribed forms (i.e. in Chinese script), whereas HZ2 dispenses with the former and is written entirely in Chinese script. According to Ishida, huay( ylyu type B, which comprises HZl , was ini­ tially compiled during Yongle's reign (1402-1424) at slyfguan [Y�fill "the 8 Translators Institute" and was continually revised by the institute and its successor institute named slylguan [9 ��fill I sryfguan [9 �fill in Qing 9 China. Thus, while the precise time of compilation of HZl is not estab­ lished, it is generally assumed to have been compiled initially in the Yongle period at the Translators Institute after it was founded in terms 11<�;;$: "Yongle version" and 10 often used in reference to HZl . [9 �fill;;$: "sryfguan 1407, hence the version" that are Honda examines six different surviving manuscripts and printed copies of HZl and observes that after the glossary was first compiled its contents re­ mained for the most part unchanged throughout the Ming and Qing 11 The variety of New Persian whose words are recorded in HZl periods. therefore probably date to the time around the reign of Yongle. This in tum assigns the contents of the "Berlin library manuscript" (see §3), a Ming­ period manuscript of HZl which this paper utilizes as the source of data, to 12 the early fifteenth century. The Ming dynasty established the institute a few years after the transfer of the capital from Nanjing to Beijing in 1403. The institute initially comprised eight divisions, of which hufhufguiin @] @]Ml, a division that was in charge of Persian translation, was one. (Hamada Siyfguiin has been variously translated as "the Ming dynasty Four Barbarians' 2005, p. 114). Office" (Harbsmeier 1998, p. 83), ''the Barbarian [Languages] Translation Bureau" (Hecker 1993, p. 91), "the Bureau of Translations" (Aisin-Gioro & Jin 2007, p. 137), etc. in English. Miya 2004, p. 174 speculates that at siyfguiin translation from Chinese to foreign languages may have had priority over that from foreign languages to Chinese, because the dynasty of Hami carried out the latter for reports coming from states west of China. Ishida 1973b, pp. 148-149. IO See e.g. Sarashina 2002, p. 145, Hamada 2005, Liu 2006, p. 30, 2008, and Li 2011, p. 122. 11 Honda 1963, p. 64. This perfunctoriness may reflect that in the post-Yongle Ming's diplomatic relationship with Central Asia and the Middle East (see Tasaka 1964, pp. 1055-1056, Hecker 1993, p. 95, and Rossabi 1998, p. 251, Kauz 2005, p. 255). 12 hufhufguiin zdzi or part of them may predate hudyf yiyii type B and hence that the 'Berlin library manuscript' may contain pre-Yongle material. This is because the compilation of hudyf yiyii type B and that It must be pointed out here that the contents of the compilation of of each Sino-Xenic glossary which composes it need not coincide. This is the case also with hudyf yiyii type C (see Ishida 1973b, pp. 13-16 and Watanabe 1960, p. 125). Indeed, a manuscript of HZ2 held in Beijing Library is reported by Liu 2008, p. 11 to bear a seal 102 S. IDO Siy(guan was specifically in charge of translation in the sphere of foreign relations, as was hu(hu(guan @]@]tS, the division within siy(guan that was in charge of Persian translation. We can therefore fairly safely assume the Per­ sian pronunciation transcribed in HZl to have had official diplomatic cur­ rency in the Persianate world in the early fifteenth century. Determining where this variety originates from (or, indeed whether it can be associated with a particular geographical area) is not easy, not least because Persian was one of the main languages for diplomacy in the Ming, to which Persian documents were advanced not only from Central Asia but also from loca­ tions further away from the Ming such as Damascus, Mecca, and even 13 Egypt. This fact notwithstanding, it would not be too far-fetched to assume that the Persian pronunciation recorded in HZl is congruent with that of the dynasty which effectively had the whole Persian-speaking world under its control: the Timurid dynasty. After all, siy(guan translated Persian when the Timurid dynasty, whose foundation largely coincided with that of the Ming, represented the Persian-speaking world. The Timurid Empire and the Ming were the largest states in their respective geographies, dominating most of Central and West Asia and East Asia, respectively, and were in active com­ 14 munication in the early fifteenth century. Besides the two capitals of the Timurid Empire, Chinese missions travelled to such Persianate cities/towns 15 as Bukhara, Andkhui, Shiraz, and Isfahan, all of which were within the 16 territories of the Timurid Empire. The Ming outlasted the Timurid Empire indicating the year of Xuiinguiing '.lll::7't2 (1372) of the Northern Yuan dynasty, suggesting a time of compilation of HZ2 considerably earlier than previously inferred in the literature. 13 Tasaka 1964, pp. 977-986, Ishida 1973c, pp. 786-788 (originally published in 1949), and Liu, 2006 present various data that testify to the wide currency of Persian as a language of diplomacy in Ming China. H6ngzhi wunian renz[ jiuyue chijian jingjuesi ltbaisi beiji 5l¥il 11.if:x-TfL.FI t!J�i'¥ft�t!ff�Wf�c (1492) of Wang Ao .:E� (cited in Kanda 1948, pp. 18-19) cites two "westerners" of lumi �� (i.e. the Ottoman Empire; see Bretschneider 1910, pp. 306-307) origin who moved to Beijing and were employed at siyfguiin in the early fifteenth century. Their names are transcribed in the above-men­ tioned record as kemiiludlng PT.�� T and yibulajfn VF � *1J�. which Tasaka 1964, p. 987 identifies as "Kamal al-Din" and "Ibrahim," respectively. They were presumably employed at hufhufguiin as siyfguiin had no division for Arabic or Turkish (though it did have a Turkic division). 14 15 16 See Chan 1998, pp. 258-261. Fletcher 1968, p. 207. Liu 2008, p. 12 notes in passing that the Persian pronunciation taught at hufhufguiin was close to that of Afghan Dari and the Tajik of Tajikistan, but provides no evidence or ar­ gument in support of this statement. NEW PER S I AN V0WELS T R A N S C R IB E D IN MI NG CHINA 103 by more than a century, but the diminishing relations of the post-Yongle Ming with Central Asia meant that the Timurid Empire was the Persianate state with which it conducted most frequent overland exchanges in its his­ tory of nearly three hundred years (Yongle was succeeded by emperors 17 whose interest in foreign affairs was relatively limited). Considering these 18 facts, as well as the presence of some Central Asian toponyms in HZl , it seems reasonable to assume that the Persian pronunciation recorded in HZl reflects (either in whole or in large part) that of the variety which had diplo­ 19 matic currency in the Timurid court. If the Persian documented in HZl is the variety that had currency in the Timurid court, then a question inevitably arises as to what its dialectal basis is. The natural candidate for the basis of the variety is the dialect of the city where the court was and from which most Timurid "tributes" to the Ming were dispatched, namely the Timurid capital of Samarkand. The capital, however, was transferred from Samarkand to Herat in 1409 - did the transfer prompted the compilers of HZl to give precedence to the dialect of the new capital over that of Samarkand in transcribing Persian words? Records indicate that it did not. The Persian documented in HZl on the whole must reflect that of the Samarkand dialect of the time, because records show that 1) the Ming dynasty had paid little attention to Herat before Shahrukh emerged more or less victorious in the struggle for succession; 20 2) the "tributes" to the Ming from Samarkand vastly outnumber those from Herat (approximately eighty-seven from Samarkand and sixteen from Herat, 21 according to Tasaka); and perhaps most significantly, 3) "Herat" is conspicuously absent in HZl (and also in HZ2 for that matter) which 17 See Tasaka 1964, pp. 1055-1056, Hecker 1993, p. 95, and Rossabi 1998, p. 251. 18 See Honda 1963, p. 195. 19 Whether it carried prestige in tbe court is a matter of debate - according to Manz 1989, pp. 113-118, Persian bureaucrats were not necessarily held in high regard by Timurid rulers. However, as far as the Ming and probably also Northern Yuan, which had to deal directly with Timur's expansionist drives (see Okada 1994, pp. 54-55 and Kawaguchi 2014, pp. 102-103), were concerned, the Turanian variety of New Persian was probably the only New Persian variety of diplomatic importance in the early 20 fifteenth century. See Zhang 2006, p. 40 for how the attention of the Ming had been singly focused on Samarkand until 1408. Even in 1414, Herat was "still a poor second to the splendid cap­ ital Timiir had built at Samarqand" (Hecker 1993, p. 90) which retained its cultural 21 prominence even after Shlihrukh's ascension to power. Tasaka 1943a, p. 106. S. 104 !DO however contains "Samarkand"22 along with such Central Asian place names as Badakhshan, Balkh, and Khorasan. These facts are also consistent with the aforementioned observation by Honda that the contents of HZl remained largely unaltered since its compilation.23 In summary, this paper concerns the vowels of an early fifteenth-century variety of New Persian which had diplomatic currency in the Timurid dyn­ asty in Samarkand. I will refer to this particular variety as "Timurid Persian" for brevity in the remaining part of this paper. 