16 MEMOIRS OF THE CARNEGIE MUSEUM 
makers of China, as will be seen by noting the special list of negatives (see Plate 
XXVIII). 
The most complicated of all these is the sign ig “ Wu,” “minus,” “without.” 
In its modern garb it suggests a likeness to sm hsiie, ‘“ blood,” and X huo, “fire.” In 
fact, it is connected with neither of these, though for convenience it is classed under 
the latter. Taking the old form & as a means of comparison, we find the upper part 
( 8 ) has been condensed into YW, leaving the “two trees” (4%) as the origin of the 
base of the modern symbol m\. The Shuo Wén defines it as “lost” probably from 
the sign ¢ in many old forms, which has that meaning. The inference by the 
commentators of the Shuo Wén is, “ ‘man’ (A) ‘lost’ (&) in the ‘woods’ (#8) 
hence ‘missing’ ‘minus.’”” This is a far-fetched explanation and fails to account 
for an essential part of the old symbol #& *. 
The list of pictographs and ideograms represented in Plates ].—X XIX. is neither 
complete nor strictly logical in arrangement. They have been selected somewhat at 
random to illustrate the pictorial nature of the language. Many of the symbols 
given will not be found in the current Chinese-English dictionaries, for the obvious 
reason that these works are abridged, excluding many obsolete signs which, how- 
ever, played an important part in the early development of the written language. 
I have tried to give the original meanings (where ascertained), which often seem 
remote from their modern significance. No attempt has been made to indicate the 
old pronunciation, which forms a different branch of philology from that herein 
discussed. I have followed, in the main, the Wade system of Romanization, with 
a few changes which seem expedient in view of the poverty of sounds in the Peking 
Dialect, upon which Sir Thomas Wade based his system.” I have departed from 
> which 
this system in distinguishing between the two initial sounds “ch” and “k,’ 
coalesce in Pekingese, and have introduced a few minor changes noted in the key. 
Of the many systems of Romanization in vogue, that by Sir Thos. Wade is the 
most widely known. It is the standard of pronunciation used by the British Con- 
sular Body, by the Chinese Customs and Postal Service, and by Dr. Herbert Giles 
in his Anglo-Chinese Dictionary. It is also used largely by contributors to the 
Journals of the Royal Asiatic Society. This has naturally given wide circulation 
to Wade’s system, and is sufficient reason for its adoption in this paper. The 
changes introduced have been due partly to the author's choice, and partly to sug- 
gestions made by others. 
23 See note at Plate XX VIII. 
#4 A comparison of the dialectic variations in sounds — especially the old sounds — will show the inadequacy of 
Wade’s System to indicate them, 
