22 ON THE CHINESE SYSTEM OF WRITING. 



by comparing the forms of the graphic system with those of the spoken idiom 

 that he hopes to obtain the solution of the important problem that has so much 

 puzzled the sinologists of Europe. 



If there is any perspicuity in the Chinese written characters, it is not in 

 their outward forms, which, whatever some of them may have been in the 

 beginning, are now nothing more than linear and angular figures, which pre- 

 sent, of themselves, no idea to the mind, but in the method and arrangement 

 of them that has been adopted by the Chinese grammarians, and which the 

 languages to which that system was to be applied necessarily required. The 

 monosyllabic languages are devoid of grammatical forms; their words are not, 

 as in the idioms of Europe and Western Asia, derived from roots that lead to 

 the understanding of their numerous derivatives; no one monosyllable is con- 

 nected, as to its sense or meaning, with another by means of some slight altera- 

 tion; but, on the contrary, the same word or monosyllable sometimes serves to 

 express tv/enty or thirty, and sometimes even fifty different ideas; and the only 

 mode of discrimination between them is by the tone of voice or accent, by the 

 juxta-position of the words to each other, and by joining two words together to 

 show the separate meaning of one. This, in speaking, is of little conse- 

 quence; for it is well known, whatever may have been said to the contrary, 

 that the Chinese, in conversation, understand one another perfectly well, and 

 without the least difficulty. For this I have the testimony of the Chinese 

 themselves, several of whom I have interrogated on this particular point, and 

 who have uniformly given me the same answer. I have also heard them con- 

 verse together, and never have seen them embarrassed. Besides, if there was 

 any ambiguity in their discourse, it might be easily corrected at the moment. 



But, in inventing a system of writing for such a language, it was necessary 

 to prevent ambiguities which the author would not be at hand to correct. For 

 this reason difi'erent characters were applied to the same monosyllable, to show 

 in what sense it was to be understood. This was done by uniting two or more 

 characters, each representing a particular word, to show in what sense the 

 word represented was to be taken. This has given rise to the notion that Chi- 

 nese characters represent abstract ideas, when, in fact, they are but a method 

 of spelling the same word, analogous to the different orthography that we 

 employ in writing homophonous words, such as sea and see; scene and seen; 

 grate and great, &o. Thus the Chinese system of writing was invented to 