2. WHY VOWELS? The present analysis concerns the vowels of Timurid Persian. The reason for the focus on vowels is two-fold. First, the Persian of Iran, Dari of Af­ ghanistan, and Tajik of Central Asia are widely assumed to have developed from Early New Persian and "have diverged in their phonology, most prominently in their vocalic systems."24 Their consonant systems, in contrast, exhibit relatively little diversity. One can therefore expect to gain more insight into how or if the three varieties have diverged from a common ancestor by contrasting their vowel systems with the Timurid Persian vowel system than by looking at their largely uniforill consonant systems. Hence any data on the vowel system of Timurid Persian should be useful in studying the diachrony of these varieties. Secondly, HZl provides data pertaining to the vowel contrasts and qualities of Timurid Persian, something that Arabic script, in which New Persian has been mostly written, conveys 22 23 The 794th entry in Honda's list (Honda 1963, p. 28). Honda 1963, p. 64. There is also circumstantial evidence that suggests the persistence in China of Central Asian New Persian (if not necessarily Timurid Persian) well into the seventeenth century and probably beyond. Bausani 1968, pp. 874-875 identifies Central Asian traits in some Persian words that appear in (a fragment of) one 1j\ %� xiiio'erjin text that describes a revolt that took place in 1862. Chinese texts (in different xiou Jing (in Linxia), bdizl)Tng l�:FJ:f.& (biezijfng dialects) written in modified Arabic scripts - variously called xiiio'erjin 1J\3t,�, xiiiofing ¥11Jr.&, xiiiofing 1J\f.&, JJLl¥f.&) in different regions (see Kuroiwa 2003, and pp. 15-17 for detail) - whose circulation is believed to have started with Hu Dengzhou ti)H�i9Ws (1522-1597) education system (Kuroiwa 2003, pp. 17-18) are known to contain a large number of loanwords from Arabic and New Persian. See also Nakanishi 2009 for evidence that suggests a strong linguistic influence that New Persian sustained on Chinese-speaking Muslims until the mid-Ming period. 24 Windfuhr 2009, p. 457. Incidentally, the three varieties are all spoken in the areas over which the Timurids reigned. NEW PER SIA N V 0WELS T R A N S C R IB E D IN M IN G C H lNA 105 only partially. (Chinese script is not known for faithful representation of foreign sounds, but it is capable of very detailed transcription of non­ Chinese phonology, as is most famously exemplified by the Secret History of the Mongols, in which Mongolian phonology is represented in Chinese 25 script in greater detail than would be possible in Uyghur script). Not much is known about the vowels of New Persian in the fifteenth century, which warrants the priority given to the Timurid Persian vowel system in this paper. 3. TIMURID PERSIAN DATA CONTAINED IN HZl The Timurid Persian data utilized in the present paper come from Honda, which comprises a complete numbered list of the seven hundred and seventy-seven entries of HZl as well as the two hundred and twenty­ three entries found in the "appendix," which only the "Berlin library 26 manuscript" comprises. The data that we utilize in this paper consist of native Timurid Persian morphemes paired with their transcribed forms in Chinese script. Lexically, varieties of New Persian are saliently characterized by loan­ 27 words from Arabic and Timurid Persian is no exception. However, words of Arabic origin recorded in HZl are excluded from the data utilized in this paper, as are most of the few dozen words that can be assumed to have been borrowed into Timurid Persian from other languages such as Turkic, Mon­ golian, and Chinese. Foreign components in Timurid Persian words and 25 6 2 See Hattori 1946, pp. 27-28 and Ozawa 1994, pp. 48-49. Honda 1963 reproduces the original entries in type-setting but does not convert Chinese glyphs in HZl into their modem equivalents or variations, which adds to its usefulness. For example, the Chinese transcription of.);.; (Tajik /nazar/, Dari which is presented as t.flfllj )(,, �9!LlJL nazer, Persian na�ar), in Liu 2008, p. 135, appears in Honda 1963, p. 12 as a more faithful reproduction of the form that appears in the manuscripts of HZ1. Note the last glyph in t.flfltJ)C, which is n. not converted to its simplified Chinese form JL or to its modem Japanese form 27 Timurid Persian recorded in HZl exhibits other characteristics such as the apparent absence of the izafet marker in a number of words that would carry the marker in today's New Persian (Tasaka 1943b, p. 138 and Tasaka 1943c, pp. 101-104). HZl also contains a number of lexical items that are apparently literal translations, e.g. the 887th entry in daryaa+maza, Persian daryii+maza) "sea"+"taste" which appears to be a literal translation of hiiiwei iilJ� "sea­ food" (iilJ and � are the logograms for "sea" and "taste", respectively). Other such char­ Honda's list (Honda 1963) •..>- 4.J� (Tajik /darjo/+/maza/, Dari acteristics of HZl will be mentioned where relevant. S. !DO 106 28 compounds are also discarded from the data. The exclusion of non-native elements from our data allows us to deal with Timurid Persian vowels with­ out the complication that loan phonology may bring about. This paper thus concentrates on Timurid Persian vowels contained in native Timurid Persian morphemes recorded in HZl . 4. TIMURID PERSIAN VOWELS This paper analyses Timurid Persian vowels that are transcribed in Chi­ nese script in HZl. The analysis involves two steps. First, referring to a set of rhyme tables called tujing (§4.2), the sound values of the Chinese glyphs used in transcribing Timurid Persian morphemes in HZl are identified, after which the sound values are analysed for information about Timurid Persian vowels. This section explains the first step, which effectively provides pre­ liminaries for the following section (§5) where the second step of the analy­ sis will be taken. 4.1. Data from HZJ Each entry in HZl accompanies a translation and transcription, as can be seen in the entry for •.Jw...., (Tajik /sitora/, Dari setaara, Persian sitiira) "star" reproduced below in typescript. Entry Translation in the Chinese language Transcription in Chinese script In this entry, the Timurid Persian word•);:,,.,. is accompanied by both xzng the Chinese logogram for "star," and 13t11B.iWJ, £, a string of Chinese glyphs in which each glyph is used not as a logogram but as a syllabic phonogram to jointly represent the sound of Timurid Persian•).:i.... Since this paper deals with the vowels of Timurid Persian, obviously, we would like to extract phonetic and/or phonological information from the transcription. For example, in the case of this entry, we may want to work out approximately what sound each of xr rJG, tii 1m, and le .iWJ had in the Ming period. As it turns out, rJG11B.iWJ can be deduced to represent in HZl something like /si.tha.11:::/ based on the Ming-period Chinese 28 For example, Arabic w� in the 1002nd entry in Honda's list (Honda 1963) 4-i� is discarded from the data while New Persian \A (Tajik /ho/, Dari haa, Persian ha) suffixed to it is included in the data. Incidentally, this entry attests to the use of Arabic-Persian double plural marking in Timurid Persian. NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA 107 sound system encoded in a set of rhyme tables called zhOngdlng s'fma wen-gi5ng dengyun tuj'fng !tU€Jf.!§1.lfu0��1il*� (1606). We consult this set of rhyme tables, which will hereafter be referred to simply as tujing, for identifying the sound values that the glyphs occurring in HZl had in the Ming period. 4.2. Data from tujing Space does not allow an explanation of what rhyme tables are, but it suf­ fices here to know that a set of rhyme tables like tujing can be regarded as a kind of syllabary and can be used more or less as such (for the purpose of 29 this paper at any rate). The Chinese sound system encoded in tujing has some characteristics which collectively represent a break with the sound systems encoded in rhyme books that either preceded or were contemporary with tujing. Unlike such rhyme books as zhi5ngyudn y'fnyun )(:�� of 1603, r:fi J]t if� of 1324 and jiao tai yun tujing was compiled by a speaker of the dialect of the Beijing area, and hence can be assumed to reflect the sound system of the Beijing dialect (albeit from a period later than that of the Timurid dynasty) 30 more faithfully than do the rhyme books mentioned above. This is im­ portant for this paper which utilises data extracted from HZl , because Beijing was the capital of the Ming from 1403 onwards, and, more im­ 31 portantly, was home to s!y{guan where HZl was compiled. How, then, do we go about using tujing for identifying the sound values of the Chinese glyphs used in transcribing Timurid Persian morphemes in HZl? 32 First, observe one of the twenty-five rhyme tables that constitute tujing. 29 The reader is referred to Branner 2006 for an explanation of rhyme tables in the English language. 30 See Nagashima 1941, pp. 23-24 and Toda 1957, pp. 104-105 for more detailed explana­ 31 Nevertheless, assuming that the transcription was carried out based entirely on the dialect tions about the compiler. of the Beijing area is likely an oversimplification-after all, the capital of the Ming before Beijing was Nanjing, and at least one copy of HZ2 may predate the transfer of the capital from Nanjing to Beijing (see Footnote 12). Regardless, Nishida 1963, Shogaito 1984, Jiang 1996, 1999, 2000, 2007, and Oehl 2004 all testify to the suitability of tujing as a tool for the phonetic reconstructions and analyses of the languages recorded in hudyf yi:yii, which constitutes another reason why I consult tujing rather than more commonly consulted zhOngyuan ylnyun. 32 For the rhyme tables in tujing, I refer to Lu 1988, which is the only modern work on tujing containing a full set of its rhyme tables. 108 S. Table 1. Example of a rhyme table in Ji � !ijij � ¥ft. � !DO tujing m � � m � ,c,, � 3f � • JJ � * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � �Ll q;rg � l!i Jllj � 0 £ ![ � ljJ 0 0 *f 0 0 M 0 0 0 0 M 0 j!ft * 0 � � 111: � :!% fg M AA � '.=E; � {if % :ill!! � 1e �i!i 0 1E.l. 1111l � {L �Ii .