Vernacular Language and the Wu Dialect in the Formation of a Chan Koine and the Rise of Chan/Zen Philology: The Seventh to Seventeenth Centuries

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper is well-documented and highly original. The title suggests that there are two parts of argument for this paper: one is the rise of Chan/Zen philosophy and the other a hypothesis about the Greater Hangzhou connection. The first argument for the rise of Chan/Zen philology is very strong. The argument for a standard Chan koine is fascinating. The author also extended the discussion to later periods in China and Japan, which is much needed and appreciated. The author has an encyclopedic knowledge of Chan texts and also attempted to connect it to the linguistic studies of ancient Chinese. I am not an expert in this field and cannot comment further. But I am wondering if Edwin Pulleyblank’s Middle Chinese is still relevant to this discussion. Pulleyblank seems to have a systematic theory about the formation of standard Chinese, early middle Chinese (EMC), and late middle Chinese (LMC). His work may be outdated and narrowly focused on the middle Chinese but can be a useful framework for discussion. In particular, he made efforts to use the Japanese and Vietnamese evidence. (The author did cite his work on neo-Confucianism.)

The second part may need some more consideration. Right now, this argument is not well-developed and materials and references are scattered throughout the paper. The author may want to consider putting them together in one section in the beginning or the end.

The Greater Hangzhou region needs to be better defined. Albert Welter’s recent works on Hangzhou can be consulted. The author seems to have used the Greater Hangzhou region to refer to the entire Jiangnan area, which is fine but needs clarification. The regional linguistic connection to Hangzhou is the key for this paper. However, the statement that the greater Hangzhou region belongs to the Wu dialect needs to be qualified because the Hangzhou dialect in the city had been deeply influenced by the northern dialect due to migration, first in the southern Song and second during the Qing dynasty. The Qing government built a Manchu garrison inside the city. Hangzhou dialect still keeps the “er 儿” sound in their daily colloquial conversation, which is very rare in South China. The Hangzhou area was developed much later than the Wu/Suzhou and Yue/Shaoxing areas. Northern food is also preserved. Linguistically, it is classified as a special zone 杭州小片within the Wu dialect area. Here, immigration and social mobility might be reason behind. The author only mentioned briefly the role of immigration in the conclusion. But this can be highlighted and expanded.

There are a few missing Chinese characters for the references:

Page one, note one: Cao Shibang 曹仕邦, Zhongguo shamen waixuede yanjiu: Hanmo zhi Wudai 中國沙門外學的研究―漢末至五代,

Note 19： See Huang Qingping 黃青萍, “Dunhuang xieben Yuanming lun yu ‘amaluoshi’ chutan,” 敦煌寫本《圓明論》與〈阿摩羅識〉 初探──以傅圖 188106 號為中心 Zhongyang yanjiuyuan lishi yanjiu suo jikan 中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊

Page 11: Again, Yaoshan 夭 藥？山(884-960), a native of Fujian, quoted a dialogue, “

Note 50: 50 Sun et al, Zutang ji, 2: 746.所以安在潙山、三十年來喫潙山、飯屙潙山屎、不学潙山禅、只是長看一頭水牯牛、落路入草便牽出、侵犯人苗稼則鞭打つ

Note: 150: Noguchi Yoshitaka 野口義 善敬, Gendai Zenshūshi kenkyū 元代禪宗史研究,

Page 6, section 4: However, geographically the Wu-Yue region differed greatly, with a broad low floodplain stretching from Hangzhou to Ningbo that was very fertile and amenable to water transport.

 

This statement needs to be clarified. The plain seems to stretch to the north towards the Tai Lake, which is usually referred to as Hang Jia Hu杭(州)嘉(興)湖(州) plain. There is a small coastal plain in the Ningbo and Shaoxing area. 

Author Response

Thank you for providing useful advice for improving my article. I have changed the title of the article to avoid any ambiguity about the topic. It was not meant to be about the rise of Chan, but about the rise of Chan philology and Zen philology.

I have taken your advice and consulted Pulleyblank's Middle Chinese, which I had ignored because it is primarily about phonology. It has been helpful. 

I hope that I have specified any area outside of the Greater Hangzhou region. Although I have referred to other areas in Jiangnan, I believe I have distinguished them from Greater Hangzhou region or Zhejiang.

The reference to the Hangzhou dialect was welcomed, for it may provide a further avenue for investigation, especially with regard to the Zen monks who arrived in Hangzhou during the Southern Song and Yuan. I have added some notes on this from the thesis of Simmons on this dialect, as well as some references to immigration.

The remaining short items mentioned in your review have been amended in accordance with your suggestions.

Reviewer 2 Report

See report PDF for details.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

See report PDF for details.

Author Response

Thank you for the detailed review of my article, especially those comments on structure. 

First, I have changed the title so that it is not ambiguous. The article is not about the rise of Chan but about the development of Chan philology and Zen philology. Second, I have tried to give indications about the structure of the article near the start of the article and by added to the numbered section headings.

Section 2 (2): I have removed the reference to "fantasy,' and almost all of the material on the official documents required for travel. I have added material on travel that brought monks into contact with different languages and dialects. Following your advice, I have numbered two additional subheadings and introduced each with an introductory sentence or paragraph.

For Section 5, I have added information on Yang Yi and "coarse language," and altered several sections to clarify matters, but because we have very limited information on this, it is difficult to be definite about exactly how his editing contributed to the creation of a standardized Chan koine. I have, however, added references to the no-longer extant Fozu tongcan ji that Yang Yi and his associates edited to create the Jingde chuandeng lu.

Finally, I have rewritten the conclusion.

For the list of errors that needed change, I have made alterations to answer all of them, with the exception of 1.2, where I have kept "common language" because this is the usual translation for koine. However, I have added "standard" or "normative" in several places. For 2.3, while McRae, Faure, Welter, Morrison, and Cole have dealt with lineage succession, that was mostly to dismiss their validity by finding gaps or inventions in them. They do not describe the regional networks or analyze what the implications were of such claims beyond legitimization of the genealogical claimant. Much more work needs to be done on this. 5.1, this is work for the future, as this is mostly an impression gained from reading these texts.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The author has made adequate revisions and I agree to accept for publication. I have noticed the change of the title. After reading the revised article again, I think the revised title may not reflect the content of this important research. Its connection to Hangzhou is only secondary. If the author wants, an honest title may be more appropriate. Something like: Vernacular Language, the Wu Dialect and Zen Philology in the Formation of a Chan Koine in East Asia: The Seventh to Seventeenth Centuries. In addition, the author may want to check some details again for Chinese, Japanese, and Korean spellings. It is hard to avoid mistakes in such a wide-ranging paper and the copyeditors cannot catch everything. For example: Linji was written as 臨際 in note 13. In note 76, Zanning was written as Canning.

Author Response

I have changed the title to make the content clearer.

Reviewer 2 Report

Please see the attached follow-up report.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

/

Author Response

Thank you again for your corrections and comments. I have made all the corrections suggested and added to footnotes 73 and 75.