Abstract：This paper aims at distinguishing two pairs of concepts related to the diachronic development of “synthetic-to-analytic” in the history of the Chinese language, based on a comparison of shi (send someone) used in Zuozhuan and Zhanguoce.The diachronic development of “synthetic-to-analytic” has been extensively explored during the past decades and is still under close investigation. A number of studies from various perspectives have been conducted, with fruitful insights and findings achieved. However, little attention has been paid to the distinction between two pairs of closely related concepts, i.e. lexical syntheticity vs. pragmatic syntheticity, and distinctive meaning vs. categorical meaning.This paper sets out to make a distinction within these two pairs of concepts. Based on such divisions, four types of historical development from syntheticity to analyticity has been proposed. They are (1) categorical meaning from lexical syntheticity to analyticity; (2) categorical meaning from pragmatic syntheticity to analyticity; (3) distinctive meaning from lexical syntheticity to analyticity; (4) distinctive meaning from pragmatic syntheticity to analyticity. With such a fine-grained classification system, we can not only understand the relevant data in a more accurate way, but also further explore the otherwise intriguing questions such as how different types of transformations are realized in the history of the Chinese language; in what kind of order; and whether they are Chinese specific or cross-linguistically universal. Such investigations could contribute to revealing the rules and patterns governing the development of the lexicon-grammatical system, and provide the studies of the history of Chinese lexicon-grammar with a more profound perspective.Based on a systematic investigation of the transformations of shi from Zuozhuan to Zhanguoce, this paper demonstrates four types of “synthetic-to-analytic”. Some previous studies have focused on the usage of shi in Pre-Qin documented texts, little has been done, however, from a diachronic development perspective. With a thorough investigation of the relevant data preserved in the oracles and the Qinghuajian texts, it is found that shi had three types of changes from Zuozhuan to Zhanguoce. More specifically, the “shi NP yu G” to “shi NP shi yu G” represents the type of categorical meaning from lexical syntheticity to analyticity (1), and “shi ? non-indexed” to “shi NP general name VP” belongs to the type of categorical meaning from pragmatic syntheticity to analyticity (2). Additionally, it is found that “shi ? non-indexed VP” and “shi NP general name VP” reflect register differences. The former should be taken as a formal usage, frequently used in the narrative contexts, whereas the latter reflects a relatively oral usage and typically appears in conversation contexts.The chronology of “synthetic to analytic” is further investigated in this paper. The transformation of “synthetic to analytic” has already been initiated at the time of the late Warring States Period, and the transformation of some subcategories had even tended to be completed by that time. These further shed lights on the understanding of the division between Archaic Chinese and Middle Chinese.With reference to difference sub-types of “synthetic-to-analytic”, a close investigation suggests that (1) occurred later than (2). Such a conclusion drawn from the case study of shi is inclined to be a general rule and the other two types of changes are left unattended in this paper, which calls for further investigations.
史文磊. “从综合到分析”相关概念辨正[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2021, 51(2): 185-204.
Shi Wenlei. Two Pairs of Concepts Related to “Synthetic-to-Analytic”: A Comparison of the Usage of “Shi” （使） in Zuozhuan and Zhanguoce. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2021, 51(2): 185-204.
2021, Vol. 51 