§_ 0 � It � !Et � w: 11¥ m iili 0 @ Iii � 0 1¥ 0 P$ '['i!i �a 't! � �i!i m � � 1' {{j � 0 � � � J"Ll � jjp � 0 * )JIJ � flt! jG it 0 $ If� m I& The traditional analysis of the Chinese syllable divides the syllable into two components which in this paper will be called the "initial" and the "final," re­ 33 This particular rhyme table (Table 1) contains syllables with the final spectively. IE/ as well as those with the final /ic/. The glyphs in the top two rows of the table represent the initials that can be combined with the final /El or /iEI, which are, in this particular table, /kl, fkh/, It/, /th/, In/, /p/, /ph/, /ml, /ts/, /tsh/, Is/, 0 (absence of 34 an initial), Ix/, Ill, It�/, /t�h/, /J, and /�. These initials are represented with _5!, }'.[/ !lffil -'-"" �2": }F.' 3:V '1� t:X, , .ia, t!� ...., , 1n, • 33 J3R ;r.i, tt .ff!, ,',3;: 1FJ, ' 1 l), !\iV Ji',;;;, O ;o'i; ;;r..: tlr , '"" 13,g � � and ii'!", � respectively. 35 µye, 7.r, w.,, This terminology is an expedient. See Branner · 2006, p. 2 and Duanmu 2007, Chapter 2 for detailed explanations of the Chinese syllable structure. 34 In the present paper, I identify JJ as representing the absence of an initial, but some data exist that allow the assumption that it signifies the glottal stop /?/ at least in some isolated cases (see Duanmu 35 � in table 2007, p. 72, Lin 2007, p. 114, and Pulleyblank 1983, p. 64). 1 signifies the initial /zJ which, however, is absent in the phonology of the Chinese encoded in tujing, hence the square. NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA 109 The remaining rows are so arranged that the two different finals, retroflexion of the initials, and four distinctive tones are set apart, while the columns are assigned to the initials. The table presented above can thus be converted into 36 the following table of syllables (ignoring tones). Table 2. A rhyme table in tujing converted into a table of syllables initials th n p ph m tsh (z) s t� t�h u � -retroflexion x +retroflexion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SE E XE 1£ 0 0 0 XE 0 0 �£ tsE tshE 0 0 tE 0 0 tsE 0 t�E t�hE finals �£ t�E t�hE l£ �£ t�E t�hE l£ �£ siE iE xiE tiE thiE niE piE phi£ mi£ tsiE tshiE 0 Si£ iE XiE Ii£ kiE khiE tiE thiE niE piE phi£ mi£ tsiE tshiE 0 Si£ iE xiE Ii£ 0 Si£ iE xiE Ii£ 0 kiE khiE tiE 0 niE piE phi£ mi£ tsiE tshiE Among the hundreds of glyphs that -retroflexion \f.retroflexion 0 kiE 0 t�E t�hE l£ piE phi£ mi£ tsiE tshiE kiE khiE tiE thiE iE 0 0 k£ khE t£ thE nE E ts 0 -retroflexion tujing contains are one hundred and forty-five glyphs which the system of transcription adopted in HZl utilises. The sound values of many of the glyphs used in transcribing Timurid Persian morphemes in HZl are thus readily available in tujing. (For simplicity, the Chinese-script transcription system used in HZl for native Timurid Persian 36 The reconstruction of the sound system of the Beijing dialect encoded in tujing has been attempted by a number of scholars with different perspectives on reconstruction. Todo 1957, pp. 104-108, for example, presents a reconstruction that is decidedly phonological. In this paper, I consult Todo 1957, pp. 104-108, Satoh 1981, Lu 1988, and Ye 2001, pp. 140-153 for the reconstructed pronunciations of the glyphs contained in tujing. S. 110 JOO morphemes will be referred to as 'the HZl transcription system' in the re­ mainder of this paper). In fact, even with Table 2 alone, we can tell roughly how a number of entries in HZl were pronounced at siy(guan in the Beijing dialect in the Ming period. Table 3 presents some Timurid Persian entries in HZl with their (reconstructed) Ming-period Beijing Chinese pronunciations, all re­ trieved from Table 2. For reference, the Tajik counterparts of the entries are appended to the table. Table 3. Some Timurid Persian entries in HZl with their reconstructed Ming-period Beijing Chinese pronunciations Entry Translation � =1!1f "bitter" �.) �"goods" •_;Aj lj:U !lt "gallbladder" 1i$ "scattering" m "root" &! Transcription Pronunciation In Tajik ;V:::f)J� :f}j�;V:: �lj�:f}j /thEJE.XE/ /talxf /lE.xt.thE/ /raxt/ /tsc.xE.lE/ /zahra/ �IH{lj /li£.1sE/ /reza/ 5jlj� /piE.XE/ /bexf In the following subsection, approximately seventy percent of the glyphs used in the HZl transcription system are matched with the same glyphs in tujing. The mapping between the two sets of glyphs allows us to retrieve the readings of the glyphs used for transcribing Timurid Persian morphemes recorded in HZl. 4.3. Combining HZJ with tujing A total of two hundred and six Chinese glyphs are used in transcribing native Timurid Persian morphemes that I extracted from HZ1; them, one hundred and forty-five appear in 37 Out of these glyphs, sixty tujing. 37 among Six of them, namely �, (!L7J j] � .Z:. C..1i:¥1L*Jl\ 3f:EVJ\%��5R�:if.J:l'!Jcl$ffi* *���������*�••m•wm•M••••�••�-��·�••> are not found in tujing (note that among them, • and W are two alternative forms of a single logogram/phonogram, as are * and *). Of the rest, one glyph, namely �F repre­ sents the initial /f/ in twelve of the twenty-five rhyme tables in limited information is readily available in tujing tujing. As a result, only for the sounds of the sixty-one glyphs. (To be sure, estimating the readings of the sixty-one glyphs is possible, because the readings of most of the glyphs approximate somewhat to their modem counterparts in to­ day's Beijing dialect. A number of works also exist where the phonology of the Chinese encoded in tujing is contrasted with that encoded in Mandarin Chinese phonology.) zhongyuan ylnyun or with modem NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA *· �.�.a forms �. *· 111 tujing in their alternative but homophonous •• respectively. In sum, the glyphs used in and� appear in ®, �. !i."$: and transcribing Timurid Persian morphemes in HZl whose (reconstructed) sounds can be retrieved from tujing are as follows. �C�)�C�)�C@)�C$)UC�)�C�)n�R±� ili�*�R�PB*���*:±������h�����$�� a *.lfil::& ® 1�111fFJ31J *�ft!1Httre�n:Y:n¥ -g ��M !j! :&�Jff fi�!* m �m***�1¥J:f.tm�PJfl1Jr¥Jllil',l�,qfr�*�15t�t-fa'�f!Ettt�JiJgl�A -��-m��*��w•••••�•••••mM•�••• *����������������� The present paper deals with vowels, for which, obviously, we need to identify what finals these glyphs are shown to have in tujing. The following table (Table 4a), indexed for convenience with Greek and Arabic numerals, shows all the finals that appear in tujing.38 The one hundred and forty-five glyphs are placed in Table 4a according to their finals. The table consists of two sections; the top seventeen rows and the bottom eight rows are respectively for finals with vocalic endings and those with nasal endings. In the table, the Arabic numerals (1, 2, 3, ...) indicate the order of appearance of the rhyme tables in tujing, whereas the Greek numer­ als (a, �) correspond to the finals that appear in each rhyme table. Conse­ quently, each row in Table 4a corresponds to one rhyme table; Table 1 for instance corresponds to the sixteenth row that comprises a16 /E/ and �16 /iE/ in Table 4a. Table 4a. Distribution of glyphs used in the HZl transcription system within tujing a finals p finals tt!f'.:,*.:&Wfg;fff\� "' 1. 1. � � -T R 13 JJ:�.�, tlt!E:�¥1C@W:W*ai i 3 m� � c--����.-4 y, (iii) ii y, (Ii) :±fi .::! u � ±?�fr.Jl£H±3'BWm*:t-i*8 iu :X:!ff <;J ai iai g .. 38 uai 0 7 ei (iei) 8 Whether all the finals that appear in tujing were in active use is a matter of contention. See, for tujing (Satoh 1981, pp. 58-61). instance, Satoh's discussion on the sections all and �11 in 112 I S. !DO uei 'OU ��ff.ii ua.u, (uuu) a. �iiJ;ft xtr.��Eli1**f-4WJ���m Y.. filltr?:J>�iiJ*��H �.;&) ua. e:.te�ftE,�tJ.� E �t.!1:�5l_IJ1j!i:iWJ���� E!Efgl(::JB " U:'.l UE au itm 10 a.u, (uu) 11 ici 12 ! ia. ® 13 14 ua. rt 15 iE n:71rn1J®��Sl'*� 16 iuE, (yE) fa] 1fn. 17 24 2S: 1 2 IE!;f>f\${lit 18 o iau 0 1 :UIJ I 9 (�ei) iu� "' an ,� in = l§'f*!ltrfillf.I LllH*���{t@:,@1(���� �?'l:•m )i� irn § uirn, (yrn) ii tiL!ri*.a�r� iUJ) *IH±m (liua.IJ) :a = � u(a)n an c; "' uan (IS = UIJ, (UIJ) UUIJ, (uu ) iun, (yn) 19 23' Table 4a allows one to retrieve the sound values of Timurid Persian vowels from HZl and tujing albeit through a filter of transcription. This in tum allows us to establish how many vowels the transcriber or transcribers for HZl identified in Timurid Persian (and to also estimate the approximate sound values of Timurid Persian vowels). 4.4. Glyphs with multiple readings Before embarking on translating Table 4a into data on Timurid Persian vowel phonology, some explications about glyphs with multiple readings are in order. Several glyphs appear in multiple cells in Table 4a, which likely indicates the multiple readings that the glyphs had in Mind-period Beijing Chinese. The glyphs in question are �. �. El, @, and �iiJ. all of which, incidentally, also have multiple readings in present-day Mandarin-� and � appear in both a8 lei/ and a16 1£1, while El appears in both a7 /uai/ and al 7 /uE/,@ in P14 /ia/ and P16 /iE/, and �iiJ in a12 hi and a14 /a/. Since the HZl transcription system utilises Chinese glyphs not as logograms but as phonograms that represent foreign sounds, every Chinese 113 NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA glyph used in the HZl transcnpt:J.on system should ideally be uniquely associated with a particular foreign ( i.e. Timurid Persian) sound. I therefore assume that the transcriber or transcribers for the glossary sought to limit themselves to one reading per glyph and discuss in the following paragraph which of the multiple readings of :li19J, J\ll!:, S, and® are likely to have been employed in the HZl transcription system. As for the multiple readings of �iiJ, they call for a separate treatment and will be discussed later. As was stated above, there are glyphs in the Beijing dialect that have two different readings. Many of such glyphs can be traced back to particular classes of characters in the Middle Chinese 'entering tone' category, and can be classified into particular sets of glyphs in accordance with their origins.39 :li19J, J\ll!:, and S, belong