Seul Devlet Üniversitesi Kütüphanesinde Bir Huá-yí-yì-yǔ Nüshasında Bulunan Uygurca Malzemedeki 把根赤 ba-genchi
Yong Song LiHuá-yí-yì-yǔ, Ming Hanedanı’nın (1368~1644) başlagıcından beri telif edilegelen Çince ve komşu dilleri arasındaki türlü lügatçelerin genel bir adıdır. Genel olarak 4 farklı gruba sahiptir. 3. gruptaki lügatçelerde her yabancı dilin sözcükleri sadece Çin yazısı ile yazılmıştır ve söz konusu dilin harfleri kullanılmamıştır. Bu 3. gruba Seul Devlet Üniversitesi Kütüphanesinin koleksiyonundaki nüsha giriyor. Onun 7. cildi Uygurca içindir. 19 kategoriyi içerir. 8. kategorisi, 62 maddeli 人物門 rén-wù-mén ‘kişiler kategorisi’dir. Bu yazıda, bu kategorinin 把根赤 bǎ/bà-gēn-chì sözcüğü işlenecektir. Bu nüsha ile AB’de, 3. Çince sözcük 大人 dà-rén’in Uygurca karşılığı 把根亦 bǎ/bà-gēn-yì olarak ve 4. Çince sözcük 陰陽 yīn-yáng’ın Uygurca karşılığı ise 忒必 tè-bì olarak verilmiştir. BT ile SB’ye göre, müstensih sözcüklerin sırasında bir hata yapmış ve bir sözcük atlamıştır. 把根亦 bǎ/bà-gēn-yì, 把根赤 bǎ/bà-gēn-chì için bir müstensih hatasıdır. Eski Uygurca körümči’ye dayanarak, 把根赤’yi baqïmčï olarak okuyabiliriz ki, bu sözcük Uig. baqimči ve Bšk. baγïmsï’da yaşıyor.
把根赤 ba-gen-chi in the Uighur word materials in a manuscript of Huá-yí-yì-yǔ in the library of Seoul National University
Yong Song LiThe Huá-yí-yì-yǔ (華夷譯語) is a general name for the various wordbooks between the Chinese language and its neighboring languages compiled from the beginning of the Ming dynasty. It has broadly 4 different classes. In the wordbooks of the third class the words of each foreign language were transliterated only in Chinese characters and the letters of the language in question were not used. To this third class belongs the manuscript in the collection of the library of Seoul National University. Its seventh volume is for the Uighur language. It contains 19 categories. Its eighth category is 人物門 rén-wù-mén ‘the category of persons’ with 62 entries. In this paper, the word 把根赤 bǎ/bà-gēn-chì of this category will be treated. In this manuscript and AB, the Uighur counterpart of the fourth Chinese word 陰陽 yīn-yáng is given as 忒必 tè-bì, whereas the Uighur counterpart of the third Chinese word 大人 dà-rén as 把根亦 bǎ/bà-gēn-yì. According to BT and SB, the scribe made a mistake in the sequence and omitted one word in this manuscript and AB. 把根亦 is a scribal error for 把根赤. Based on Old Uighur körümči, 把根赤 can be read as baqïmčï, which survives in Uig. baqimči and Bšk. baγïmsï.
