Skip to main content
Chinese Language

Return to Question

added 1 character in body
Source Link
Ludi
Ludi
  • 2.8k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 32

When I got this question, I immediately answered „yes“, based on a passage in Mencius. But, apparently, people online confidently dismiss my interpretation, hence I find it incumbent upon myself to inquire with you, before I lead astray junior students.😿

On a specific passage

孟子对曰：“王好战，请以战喻。填然鼓之，兵刃既接，弃甲曳兵而走。⋯“，

Which Legge translates as follows:

Mencius replied, 'Your majesty is fond of war - let me take an illustration from war. The soldiers move forward to the sound of the drums; and after their weapons have been crossed, on one side they throw away their coats of mail, trail their arms behind them, and run.run…’

Legge also comments specifically on the 之 in the above quote, explaining:

之 refers to 戰士, or soldiers.

Similarly, Harold Shadick included this passage in his »A First Course in Literary Chinese« as Text number 10. The commentary on Text 10 says of this 之：

The implied antecedent of 之 is “the soldiers of two armies drawn up for battle.”

What Western Grammar Books Say on the General Question

Shadick, in his aforementioned book, Section Grammar 4.2, says quite absolutely:

The object substitute 之 ⋯ can substitute for any object of any transitive verb or coverb … The criterion by which an expression is identified as an object is that it can be substituted by 之.

So, clearly, based on the books from which I was taught, the answer is yes.

But I am acutely aware of having studied in the West. I cannot exclude the possibility that this line of reasoning originated from Legge, whence most Western Commentatorscommentators simply absorbed it. Therefore, I was quite shaken by the following.

Different or Unclear Interpretations of 之 in the specific passage

The question of the function of this 之 has vexed a baidu user here. Only one answer was given, that one highly upvoted. And it states that 之 can notcannot be a 代詞 (pronoun/substitute), but must occur for reasons of sound.

The same is reiterated here.

There is also this commentary, which understands 之 as 代詞, but then states

这里指代击鼓的事由

It is not clear to me, what 事由 means here.

When I got this question, I immediately answered „yes“, based on a passage in Mencius. But, apparently, people online confidently dismiss my interpretation, hence I find it incumbent upon myself to inquire with you, before I lead astray junior students.😿

On a specific passage

孟子对曰：“王好战，请以战喻。填然鼓之，兵刃既接，弃甲曳兵而走。⋯“，

Which Legge translates as follows:

Mencius replied, 'Your majesty is fond of war - let me take an illustration from war. The soldiers move forward to the sound of the drums; and after their weapons have been crossed, on one side they throw away their coats of mail, trail their arms behind them, and run.

Legge also comments specifically on the 之 in the above quote, explaining:

之 refers to 戰士, or soldiers.

Similarly, Harold Shadick included this passage in his »A First Course in Literary Chinese« as Text number 10. The commentary on Text 10 says of this 之：

The implied antecedent of 之 is “the soldiers of two armies drawn up for battle.”

What Western Grammar Books Say on the General Question

Shadick, in his aforementioned book, Section Grammar 4.2, says quite absolutely:

The object substitute 之 ⋯ can substitute for any object of any transitive verb or coverb … The criterion by which an expression is identified as an object is that it can be substituted by 之.

So, clearly, based on the books from which I was taught, the answer is yes.

But I am acutely aware of having studied in the West. I cannot exclude the possibility that this line of reasoning originated from Legge, whence most Western Commentators simply absorbed it. Therefore, I was quite shaken by the following.

Different or Unclear Interpretations of 之 in the specific passage

The question of the function of this 之 has vexed a baidu user here. Only one answer was given, that one highly upvoted. And it states that 之 can not be a 代詞 (pronoun/substitute), but must occur for reasons of sound.

The same is reiterated here.

There is also this commentary, which understands 之 as 代詞, but then states

这里指代击鼓的事由

It is not clear to me, what 事由 means here.