to one such �. JllJ, 1¥i, �. and 1�, all of which (except for 1� that is in the same cell as 1i!9J and J\ll!:) are in a16 It/. I assume that, in the HZl transcription system, :li!9J, J\ll!:, and 1� have /e/ rather than /ei/ as their final, because �. JliJ, 1¥i, and �. which all have or are estimated to have had the same type of multiple readings as the three glyphs, appear only in a16 ff) in tujing, suggesting the relative prevalence in the Ming period of It/ over lei/ among the glyphs with multiple readings. I similarly assume that S is used Three of the glyphs in question, namely set of glyphs as do in the HZl transcription system as /puf) rather than as /puai/ for the same m in a17 fuel belong to the same set of glyphs with multiple readings as S .40 I also assume® in HZl to end in lie/ rather than in /ia/ because® is the only glyph in �14 /ia/-it is difficult to conceive of reason-a, g\G, and a vowel in New Persian that can only be preceded by one particular consonant, which is in this case Is/ or a New Persian phone approximating /s/ (® is in the column for the initial /s/ in both Additionally, the section for the final /ia/ in �14 /ia/ and �16 lie/). tujing contains only nineteen glyphs, in contrast with the section for lie/ which contains fifty-two, implying the relative uncommonness of syllables ending in /ia/ in the phonology of the Ming-period Beijing Chinese encoded in 39 See Sato 1979 for a more detailed explanation of the deng and zhengchiyzn 40 rusheng tujing. characters of the ceng (first second deng) and geng (second deng) rhyme groups. Incidentally, the readings assumed for the glyphs tb, �. 1�, and B in this paper are all of the type that is referred to as 'literary readings' in the literature. The origin of "literary readings" is debated at length in a number of studies such as Osada I 953, p. 5, Satoh 1981, Chen 2001, and Gao 2009. 114 S. IDO Consequently, this paper assumes that the one hundred and forty-five glyphs used in the HZl transcription system are distributed as follows (Table 4b) in the rhyme tables in tujing. Table 4b. Distribution of glyphs used in the HZl transcription system within tujing (modified) finals a finals Jt£,*::&W fi!:{fl\1fr mnI1¥Jt1C�w�*m y, (u) ±{:£ y, (iu) rn•* �!Ff I . 3 4. 5 6 7 :SJ uei 8 9 (yei) �� ��- � 10 � �iiJ:fj(; i:J 12 :a uuu, (uou) :J � 11 au, (nu) *�����*MmR•••o iUE, (yE) i;"lU lo 13 14 rt. 15' jj Jfn. 11 -1:1�1rn1Jl!!;;��S7D!Z� 16 24 • 251 0 unnecessary spacing I I , � if) ;"lT) on ;"ln :g1 U(;"l)n �.J an uan �I �i UTJ, (U!J) UUT), (uu ) ion in 11 21 tJL:Efi �Mr� iUT) 18 19 20 21 22 }B:(:l:� (liUUIJ) 23 ,lg �;j;t?${Bl iun, (�n) :)1-� �f*f;Jgj_� W:Pt*�l¥i'*'ffi�1l*��� irn � uirn, (�rn) '* �ili!ifl•m NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA 115 5. TIMURIDPERSIAN AND TAJIK VOWELS Table 4b exhibits clustering of glyphs to a limited number of specific cells such as p3 Iii and a5 /u/. The pattern of the clustering then must reflect in some way Timurid Persian vowel contrasts. As it turns out, the vowels in the finals of the clustering glyphs are in close correspondence with present­ day Tajik vowels. If we take Tajik /e/ for instance, various Timurid Persian syllables whose Tajik counterparts end in le/ are consistently transcribed in HZl with glyphs that have the final /uo/, i.e. the glyphs in a.13 in Table 4b; this can be observed in a number of transcribed Timurid Persian-Tajik word pairs such as the following: /tuJ.tsE.xE/-/dezaxf, /muJ.tsE/-/meza/, 41 /suJ.xE.than/-/sextan/, and /xuJ.?.tan/-/xerdan/. The reader is also referred to Table 2 for transcribed Timurid Persian-Tajik word pairs in which Tajik /a/ and le/ are in correspondence with transcribed Timurid Persian 1£1 and /ic/, respectively. Table 7 contains more such word pairs. The correspondence between Tajik sounds and the readings of glyphs used in transcribing Timurid Persian sounds will be presented in §5.2. How­ ever, preliminary to the presentation of the table, I must offer a caveat-the correspondence between Tajik sounds and the readings of the glyphs in­ volves some inconsistencies, which will be attended to in the immediately following subsection. 5.1. Weeding out inconsistencies In identifying individual correspondences between Tajik sounds and the readings of the glyphs used in the HZ1 transcription system, I ignore those with less than three instances. The reason for this is two-fold. First, like any manuscript, HZl (and arguably also tujing for that matter) contains scribal errors and slips of the brush. Such errors result in illegible glyphs and inconsistencies in the sound-glyph correspondence that the HZ1 transcription system encodes. At least some of such inconsistencies can be 42 weeded out by ignoring correspondences with a limited number of instances. Second, many correspondences between Tajik sounds and glyphs used in the HZl transcription system are not one-to-one. For example, I::, in HZl , 41 (j.JJ �f!1Jm rj3aX "hell," •j.J" i*J'!lj My3a "boot," r:fo.Y" ��-a: cyxTaH "to burn," and 0-l.J.P- j()t.f} XyPIWH "to eat." )t. in j()t.:f]- /xuo.?.tan/ is one of the glyphs used in the 42 A full set of native Timurid Persian entries in HZI (in Chinese-script transcription) against which their reflexes in Tajik are placed will be provided in full elsewhere and is available from the author on request. HZI transcription system that are not found in tujing (see §4.3), hence the question mark. 116 S. !DO which must transcribe a Timurid Persian syllable approximating /pua/, cor­ responds with present-day Tajik /bo/ in thirty-two instances, but it also cor­ responds, in one instance each, with Tajik Iba/, /po/, and a Tajik syllable 43 Excluding such 'devi­ whose pronunciation varies between /bo/ and /ba/. ant' correspondences from our data is necessary to see the general picture and not to be inundated by details. (This said, the data left out certainly merit a separate analysis, since their occurrence may be governed by yet unknown principles or reflect differences between the sound systems of Timurid Per­ 44 sian and Tajik. ) Consequently, our data of the correspondence between Tajik sounds and the readings of glyphs used in the HZl transcription system comprise the correspondences listed in Table 5. Table 5 shows pairwise correspondences between glyphs used in the HZl transcription system and Tajik sounds that are observed with consistency. The numbers of their instances in HZl are 45 also shown beside the correspondences. 43 Similarly, m: /sol in HZl corresponds to Tajik /so/ and /sa/ in sixteen instances and one instance, respectively. Mapping in the direction of Tajik phones to glyphs is not neces­ sarily one-to-one either. For instance, Tajik /re/ corresponds with stances and with 44 t- m_ /lu'J/ in eight in­ /lu/ in one instance. For example, Kuribayashi 2007 ascribes the use of some glyphs in huayf ylyii type A to their semantics and morphology. 45 Note that 1) the sixty glyphs whose readings cannot be retrieved from this table (see §4.3), 2) the correspondence between x.o /ho/ and 1¥.l':::& tujing are absent in which occurs in five entries towards the end of the glossary (the 983rd, 987th, 988th, 997th, and 1002nd entries in Honda's list (Honda 1963)) most likely represents erroneous transcription, 3) (-H) is inserted where the presence (or absence) of the izafet marker cannot be confirmed in HZl (see footnote 27), and 4) the following pairs of glyphs corresponding respectively to Tajik syllables /gin/, /din/, /zin/, /mini, /rin/, /tin/, and /r;,in/ or /r;,irn/, are not included in the data either, because they comprise lt!.'?, :f�'?. and 1:::1'?. '? which is not found in tujing: JL'?, }ij;,J'f, ep'Jf, *'?. NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA Table 5. Glyphs in tujing 117 used in the HZl transcription system and corresponding Tajik sounds (correspondences with less than three instances are excluded from this table) . � ',? .s .s � .9 � r/') a3 a3 B /ts1/ 3 /z/ 24 a5 l'ZJ! )!( hi 3 a5 a3 m /xu/ xy /xu/ 5 3 a5 IIu/ rry II u/ 5 /pi/ 6H /bi/ 6 a5 IIu/ PY /ru/ 5 /pi/ 6H /bi/ 3 a5 /tu/ .n;y /du/ 4 /mi/ MH /mi/ 4 /piu/ qi /f/ /i/ H /i/ 3 �5 �5 /piu/ <l>Y /fu/ 4 /i/ i1 /j/ 15 a12 !:JI o lo/ 29 /ni/ HH /ni/ 8 a12 hi a /a/ 16 �3 �3 Inil Hif /ni/ 6 a12 !:JI sa /va/ /xi/ � /hi/ 5 a13 4 �3 �3 I xii x;w /hi/ 3 a13 8 /ti/ ,ll;H /di/ 8 a13 /�u:J/ my /Ge/ 3 �3 /si/ cw /si/ 12 a13 lku:JI ry Igel 7 5 a13 IIu:J/ PY Ire/ 8 7 a13 /lu:J/ 7 �3 �3 �3 �3 * �3 �3 a4 a5 ± pas /rav/ 19 3 4 a14 ft!!. /thal TO /to/ 19 a5 /xu/ xy lxu/ 4 a14 n /tal .n;o Idol 9 a5 /ku/ ry /gu/ 9 a14 ¥:9 /�al IIIO /Go/ 16 a5 /nu/ HY /nu/ 4 a14 �iiJ /al o lo/ 29 a5 /mu/ MY /mu/ 5 a14 �iiJ /al a /a/ 16 3 al4 riil' lxal x;o /ho/ 12 a5 118 S. !DO .5° ",? .s i:: 0 'B Cl) Cll a14 Pfl' lxaJ xo Jxol 6 a16 � !xel xa Jxa! 4 a14 Pfl' !xaJ x:a Iha/ 5 a16 � lxel x:a /ha/ 4 a14 Pfl' .::& /xai/ x:o /ho/ 5 a16 � /xe/ x11 !VJ 3 a14 fr.f3 /naJ Ha /na/ 25 a16 � /se/ ea /sa/ 15 al4 fr.f3 /naJ HO /no/ 9 al6 f{!j. lte/ .na /da/ 50 a14 :Ji /taJ .no /do/ 11 a16 f{!j. /te/ .n Id/ 47 a14 � /saJ co /so/ 16 a16 f{!j. !te! a15 e:1. /puaJ 60 /bo/ 32 P16 11, /mie/ He /ne/ 3 a15 re /puaJ 60 /bo/ 7 P16 >J1J /pie/ 6e /be/ 6 a15 1:t. lxuaJ xo Jxo! 5 P16 � lief H:a /ja/ 12 a15 frE /phuaJ /po/ 6 P16 �/® /sie/ ce /se/ 3 a15 .� lmuaJ MO Imo! 4 P16 ii:/$ /phie/ rre /pe/ 4 a15 :tz.� lmuaJ MO Imo/ 16 al7 a /pue/ 6a Iba/ 19 p 15 rti /puaJ 8 al7 a /pue/ 60 /bo/ 3 a16 ;it al8 .� fan/ H In! 42 a16 ;it a18 .