The Huá-yí-yì-yǔ (華夷譯語) is a general name for the various wordbooks between the Chinese language and its neighboring languages compiled from the beginning of the Ming (明) dynasty (1368~1644). It has broadly 4 different classes. In the wordbooks of the third class the words of each foreign language were transliterated only in Chinese characters and the letters of the language in question were not used. To this third class belongs the manuscript in the collection of the library of Seoul National University. Its seventh volume is for the Uighur language. It contains 19 categories. Its eighth category is 人物門 rén-wù-mén ‘the category of persons’ with 62 entries. In this paper, the word 把根赤 bǎ/bà-gēn-chì of the eighth category 人物門 rén-wù-mén will be treated. The word materials are arranged as follows: 1) Chinese entry in 拼音 pīnyīn transcription; 2) Uighur word in 拼音 pīn-yīn transcription before ‖, the transcription in “Early Mandarin” after ‖, and in parenthesis the usual transcription in Turkology. In addition, the forms from another manuscript in the collection of Awanokuni Bunko (阿波國文庫) in Shikoku island (= AB), the forms from another manuscript in National Library of China (= BT), the forms from another manuscript in the collection of Seikadō Bunko (靜嘉堂文庫) in Tōkyō (= SB), the reading by Shōgaito (1984), the information in the etymological dictionary of Sir Gerard Clauson (= ED), and the modern Uighur form, and the form in another modern Turkic language are also given. In the manuscript in question the Uighur counterpart of the fourth Chinese word 陰陽 yīn-yáng ‘adept (e.g. astrologer, diviner, geomancer, etc.)’ is given as 忒必 tè-bì, whereas the Uighur counterpart of the third Chinese word 大人 dà-rén ‘Your Excellency; His Excellency (address for a high official)’ as 把根亦 bǎ/bà-gēn-yì. The same is the case in AB. According to the two manuscripts BT and SB, the correspondence in the manuscript in question and AB is wrong. The scribe made a mistake in the sequence and omitted one word. 把根亦 in the manuscript in question, AB and SB is a scribal error for 把根赤 bǎ/bà-gēn-chì. This scribal error shows that the scribe(s) of this material did not fully master Chinese or Uighur. Incidentally, Shōgaito could not identify 把根赤 and gave the reading pa kən tʂhʅ (p. 134) according to the Chinese pronunciation of Beijing region of the Ming (明) dynasty (1368~1644). Moreover, Shōgaito gave ‘Yīn and Yang’ as the meaning of 陰陽 yīn-yáng. Undoubtedly he overlooked both that 陰陽 means also 陰陽生 yīn-yáng-shēng ‘adept (e.g. astrologer, diviner, geomancer, etc.)’ and that it is in 人物門 rén-wù-mén ‘the category of persons’. There is a word körümči ‘fortune-teller, soothsayer’ in Old Uighur:
ED körüm (g-) N.S.A. fr. kör-; ‘a single act of seeing’; in the early period apparently ‘examining the omens’, or simply ‘omen’. (745b)
körümçi: (g-) N.Ag. fr. körüm; ‘soothsayer’. Pec. to Uyğ. (745b)
Based on Old Uighur körümči, 把根赤 bǎ/bà-gēn-chì ‖ paˇ-kən-tʂʰiˇ can be read as baqïmčï < baq-ï-m-čï. This word is found in the following two languages:
Uig. baqimči ‘a fortune-teller by the book’ (URS 195a)
Bšk. baγïmsï ‘sorcerer, sorceress; fortune-teller, soothsayer’ (BRSa 68b; BRSb 65a; < *baqïmčï < baq-ï-m-čï).
The verb baq- is used especially with fal/fāl/fål/pal ‘omen, augury; fortune’ (< Arabic فأل faʾl) in some modern languages like Turkish, Azerbaijanian, Uzbek, Modern Uighur, Kumyk, Crimean Tatar, Crimean dialect of Karaim, Urum. In sum, it was possible for the author to read the Uighur word 把根赤 bǎ/bà-gēn-chì as baqïmčï (< baq-ï-m-čï) in the manuscripts of Huá-yí-yì-yǔ of the third class, whereas the former researcher SHŌGAITO Masahiro (庄垣內正弘) (1984) could not identify it. 把根亦 bǎ/bà-gēn-yì in the manuscript in question, AB and SB is a scribal error for 把 根赤 bǎ/bà-gēn-chì. This scribal error shows that the scribe(s) of this material did not fully master Chinese or Uighur. Apart from the shortcomings of the Chinese characters, this may be the main reason why the Uighur word materials in the wordbooks of this class are not highly regarded.