When I got this question, I immediately answered „yes“, based on a passage in Mencius. But, apparently, people online confidently dismiss my interpretation, hence I find it incumbent upon myself to inquire with you, before I lead astray junior students.😿

On a specific passage

孟子对曰：“王好战，请以战喻。填然鼓之，兵刃既接，弃甲曳兵而走。⋯“，

Which Legge translates as follows:

Mencius replied, 'Your majesty is fond of war - let me take an illustration from war. The soldiers move forward to the sound of the drums; and after their weapons have been crossed, on one side they throw away their coats of mail, trail their arms behind them, and run…’

Legge also comments specifically on the 之 in the above quote, explaining:

之 refers to 戰士, or soldiers.

Similarly, Harold Shadick included this passage in his »A First Course in Literary Chinese« as Text number 10. The commentary on Text 10 says of this 之：

The implied antecedent of 之 is “the soldiers of two armies drawn up for battle.”

What Western Grammar Books Say on the General Question

Shadick, in his aforementioned book, Section Grammar 4.2, says quite absolutely:

The object substitute 之 ⋯ can substitute for any object of any transitive verb or coverb … The criterion by which an expression is identified as an object is that it can be substituted by 之.

So, clearly, based on the books from which I was taught, the answer is yes.

But I am acutely aware of having studied in the West. I cannot exclude the possibility that this line of reasoning originated from Legge, whence most Western commentators simply absorbed it. Therefore, I was quite shaken by the following.

Different or Unclear Interpretations of 之 in the specific passage

The question of the function of this 之 has vexed a baidu user here. Only one answer was given, that one highly upvoted. And it states that 之 cannot be a 代詞 (pronoun/substitute), but must occur for reasons of sound.

The same is reiterated here.

There is also this commentary, which understands 之 as 代詞, but then states

这里指代击鼓的事由

It is not clear to me, what 事由 means here.

Source Link
Ludi
Ludi
  • 2.8k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 32

Can 之 refer to an object not previously mentioned?

When I got this question, I immediately answered „yes“, based on a passage in Mencius. But, apparently, people online confidently dismiss my interpretation, hence I find it incumbent upon myself to inquire with you, before I lead astray junior students.😿

On a specific passage

孟子对曰：“王好战，请以战喻。填然鼓之，兵刃既接，弃甲曳兵而走。⋯“，

Which Legge translates as follows:

Mencius replied, 'Your majesty is fond of war - let me take an illustration from war. The soldiers move forward to the sound of the drums; and after their weapons have been crossed, on one side they throw away their coats of mail, trail their arms behind them, and run.

Legge also comments specifically on the 之 in the above quote, explaining:

之 refers to 戰士, or soldiers.

Similarly, Harold Shadick included this passage in his »A First Course in Literary Chinese« as Text number 10. The commentary on Text 10 says of this 之：

The implied antecedent of 之 is “the soldiers of two armies drawn up for battle.”

What Western Grammar Books Say on the General Question

Shadick, in his aforementioned book, Section Grammar 4.2, says quite absolutely:

The object substitute 之 ⋯ can substitute for any object of any transitive verb or coverb … The criterion by which an expression is identified as an object is that it can be substituted by 之.

So, clearly, based on the books from which I was taught, the answer is yes.

But I am acutely aware of having studied in the West. I cannot exclude the possibility that this line of reasoning originated from Legge, whence most Western Commentators simply absorbed it. Therefore, I was quite shaken by the following.

Different or Unclear Interpretations of 之 in the specific passage

The question of the function of this 之 has vexed a baidu user here. Only one answer was given, that one highly upvoted. And it states that 之 can not be a 代詞 (pronoun/substitute), but must occur for reasons of sound.

The same is reiterated here.

There is also this commentary, which understands 之 as 代詞, but then states

这里指代击鼓的事由

It is not clear to me, what 事由 means here.