� !'dn! M Im! 7 a16 11!: a20 W /�an/ rnaH /Gani a16 �IJ /tse/ Ja /za/ 20 a20 fJ- /tan/ a16 1fi: Ike/ ra /gal 17 a20 1.ft /an/ a16 :¥JJ 11£1 JI /1/ 22 a20 11t /than/ a16 :¥JJ !lei pa Ira/ 18 a20 � al6 :¥JJ 11£1 5 a20 � a16 :¥JJ !lei na /la/ 5 a21 71 a16 � lxel x: !hi 32 a22 Ill� a16 � lxel x lxJ 25 rro cpa /fa/ .r(-11) /1(-i)/ .r(-11) /rK._-iY .naH /dan/ 4 25 /an/ 5 TaH /tan/ 24 fkhanf KaM /kam/ 3 /lan/ aH 4 paH /ran/ 4 /phuan/ rraH /pan/ 4 llU!J/ paH /ran/ 5 NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA 119 Note in Table 5 that �iiJ is used to transcribe a sound or sounds in Timurid Persian that are in correspondence with Tajik /a/ and lo/. The glyph, which appears only in the word-initial position in the HZl transcription system and had two readings, namely /a/ and /'J/ (see §4.4) in Ming-period Beijing Chinese, corresponds to Tajik /a/ in sixteen instances 46 and to lo/ in twenty-nine instances in HZl. Given the number of instances, the correspondences are unlikely to have resulted from errone­ ous transcription. One could therefore regard the double correspondence of �iiJ with Tajik /a/ and lo/ as reflecting the /a/---'>/o/ vowel shift47 in progress in the word-initial position or as a kind of /a/-/o/ alternation that is ob­ 48 served today in Tajik. One could also assume that �iiJ in the HZl transcription system transcribes two distinct word-initial Timurid Persian vowels whose counterparts in Tajik are /a/ and lo/; that is, that �iiJ transcribes the Timurid Persian word-initial vowel corresponding to Tajik /a/ in some instances, and the Timurid Persian word-initial vowel cor­ 49 responding to Tajik lo/ in other instances. In this paper, however, I simply assume that the glyph basically transcribes the Timurid Persian 5° word-initial vowel that corresponds to Tajik /a/ to avoid having to postu­ late a Timurid Persian vowel whose occurrence is restricted to the word­ 51 initial position. 46 The glyph 47 This refers to the /a/->/o/ vowel shift that appears to have taken place in a large variety of �iiJ still has multiple readings in contemporary Mandarin. Tajik dialects. See Rastorgueva 1964, pp. 17-41 and Ido 2009. 48 The /o/-/a/ alternation, which is observed particularly commonly in front of the word-final /hi, is reflected in the orthography of Tajik (see Komitet 1967, p. 10). There are also a number of glyphs in HZl that correspond to Tajik /Ca/ and /Co/ such as (see Table 5). �. Mi, and 8 What they are evidence for is unclear and merits further investigation. It may also be worth noting that the New Persian vowel whose present-day Tajik realization is lo/ is transcribed variously as lo/ and /a/ in modified Japanese script in �iiil:lli:filfilli yakushi chotanwa (1796). For example, suma and dandon that appear in yakushi chotanwa can be identified as W (Tajik /Gumo/, Dari shomaa, Persian shuma) and ul.i.;J (Tajik /dandon/, Dari dandaan, Persian dandan), respectively (Nagashima 1986, p. 63, p. 69). The reader is referred to Ohashi 1983 and Takayama 2013 for detailed information on yakushi chotanwa. 49 50 1 5 These vowels are represented in Figure I as V and V3, respectively. 4 This Timurid Persian vowel is V3 in Figure 1. Incidentally, there are some entries in HZI where tone distinctions seemingly reflect stress placement. For example, the occurrence of 1* /ta/ in the first tone appears to be largely confined to the Chinese transcription of the last syllable of native Timurid Persian 120 S. !DO Having weeded out some inconsistencies in our data, in the next section, we proceed to contrast (transcribed) Timurid Persian vowels with Tajik vowels as well as with the vowels of other modern varieties of New Persian. 5.2. Vowel contrasts Merging Table 5 into Table 4b yields the following table (Table 6). Space does not allow an extensive discussion of the distributional pattern that sounds (mostly syllables) of Tajik exhibit in Table 6, but I attempt to offer a concise explanation of the information that can be retrieved from Table 6 as well as some additional description of tujing that is relevant to the retrieve. Table 6. Distribution of glyphs used in the HZl transcription system (replaced with their corresponding Tajik sounds) within tujing a finals S, y,(u) lu ai �finals Z, '/, y,(iu) dw mu, tu, du, n u,ru, Ju, ku, gu, xu iu iai j, i,bi,mi, ti,di,ni,si, hi 4 5 f,fu 6 7 0 (iei) it?u J c nu .� uau, (unu) <a :> g U:> > a ua E UE <IU va,o/a au,(nu) i:> 0 r;;a, <ka, ka, ga, rav to, do, no,so,r;;o, xo, ho,o/a, ha, . 13 ro, na t,d,1,x ,h,xi,d(-i),1(-i) ba,bo h4 1U po, bo, mo, xo ua ta,da, sa,za, la,t.Ga, ga, xa, ha, 0 ii:: iuE,(yE) fa pe,be,ne,se,ja i<iu 0 1T /ta/ in the second tone appears. Compare, ±1! /t�y.ta/ with (.)ob nm /tu.muan/ and .J)� n:t /tu.Ju/. lexical items, while elsewhere \� 8 (yei) uei 'gl 3 1 5 1 19 17 24 125 for example, NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA 121 1 "' :m � u(;i)n ]1 an �j� uan n, m iun, (yn) 18 19 irn 20 uirn, 21 m Gan, dan, an, tan, kam, ran pan ( rn) = ������������������������������ 22 OlJ, (nlJ) ran ial) UOlJ, (liUUIJ) (un ) 23 The correspondence between transcribed Timurid Persian vowels and Tajik vowels are clearly appreciable in Table 6. (This is despite the "dispersive effect" that will be explained later in this subsection.) The correspondence is exemplified in Table 7 in which Timurid Persian words are presented with their reflexes/cognates in Tajik, Dari, and Persian. The Dari and Persian pronunciations in the table are copied "as is" from Sayd's Dari-English dictionary and Steingass' comprehensive Persian English 5 dictionary, respectively. 2 The numbers in the rightmost column indicate 5 entry numbers in Honda's list. 3 Vi. V2, V3, V4, V 5, and V6 in the leftmost column are appended for later reference and can be safely ignored at this point. Table 7. Timurid Persian words and their reflexes/cognates in Tajik, !fimurid Persian V1 5 2 Dari, and Persian Tajik Dari Persian IJE,�ltf} /xu.s1.pi.tan/ /xusbida n/54 khospidan khuspidan �.�-� /pi.S).thi;:/ /bist/ bist bist R$-i!J :t±rflf �ffilt.fgf� /t��.xi.li::/ /U;ihil/' /U;il/ chehel chihal, chihil /tu.ts).ti/ /duzdi/ dozdi duzdi /si.tha.na.ti::/ /sitonda/ 55 setaandan '275 satanda Sayd 2009 and Steingass 2012. Note that the differences between the vowel systems of the three modem varieties of New Persian that this table shows are mostly in agreement with those summarised in Windfuhr 2009, pp. 457-458. 53 54 Honda 1963. Nazarzoda et al. 2010, p. 483 lists txusbidan/ as as an alternative pronunciation of txuspidan/. 55 The infinitive form of u,lj\.:i.. is copied here from Sayd 2009, p. 180, because the dictionary does not list the past participial form of the verb. 122 S. !DO '1tl1-1'1 �iiJM�1t N'2 �,Ii!],� /bed/ beed bid, bed 428 /u.mir.xc.thanf /omextan/ aameekhtan amekhtan /mit.Slthf/ /nest/ neest nist EfJIJ /puc.lir/ /bale/ balee bale �r /thir.ts1/ /tez/ teez tez �� •1-1'1 /lu::i.tr/ /reda/ roda riida /sr.t£/ /sad/ sad sad /lr.xu/ /raho/ rahaa raha '1¥5t:PJ- /lr.si.tan/ /rasidan/ rasidan rasldan ��� Isa.xc.thr/ /soxta/ saakhta sakhta 818 -ft:j=!,'8}, /an.tu.:in/ /andom/ andaam andam 825 /puc.lan.tf/ /baland/ beland baland,buland /lu::i.�an/ /ravGanl roshan roshan,roshan fkhanf /kam/ kam kam /than/ /tan/ tan tan /thn.pi.slthn.;in/ /tobiston/ taabestaan tabista n /phua.t£.�a.x£1 /podGohl paadshaah /�a.x£1 /Gox/ shaakh pad-sha,pad-shah 138 458 shakh �iiJtl>*:Pt la.�a.mi.tan! /oGomidan/ aashaamidan ashamidan mi1-1'1 !mua.t£1 /modal maada mada /luJ.ts1/ /rez/ roz roz /tuJ.Slthe/ /dost/ dost dost !209 /fiu.luJ.Xf.tbanf /furnxtan/ forokhtan firiikhtan, !25 N'3 '1Pk EfJH-1'1 V3 �LlJ ii * ft!!. l::U!!, f!BP&l �1-1'll'.P� V4 tp� 11.Y $,Ii!],� Vs !ffll�1t *'"fllj -�- v6 /pir.tc/ n• fi lf¥Yft •m�:tll B}B1-1'J farokhtan fkhuJ.tsc/ /koza/ kuza kiiza /suJ.xf.thanf /soxtan/ sokhtan sokhtan /tu.lu/ /doru/ daaru diirii /tu/ /du/ du dii,du,do fkhu.�u.tan/ lkuGodan/ koshaadan kushadan /lu.xu.su.1£/ /ruxsora/ rokhsaara rukhsiira /mu.Zi.l.tf/ /muz,da/ mozhda mizhda,muzhda 674 679 724 23 241 648 02 558 845 99 487 828 19 Even a small set of examples like this demonstrates a clear correspondence between transcribed Timurid Persian vowels and present-day Tajik vowels; the Timurid Persian vowels as they are transcribed in HZl (i.e. Ming-period Beijing Chinese vowels corresponding to Timurid Persian vowels in the HZl transcription system), namely /u/, /u'J/, /ic/, /ii, 1£1, and the NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA 123 set of /a/ and /ua/ are in correspondence with Tajik /u/, le/, le/, Iii, /al, and 5 lo/, respectively. 6 Also clearly observable is that Tajik /a/ in syllables with a nasal coda or a coda beginning with a nasal (e.g. /land/, /kam/, and /r;oan/) 57 corresponds to transcribed Timurid Persian /a/. Table 8. Correspondence between Tajik vowels and transcribed Timurid Persian vowels Tajik vowels Iii /e/ /i/ fie/ Timurid Persian vowels in the HZl transcription system la/ fol 1£1 la/ la/ /ua/ le/ /u/ /U'J/ /u/ The correspondence shown in Table 8 is particularly remarkable in view of the more restricted correspondence between Dari vowels and transcribed Timurid Persian vowels, and between Persian vowels and transcribed Ti­ murid Persian vowels - as is apparent from the V6 and V 2 rows in Table 7, transcribed Timurid Persian vowels do not exhibit the vowel oppositions that characterize the vowel systems of present-day Dari and Iranian Persian such as the u-o opposition of Dari and the 1-e opposition of Persian. In other words, in terms of vowel contrasts, trascribed Timurid Persian is much more 58 congruent with Tajik than it is with Dari or Persian. As can be observed in Tables 6, 7, and 8, the correspondence between transcribed Timurid Persian vowels and Tajik vowels is remarkably con­ sistent. However, perhaps as expected, there are irregularities, among which arguably the most conspicuous is the two-to-one correspondence between transcribed Timurid Persian /a/ with /ua/ and Tajik /o/, which reflects the dispersion of Tajik lo/ between a14 /a/ and a15 /ua/ in Table 6. The disper­ sion is peculiar given that Tajik /u/, le/, le/, Iii, and /a/ are mostly contained in a5 /u/, a13 /u'J/, P16 liE/, P3 /i/, and a16 /E/, respectively, in Table 6. On the face of it, the two-to-one correspondence points to a correspondence 56 The correspondence between New Persian vowels and Chinese finals in New Persian loan words used among Hui Chinese in contemporary Beijing appear to differ from that shown in Table 8. Observe, for example, the following loan words taken from He 1990: paJ pal for '-!'-!, :t.J\liftB'3JL 57 58 B!lt!�i!i pai1 la� t'iel for wl.>!, ��¥E!JL tiJi kai� larl for .P� 1E1E IM, t'ai� Sli t'al larl for .Jw...�, and�� luoJ tsail forojJ.J. That is, the /a/ in the final /an/ of Ming-period Beijing Chinese. This is hardly surprising considering the fact that modern Tajik is based on the dialects of the Bukhara-Samarkand area. S. 124 I DO between two Timurid Persian vowels and a single Tajik vowel.59 While this might well be the case, it is by no means the only reasonable explanation for the correspondence between transcribed Timurid Persian /a/ with /ua/ and Tajik /o/ - A close examination of tujing reveals that this apparently irregu­ lar correspondence can be reasonably ascribed to certain phonological fea­ tures of Ming-period Beijing Chinese, to which we tum now. What is not immediately apparent from Table 6 is the fact that the Chi­ nese-script transcriber or transcribers for HZl did not have every possible combination of an initial and final at their disposal. There are many gaps in the rhyme tables of tujing (see the gaps indicated with 0 in Tables 1 and 2), which is an indication that Ming-period Beijing Chinese allowed only a re­ stricted set of initial-final combinations. To give an extreme example, the �11 /au/ section in tujing contains only two glyphs whose readings are /foul in two different tones.60 This is to say that no initial but /f/ could be com­ bined with the final /au/ in Ming-period Beijing Chinese. As a result, for example, if a transcriber at huihuiguan heard a Timurid Persian sound ap­ proximating /xau/, they could not transcribe it as /xau/, because the Beijing dialect lacked the combination of the initial /x/ and the final /au/; they had to settle for a second-best alternative (such as /xnu/ in the section alO of tujing). Thus, the Ming-period Beijing Chinese restriction on initial-final combinations is at odds with consistency of correspondence between finals and Timurid Persian vowels in the HZl transcription system. In other words, 'gaps' in the rhyme tables of tujing have a dispersive effect that counteracts the clustering of the glyphs into a particular set of cells in Tables 4a-b, and consequently prevent Tajik sounds from being neatly contained in a small 1 set of cells in Table 6.6 The dispersive effect explained above appears to be what causes the glyphs that correspond to Tajik syllables ending in /o/ to cluster in two cells in Table 6 (a14 /a/ and a15 /ua/) rather than one, because the section a15 /ua/ in tujing contains glyphs with initial /p/, /ph/, and /ml which al 4 /a/ lacks altogether.62 The two-to-one correspondence between transcribed Ti59 60 61 62 This in tum may lead some to think that a merger of two Timurid Persian vowels into a singleTajik vowel took place. See Lu 1988, pp. 64-65. Indeed, whether the syllable /fau/ really existed in the Beijing dialect is a matter of dispute (see Satoh 1981, pp. 58-61). The 427th entry in Honda's list (Honda 1963). See Lu 1988, pp. 67-68.The distribution inTable 6 ofTajik consonants in isolation (e.g. in a3 and al6) seems to be similarly affected by the same dispersive effect. Most Chi­ nese syllables end in a vowel or a nasal, whereas New Persian abounds in syllable-final NEW PERSI AN V 0 WE LS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CH INA 125 murid Persian /a/ with /ua/ and Tajik /o/ can hence reasonably be construed to reflect a one-to-one correspondence between a Timurid Persian vowel and a Tajik vowel. Note also that a number of other two-to-one correspondences such as the one between transcribed Timurid Persian 1£1 with /uE/ and Tajik /a/ also likely result from the same dispersive effect-the section a16 1£1 in tujing lacks bilabial initials which al 7 /uE/ contains. The two-to-one corre­ spondence between transcribed Timurid Persian a20 /an/ with a21 /uan/ and Tajik /an/ can be similarly ascribed to the absence of bilabial initials in the 6 section a20 /an/. 3 Thus, two-to-one correspondences such as these must actually indicate one-to-one correspondences between Timurid Persian vow­ els and Tajik vowels. As for the Timurid Persian vowel which corresponds to Tajik /a/, it also has two different representations in the HZl transcription system. The vowel (V 3 in Table 7) is transcribed into /a/ in the HZl transcription system where its Tajik counterpart is the nucleus of a syllable with a nasal or nasal-initial coda. Otherwise it is transcribed into 1£1. This probably reflects the Chinese­ script transcribers' effort to preserve the Timurid Persian syllable structure as faithfully as the syllable structure of Beijing Chinese allowed. They prob­ ably assigned Ming-period Beijing Chinese syllables ending in a nasal to Timurid Persian syllables with a nasal (or nasal-initial) coda, with the result that the single Timurid Persian vowel (V3 in Table 7) is transcribed differ­ ently in the HZl transcription system, because in Ming-period Beijing Chi­ nese, no syllables with a vocalic ending existed that had monophthongal /a/ non-nasal consonants. As a result, Timurid Persian syllables ending in non-nasal conso­ nants are generally rendered by pairs of Chinese syllables in HZl; for instance, w_iJ (Tajik /tut/, Dari tut, transcribed as Persian Jt;i'.\ tut) "mulberry" (the 427th entry in Honda's list [Honda 1963]) is fthu.the/ in HZl. The transcriber of HZl may have intended to use glyphs with the final /1, '\.. a-/ consistently for transcribing all Timurid Persian syllable-fi­ nal non-nasal consonants, but section a3 /1, 1, a-/ in tujing contains only glyphs with the initials Its/, /tsh/, Is/, It�/, /t�h/, lzl., and /�/. The phonology of the Ming-period Beijing dia­ lect of Chinese thus obstructs his intention, with the result that Tajik consonants in isola­ tion are dispersed to several different cells in Table 6. 63 Tajik /ran/ corresponds with g /Ian/ in a20 /an/ and B!� /laIJ/ in a22 /al)/ in HZl , but the latter is used specifically in correspondence with Tajik [raIJ], as in (Tajik /berang/). The reading of trieved from tujing ke R: reading of /piE.laIJ. ?/ but should not differ very substantially from that in modern Manda­ rin. T5d5 & Kano 2005, p. 146 reconstruct the reading of k'o !fl as k"ar. Ming periods as �lj B!�:R; in Ming-period Beijing Chinese cannot be re­ R: in the Song, Yuan, and while Pulleyblank 1991, p. 173 reconstructs the Yuan-period S. !DO 126 as their final, nor were there syllables with a nasal ending that contained monophthongal /E/ (see Tables 4a-b). In sum, seeming irregularities in the correspondence between transcribed Timurid Persian and Tajik vowels can be reasonably ascribed to Ming-pe­ riod Beijing Chinese phonology. Two-to-one correspondences such as the ones discussed above, then, very possibly indicate one-to-one correspond­ ences between Timurid Persian vowels and Tajik vowels. This in turn means that Timurid Persian most likely had six vowel quality contrasts that corre­ 64 spond with the vowel quality contrasts of Tajik. This correspondence is summarised in a chart in Figure 1, which incidentally shows how its con­ sistency is obscured by the dispersive effect. Timurid Persian vowels Timurid Persian vowels in the Tajik vowels HZl transcription system V1 N Iii V2 /ifJ le/ 1£1 /a/ /a/ la/ lo/ /ua/ /u'J/ le/ /u/ /u/ Figure 1. Transcribed Timurid Persian vowels in correspondence with Timurid Per­ sian and Tajik vowels. 6 4 Theoretically, there could be Timurid Persian vowel contrasts that are systematically ignored in the HZl transcription system. Therefore, strictly speaking, this statement should be 'Timurid Persian most likely had at least six vowel quality contrasts that cor­ respond to the vowel quality contrasts of Taj ik.' Also, theoretically, it is not impossible that one or some or all of V 1, V2, V 3, V4, V 5, and V 6 in Figure 1 were not monophthongal in Timurid Persian. NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA 127 5.3. Vowel positions Figure 2 shows the sound values of Timurid Persian vowels as they are reflected in the HZl transcription system (symbols for diphthongs are placed halfway between their first and last parts) . . 1 --����.--���---. u UQ ---�-- a Figure 2. Timurid Persian vowels as they are reflected in the HZI transcription sys­ tem. The vowels in the quadrilateral are Chinese vowels and, as such, do not 65 directly reflect the sound values of Timurid Persian vowels. This said, given the inventory size of Ming-period Beijing Chinese monophthongal and diphthongal vowels, we can assume that the positions of the vowels in Fig­ ure 2 reflect to some extent the positions of Timurid Persian vowels relative to one another. For example, we can fairly safely assume that the Timurid Persian vowel transcribed into /i/ in HZl is closer and more front than that transcribed into lie/, that Timurid Persian vowels are widely dispersed in the vowel space, and perhaps also that the vowel system resembles for instance 65 Figure 2 is of rather limited use for working out the positions of Timurid Persian vowels relative to those of Tajik vowels, because while we know that /ii, /iE/, 1£1 with /a/, /u:J/, Jui, and lo/ with /uo/ in this quadrilateral correspond respectively to Tajik /ii, /e/, /a/, le/, Jui, and lo/, the dispersive effect explained in §5.2 can render the vowels in Figure 2 inexact indicators of actual sound values of Timurid Persian vowels. Accordingly, caution also needs to be exercised in attempting to contrast the vowel positions in Figure 2 with those of the other varieties of New Persian. S. IDO 128 that of present-day Tashkent Uzbek.66 That no glyphs with the final /b/ (�12 in Tables 4a-b) are used in the HZl transcription system could also mean that Timurid Persian rounded vowels (i.e. V4, V5, and V in Table 7 and Fig­ 6 1) were all fully back and hence that the Timurid Persian vowel corre­ ure sponding to present-day Tajik /e/ (i.e. V5 in Table 7 and Figure 1) was also a fully back vowel.67 5.4. Vowel length HZl provides equivocal evidence for a vowel length distinction in Ti­ murid Persian. HZl comprises some glyph-pairs whose occurrence is largely limited to entries whose Dari or Persian counterparts have long vowels. They occur mostly in the word-final position and have either,� /'Jn/ or second glyph.68 For example, �'� /sa.'Jn/ in �ij�,18f, "13" as their /a.sa.'Jn/ may be in contrast with:$: /san/ in 1$:$:{� /ni.san.tE/ in the HZI transcription system.69 The occurrences of such glyph-pairs as �J�, /sa.'Jn/ number in dozens in HZI,70 and this allows the speculation that some kind of vowel length distinction existed in Timurid Persian (note that /sa.'Jn/ consists of two syl­ lables and is "longer" than /san/ which conprises just one). However, among the native Timurid Persian data extracted from HZI, few glyphs or glyph­ pairs occur in the word-initial or word-medial position that can be construed to represent a vowel length distinction. Accordingly, more evidence is nec­ essary to determine if a vowel length distinction existed in Timurid Persian 66 See ldo 2014, p. 96. We may also assume that the Timurid Persian vowel system had the structural configuration of 6LO or 6RO in the typology of vowel inventories presented in Becker-Kristal 2010, pp. 192-193. 67 Hence, for example, the correspondence between /u:J/ in Figure 2 and Tajik /e/ may suggest a post-fifteenth century fronting of the mid rounded vowel (but falls short of 68 demonstrating it). The reading of yin 71" in Ming-period Beijing Chinese cannot be retrieved from tujing but should not differ very substantially from that in modern Mandarin. T5d6 & Kano 2005, p. 505 reconstruct the reading of 6 71" in the Song, Yuan, and Ming periods as Pulleyblank 1991, p. 373 reconstructs the Yuan-period reading of 9 �iiJm.� 71" as iuan while jin '. aasaan, Persian iisiin) "easy" and 1$:$:1.\J newisenda, Persian nawlsanda/nuwlsanda) that transcribes ul....1 (Tajik /oson/, Dari transcribing ·�_,.; (Tajik /navisanda/, Dari "writer" are respectively the 681st and 143rd entries in Honda's list (Honda 1963). 70 E.g. ff,� ft:f.\J:ff,� andariin) and ftB,� in ftB ��-l!Hth� (see !L;fl", �;fl", 11P;fl", *71", £71", f�;fl", and 1571" are also some of such glyph­ /lu.;in/ in the 638th entry in Honda's list (Honda 1963, p. 23), namely /an.tc.lu.an/ for u.J.J.l.il (Tajik /andarun/, Persian Table 7). pairs. NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA 129 and, if it did, whether the distinction was phonological and also whether the 71 distinction was limited to word-final syllables with a nasal coda. 6. SUMMARY In this paper, I analysed historical Chinese sources to offer an insight into the vowel system of a previously unidentified variety of New Persian, namely "Timurid Persian," an early fifteenth-century New Persian which had diplo­ matic currency in the Timurid court in Samarkand (§1). The analysis yielded information about Timurid Persian vowel quality contrasts that Arabic script sources cannot provide. The analysis revealed that the Timurid Persian vowel system as it is reflected in the system of Chinese-script transcription adopted in hufhufguan zazi type 1 has six vowel quality contrasts and that it exhibits a close correspondence with the vowel system of present-day Tajik. It also revealed that the Timurid Persian vowel system lacks the vowel oppositions that characterize the vowel systems of present-day Afghan Dari and Iranian Persian such as the u-o opposition of Dari and the f-e opposition of Iranian Persian (§5.2). This paper also provided information on the positions of Ti­ murid Persian vowels relative to each other in the vowel space (§5.3) as well as on a vowel length distinction that may have existed in Timurid Persian (§5.4). Shinji Ido Graduate School of Interna­ tional Development Nagoya University Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464-8601, JAPAN REFERENCES Aisin-Gioro-Jin 2007 Aisin-Gioro Ulhicun f:Wi"'�m -�tl:!Wlf and Jin Shi i£ii!, "Manchuria from the fall of the Yuan to the rise of the Manchu state (1368-1636)," 1z:-ffti�::)(::J�.1:, 601, 2007, pp. Bausani 1968 Ritsumeikan bungaku 137-115. Alessandro Bausani, "Un caso estremo di diffusione della scrittura araba: il «sino-arabo»", Oriente moderno, 68, 1968, pp. 857-876. 71 Incidentally, a vowel length distinction exists in the Bukhara-Samarkand dialects of present-day Tajik, albeit only phonetically. See Ido 2012, p. 23 and Ido 2014, pp. 98-99. 130 S. Becker-Kristal 2010 I DO Roy Becker-Kristal, "Acoustic typology of vowel invento­ ries and Dispersion Theory: Insights from a large cross­ linguistic corpus," Ph.D. dissertation, University of Califor­ nia, Los Angeles, Branner 2006 2010. David Prager Branner, "Introduction: what are rhyme tables and what do they mean?" in The Chinese rhyme tables: Linguistic philosophy and historical-comparative phonology, ed. David Prager Branner, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2006, pp. 1-34. Bretschneider 1910 Emil Bretschneider, Media:val researches from eastern Asiatic sources: Fragments towards the knowledge of the geography and history of central and western Asia from the 13th to the 17th century, vol. II, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Triibner & Co. Ltd., Chan 1998 1910. Hok-Lam Chan, "The Chien-wen, Yung-lo, Hung-hsi, and Hsuan-te reigns," in The Cambridge History of China, vol. 7 (The Ming dynasty, 1368-1644, Part 1), eds. Frederick W. Mote & Denis Twitchett, Cambridge: Cambridge Univer­ sity Press, Chen 2001 1998, pp. 182-304. Chen Chongyu !l*]!IiW, "Zhonggu rushengzi xin jiu yin de chongdie: Beijing yinxi de yiziduodu ji sanshengdu de i:f:i11A?5-*WTIB{TEf.J]!�: ���{f*Ef.J --*$:�R=f!5�Ef.Jflr1:," Yuyan yanjiu ffi§'1Vf9'L. yansheng 2001/1, 2001, pp. 46-72. Duanmu 2007 San Duanmu, The phonology of standard Chinese, second edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. Endo et al. Fletcher 2007 1968 it�:Jt!Bt, Takashi Takekoshi it��. Shin'ichi Sarashina J!H't�-, and Feng Zheng ��eds., "Kai yakugo kankei bunken mokuroku ¥���.g� 1*)(Wif\ § �," in Kai yakugo ronbunshu ¥���ifM6)(�, eds. Takahiro Fukumori :fm:lm�iJl and Mitsuaki Endo it�:Jt!Bt, Tokyo: Daito Bunka Daigaku Gogaku Kyoiku Mitsuaki Endo KenkyUjo, 2007, pp. 197-228. 13681884," in The Chinese world order, ed. John King Joseph Francis Fletcher, "China and Central Asia, Fairbank, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968, pp. 206-224, 337-368. Gao 2009 Gao Xiaohong �B}E!ltl, Beijinghua rushengzi de lishi cengci ���i!AP5-*Ef.JBJ5:.Fz.UX, Beijing: Beijing Yuyan Hamada 2005 Daxue Chubanshe, 2009. Masami Hamada �EBiE�, "Kai yakugo ¥���it," in i:f:i � 7 � 7 � � .Q -$$!., Tokyo: Chuo ajia o shiru jiten Heibonsha, 2005, p. 114. 131 NEW PERSIAN VOWELS TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA Harbsmeier 1998 Christoph Harbsmeier, Science and civilisation in China, vol. 7 (Language and logic, Part I), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. 1946 Hattori Shiro BIH$ [9 ��, GenchO hishi no mokogo o Hattori arawasu kanji no kenkyu �:�JH.£·_'f0)�1J§g�*'IJ: T �-*0)-liJf jt, Tokyo: He 1990 � �8, "Beijing Niu Jie diqu Huirnin hua zhong de �t:J?:41ii:l:tl!.IZ@l��r:p8{]1�iiiJ," Fangyan 1J§, 2, 1990, pp. 1993 1946. 元朝祕史 He Yang jieci Hecker Bunkyiido, 144-151. Felicia J. Hecker, "A fifteenth-century Chinese diplomat in Herat," Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland (3rd Series), 3/1, 1993, pp. 85-98. Honda 1963 Minobu Honda .:;$: E8W1§, ''<Kaikaikan yakugo> ni tsuite f @I @I Afi�§g J '.: 8-)t �) l' , Hokkaido daigaku bungakubu kiyo �t;lliJ:@:7':$)($W�c�, 11, 1963, pp. 1-73. " Honda 1991 ·::t Ido 2009 .:;$: E8W1§, Mongoru jidaishi kenkyu 'E / Jv�1�.'f:ii)fjt, Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1991. Minobu Honda ;tt±·�=. "Rensa suii to gengo sesshoku :i!UU!Ut C: §§g�fM!O) 1 / � - 7 :r. 1 .A," Shinji Ido intafeisu Gengo/No/Ninchi §§g · n&J • no kagaku to gaikokugo i�j;QO)�.;j.$ C: j�ffij§g���. ed. no in shutoku TOhoku Daigaku Gengo Ninchi Sogo Kagaku COE Ronbunshii Kanko Iinkai ff���. Ido 2012:1 *�t7':$§§gi�J;o�-g.�4$c 2009, pp. 7-20. Shinji ldo E�)(�fiJ ;tt±·�=. Tajikugo bunpo binran -)!. Y 7 §g )(${!�,Sendai: Tohoku University Press, Ido 2014 o Tokyo: Hituzi, Shinji ldo ;tt±·�=, 2012. "Bukharan Tajik," Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 44/1, 2014, pp. 87-102. Ishida l 973a Ishida 11 E8� Z..M , "Joshingo kenkyii no 3d�;§g.jjffjtO)�jf¥4," in Toa bunkashi soko *�)({t.'f��. ed. Mikinosuke Ishida 11E8�Z..M, Tokyo: Toyo Bunko, 1973, pp. 3-67 (originally published in 1930). Mikinosuke shinshiryo Ishida l 973b 11 E8�Z..M, "Iwayuru heishubon <kai JiJT§\Jrp;jfj,:;$: r -:5&�§g J 0) ffJU!l.Afi�§gJ ,"in TOa bunkashi soko *�)({t.'f��. Mikinosuke Ishida yakugo> no <dattankan yakugo> ed. Mikinosuke Ishida 11E8�Z..M, Tokyo: Toyo Bunko, 1973, pp. 147-205 (originally published in 1944). Ishida 1973c Mikinosuke Ishida <Shiyakukank6> 11E8�Z..Il}J, to Doveria no "Chiang <shiyakukanshi> Fan no rr� 0) S. 132 !DO lll!l�n�J t Fsl"' 9 7(]) lll!l�n�J ," in Toa bunkashi soko *EIEJt1t�il�, ed. Mikinosuke Ishida 1:i"IB�Z..M, Tokyo: Toyo Bunko, 1973, pp. 779-802 (originally published in 1949). Jiang 1996 Jiang Chuidong �¥*, "«Nihonkan yakugo» no kiso onkei: gibo, bibo to zero seibo to no kankei o chiishin ni r 8 :i$:tr"�MifJ (J)M�-*�-BJ:, �-BJ: t �·a Ji'l-BJ: t (J) � f* � 9=11L.' ': -, " Kokugogaku OO§g�, 184, 1996, pp. 29-41. Jiang 1999 Jiang Chuidong �¥*, "«Nihonkan yakugo» to kinsei hopp6on: shoruihen r 8:;$:t("�gj tili:tlt��:1J�-Ji'l!J!m.-," Suntgadai daigakuronso,��ilJ-§'jc��ii, 19, 1999,pp.157-176. Jiang 2000 Jiang Chuidong hoppoon: �¥*, "«Nihonkan yakugo» to kinsei r 8 :i$:nm-gg J t :ilit!U� :1J � - inruihen ,, Bunkyo daigaku bungakubu §.UJU�·-, Jt�:X�Jt�tm�c�, 1411, 2000, PP· 1-22. Jiang 2007 Jiang Chuidong �¥*. kiyo "«Nihonkan yakugo» ni han'ei ra#fi �gj ':�L,t;:B;;N�r/J"m-A . .A''�r:j:iiL,-i:--;· in Kai yakugo ronbunshii ¥�m§g§j;JJt�, eds. Takahiro Fukumori �M:fflHl5l and Mitsuaki Endo iStllJit!Bt, Tokyo: Daito Bunka Shita nihongo no U-retSU boin: SU, ZU 0 chiishin ni Daigaku Gogaku Kyoiku Kenkyiijo, 2007, pp. 21-29. Kanda 1948 Kiichiro Kanda fi$tE.g-��. Toyogaku setsurin *rf*§}t;f,t, Tokyo: Kobundo, 1948. Kauz 200 5 Ralph Kauz, Politik und Handel zwischen Ming und Timuriden: China, Iran und Zentralasien im Spii.tmittelalter, Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, 2005. ) 11 D � '§'], Timiiru teikoku ;v?ff 00, Tokyo: Kodansha, 2014. - Kawaguchi 2014 Takushi Kawaguchi Komitet 1967 Komiteti Terminologiya, Kuribayashi 2007 Hitoshi Kuribayashi �;f,t:f:$;J, "«Kai yakugo» (koshubon) ni okeru do'on kanji no kakiwake ni tsuite r•�m§gj T 1 L... Loihai tahriri navi imloi zaboni adabii hozirai tojik, Dushanbe: Donis, 1967. ( f:flf,1:;$:) ': tHf .Q [PJ��*(J)if � :)tt:t ': "J �) T , " in Kai yakugo ronbunshii ¥�m§g�Jt�, eds. Takahiro Fukumori �M1m:it5l and Mitsuaki Endo :18!:.iiJlt!Bt, Tokyo: Daito Bunka Daigaku Gogaku Kyoiku Kenkyiijo, 2007, pp. 155-166. Kuroiwa 2003 Takashi Kuroiwa �*�'"Chugoku kakuchi ni okeru shonikin no shiyo jokyo to shuppanbutsu ni tsuite 9=100�±1!!': t:Hj .Q 1j\!J(.tJl(J){�ffl;jj(b[, t tl:lAA� ': "'.) �) T , " in Chugoku ni okent arabia moji bunka no shoso 9=100': t;)(j .Q 7 7 !:: 7Jt-*Jt1t NEW PERSIAN VOWELS O)�;f§, �!5�, TRANSCRIBED IN MING CHINA eds. Kazuhiko Machida lllJEEl�D�, if ��I!i, and Jun Sugawara 133 Takashi Kuroiwa Tokyo: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa,2003,pp.11-67. Li 2011 Yong-Song Li manuscript of o l -§-Aj, "The Uighur word materials in a Hua-yi-yi-yu (¥��§g) in the library of Seoul National University (III)," Altai hakpo �SJ-0 l °Q:}.b!.., 21,2011,pp. 121-138. Lin 2007 Yen-Hwei Lin, The sounds of Chinese, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Liu 2006 �Llilli�, Liu Yingsheng "Minsho chugoku to chuo ajia, nishi ajia chiiki to no aida ni okeru gaik6 gengo no mondai ayjt;Ji:p fill t i:p ;'k: 7' Y 7' [§ 7' Y 7' ±ill� t 0) fdl c: ts C) .Q ��jt§§gO) Fo��," translated into Japanese by Tsukiko Fujino iiff Jj �. in Nairikuken, kaiikiken koryu nettowaku to isuramu r*Jlit� �1�xvft>J',-:; r 'J-7t1:J..7 /.>., eds. Tetsuo Morikawa **Jiltffit and Koji Saeki 1ti:1S5li'�, · · Fukuoka: T6ka Shob6, 2006,pp. 19-46. Liu 2008 Liu Yingsheng yiyu» yanjiu )(1j:@Jtt, «Huihuiguan zazi» yu «huihuiguan ((@J@J'ra�-"f'.)) !:ij ((@]@]tg"$,.g.)) :iiJfn, Beijing: Renmin University of China Press,2008. Lu 1998 Lu Zhiwei li! it � , "Ji Xu Xiao «zhongding sima wengong dengyun tujing» §c1*� ((]!-g-fEJ�¥1ffi.0���1iiil��)) ," in Lu Zhiwei jindai hanyu yinyun lunji litit �:ili1��§g 1H�ue�, Lu Zhiwei lit ;t � , Beijing: Commercial Press, 1998, pp. 54-84. Lu 2013 Lu Zhaoming § [Jg�, "Lun «zhongding sima wengong dengyun tujing» de shengmu gouni ji qi xiangguan wenti it ((]!iJE]�¥1ffi./.4��2)) 8{]f6�)Jitjt;f§�i'OJH!" Genga bunka kenkyu §§g)(-f.t:iiJfn, 32/2, 2013, pp. 105-140. Manz 1989 Beatrice Forbes Manz, The rise and rule of Tamerlane, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1989. Miya 2004 Noriko Miya '§#.le�, "Mongoru ga nokoshita <hon'yaku> "E/::f;vb;iftlt.: lfi�J §§g Cf) , Nairiku ajia gengo no kenkyu r*J lit 7' Y 7' §§gO):iiJfn , 19, gengo (ge) " 2004,pp. 157-209. Nagashima 1941 Eiichir6 Nagashima 7j(��-��. "Kinsei shinago toku ni hoppogo keit6 ni okeru on'inshi kenkyu shiry6 ni tsuite :ilittt::tl�§B*fc::ft7J§g�t.vzcc:Ji'i:t .Qfil��mn�*4 c:JJ9iPl" C*JV ," GengokenkyU §§g:iiJfn, 9,1941,pp.17-79. (zoku) 134 Nagashima 1956 S. !DO Hiromu Nagashima *§h5l, "«Yakushi chotanwa» (dai 5 no mourugo fukugen shiron r��*fil� J (Jtn�) 0)-=c r/ Jv§g��§lfa," Nagasaki kenritsu kokusai keizai daigaku ronshu *tlitif jljl,Jl.����j(�§ifll•. 20, kan) 1956,pp. 57-86. Nakanishi 2009 r:fi[§�ill. "Shindai no chiigoku musurimu bunka juyo m1�0) r:f1 � L>. :A � L>. t.:�Hj.Q"ZJv.Y7§g)({t��." in Perushiago ga musunda sekai "Ziv .Y 7 §gf.i��alv tit!:!:J;!., ed. Kazuo Morimoto �;;fs:-7(, Sapporo: Hokkaido Daigaku Shuppankai, 2009, Tatsuya Nakanishi ni okeru perushiago pp. 175-203. Nazarzoda et al. 2010 Farhangi tafsirii zaboni tojikl, jildi 2 (nafri duvum), eds. Sayfiddin Nazarzoda, Ahmadjon Sanginov, Said Karimov, and Mirzo Hasain Sulton, Dushanbe: Paziihisgohi zabon va adabieti ba nomi RiidakI, 2010. Nishida 1963 [§ H3 �U.t, Tatsuo Nishida chibettogo tenzen "Jiiroku seiki ni okeru seikosho hogen ni tsuite: kango-chibettogo tangoshii iwayuru heishubon «xifanguan yiyu» no kenkyli + /\ ttt�c t.: to it .Q 1ffi1*1lii' 1- '°" ·y r §g�:i::tJ§t.: ""'.) l) -r ----$l§g1-"'- ';/ r §g�§�Pn� .Q p;jfi;;ts: r@WrW§gJ O)liff�-," Kyoto daigaku bungakubu kenkyu kiyo Et�.:;*;:�)(�'OOWF��c�. 7,1963, pp. 84-174. Ochi 2004 ��-If- ::i. � Sayuri Ochi , "Kai yakugo heishubon «dada tsuite -��§gp;jfi;;fs: 1v§gt.: "":J l) -r ," Kyoto daigaku gengogaku kenkyu Et�j(�§§g�Wf�. 23, yiyU>> ni okeru rf.JU!l.�§g J mongorugo t.: to it .Q -=c ni ::_,, -::i" 2004,pp.115-144. Ohashi 1983 Yuriko Ohashi .:;*;:ma .g.-f-, "Totsiiji no gogakusho: mim.$0)§g�-,��*ffl§IS J �_lit-," Gobun kenkyu §g)(Wf�. 55, <yakushi chotanwa> kanken 1983, pp. 39-52. Okada 1994 Hidehiro Okada, "Dayan Khan as a Yuan emperor: the political legitimacy in 15th century Mongolia," Bulletin de l'Ecole fran�aise d'Extreme-Orient, 81,1994, pp. 51-58. *IEli:W, "Pekin bungoon no kigen ni tsuite �tEt)(§g{fO)iEQ�'.:JWi;l)l"," Chugokugogaku kenkyukai kaihO 9=1IBJQ§g�Wf�frwr*. 11, 1953, pp. 1-5. Osada 1953 Natsuki Osada Ozawa 1994 Shigeo Ozawa 1N!!l!!J3, Gencho hishi ;7t�f�5!:. lwanami Shoten,1994. Tokyo: NE W PER S IAN Pulleyblank 1983 V 0 W EL S T RAN SC R I BED IN M ING C HINA 135 Middle Chinese: A study in historical phonology, Vancouver: The University of British Edwin George Pulleyblank, Columbia Press, 1983. Pulleyblank 1991 George Pulleyblank, Lexicon of reconstructed pronunciation in Early Middle Chinese, La.te Middle Chinese, and Early Mandarin, Vancouver: The University Edwin of British Columbia Press, 1991. Sergeevna Rastorgueva, Opyt sravnitel'nogo izuceniya tadzikskix govorov. Moscow: Nauka, 1964. Rastorgueva 1964 Vera Rossabi 1998 "The Ming and Inner Asia," in The Cambridge History of China, vol. 8 (The Ming dynasty, 1368-1644, Part 2), eds. Denis Twitchett and John King Morris Rossabi, Fairbank, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp. 221-271. Sarashina 2002 Shin'ichi Sarashina on'yaku kanji �:f4tl1i;-, no seicho 1§-��*0) Jfi�-1*-*, " in "«Kaikaikan taikei yakugo» r@l@l��§g J Keiya Toshinobu kyoju kinen chiigokugogaku ronshii m�•f§tt�§c�9=100§fi$§��. ed. Keiya Toshinobu Kyoju Kinen Chiigokugogaku Ronshii Kankokai, Tokyo: Kobun Shuppan, 2002, pp. 145-155. Sato 1979 Akira Sato 1tcili8B, "Pekingo no kogo'on to bungo'on: toku ni chUko chiigokugo no so/ko setsu itto/nito nissh6ji o �t;X§f[O)D§fii§-C:Jt§fiif: *fi::9=ttl9=100§fi U- -�AF*�q:t,Li,i::," Yokohama kokuritsu chiishin ni O)� • daigaku · jinbun kiyo, 1'JiH�OO.lr7c $AJt�c �, dai 2 rui, gogaku �=!J!� , §fi$ · bungaku Jt$, 26, 1979, pp. 21-33. Satoh 1981 Akira Satoh 1tciliBB, "Chiiko tokosetsu nisshoji to pekingo 9=ttl.E'umJ\ffi* t �tJX§f[D§fiir," Yokohama kokuritsu daigaku jinbun kiyo, dai 2 rui, gogaku bungaku kogo'on tl'l�OO.lr7c$AJt�c�, �=!J!�, §fi$ Jt$, · 28, 1981, pp. 43-64. Sayd 2009 Mustafa Ajan Sayd, Dari-English dictionary, lst edition, Hyattsville: Dunwoody Press, 2009. Shogaito 1984 Masahiro Shogaito Et:l:l:!l*JlE5l, "«Weiwuerguan yiyu» no r fltlCJ(l.��§g J 0)1iJfJ1:-aJH� r/ 1 � Jv D§f[O).f!}t$i-," Nairiku ajia gengo no kenkyii l*ll!il /' /g§f[0)1iJfjL, 14, 1984, pp. kenkyii: mindai uiguru kogo no saiko 51-172. Steingass 2012 Francis Joseph Steingass, A comprehensive Persian-English dictionary (Nataraj edition), Springfield: Nataraj Books, 2012. s. 100 136 Takayama 2013 Yuriko Takayama «yakushi � W B .g..y, chotanwa» ii:J:tt'll�w Chikushi "Tonkin tsuji Gi Ryiizan seiritsu no haikei � / ;f / r��tH.lHIS J Jl.X:1z:0)1t:l'J!:," Journal of Jogakuen $t�3c�ml:t:� · University and Junior College $t�3c�ml:t:�ffiM:t:�W�C.�. 8, 2013, pp. 227-239. EB:l:JR!J!! :it!, ''<Kaikaikan yakugo> goshaku (1) I[§] [§]fill�§! J §M! C-) ," Toyo gakuho *#*�· Tasaka l 943a Kodo Tasaka Tasaka 1943b K6do Tasaka Tasaka 1943c K6do Tasaka 3011, 1943, pp. 96-131. EB:l&!J!!:it!, ''<Kaikaikan yakugo> goshaku (2) lf§Jf§Jfill� §!J §M! c=) ," Toyo gakuho *#*�· 30/2, 1943, pp. 100-164. kan) EB:l&!J!!:il:!, ''<Kaikaikan yakugo> goshaku (3 lf§Jf§JW§!J §!� c=%) ,"Toyo gakuho *#** 30/4, 1943, pp. 88-114. Tasaka 1951 EB:l&!J!!:it!, "<Kaikaikan yakugo goshaku> I[§] [§Jfilj�§!§!�J fmlE," Toyo gakuho *#*�· Kodo Tasaka hosei 33/3-4, 1951, pp. 132-145. Tasaka 1964 E8 :l:JR!J!!:it!, Chugoku ni okeru kaikyo no guzu, gekan 9=tlfil1lc.: t:Ht .Q@j�0)1'* Kodo Tasaka denrai to sono t "(- O)jljfil T:g:, Tokyo: Todo 1957: Akiyasu Todo-Kano 2005 �jitl�JH.lil:, Todo 9=t00§!{r���. Akiyasu Todo Toyo Bunko, 1964. Chugokugo on'inron Tokyo: Konan Shoin, 1967. �1it�1* :!Jofr.fi.g.)'t, �WfWT�lD::k:=jqtt�. . Tokyo: and Kano Yoshimitsu Gakken shin kanwa daijiten Gakken, 2005. Watanabe 1960 at:ii.=.�. "Kai yakugo oyobi nibonkan -��§!to J: U B ;$:fil\�§gc.: "J P -C , daigaku kenkyu kiyo Wil$::k:*Wf ��C.�. 18, Watanabe Mitsuo yakugo ni tsuite Komazawa " 1960, pp. 120-135. Windfuhr 2009 Gernot Windfuhr, languages 2nd "Persian," edition ed. in The Bernard world's Comrie, major London: Routledge, 2009, pp. 445-459. Ye 2001 Ye Baokui nt'.3!:�. Mingqing guanhua yinxi ��'§-j%{r�, Xiamen: Xiamen University Press, 2001. Zhang 2006 �!Ott�. Ming yu Tiemu'er wangchao guanxi �-'=i�i5*JL3:.���5!:Wf�. Beijing: Zhonghua Zhang Wende shi yanjiu Shu Ji.i, 2006.