# 臣参见陛下



## Asadullah

Red Cliff

SCENE 1 

画面： 汉 建安 十三年 许昌。 

曹操： 
臣 参见 陛下。臣昨日请奏 征讨 刘备 孙权，不知陛下是否已准？ 

Could somebody tell me what "臣参见" means?


----------



## twinklestar

Hi,

臣:
1. a subject of the country where there is / was a monarch.
2. It's a pronoun the speaker, who mostly was an official, used to humbly referred to himself/herself when he/she talked to their own monarch. Nowadays it is obsolete, because China is a republic country. There's no monarch any more. (This is what it means in your context.)

参见：refers (to an underling) *humbly went to meet* (his superior/senior official(s) )*with certain etiquette. *It is mostly obolete.

臣参见= I come to meet you here, your Majesty.


----------



## Asadullah

Thank you!
But I think "your Majesty" is not contained in the words "臣参见".


----------



## twinklestar

臣 参见 (陛下)－I come to meet (you here, your Majesty).

You're right. I have broken down 君 and 参见 for you in the first place.

Accurately I should have said "I humbly meet" instead of "come to meet".


----------



## Asadullah

Thank you!


----------



## Skatinginbc

臣参见陛下 literally "I, your humble servant, am here to pay my respects and see Your Majesty."
臣: male slave, subject
参: pay one's respects by rendering courtesy such as kneeling or bowing
见: see, meet
陛下: Your Majesty


----------



## Jher

臣is no slave...
Only officials can call themselves 臣.

As for ordinary people, non-officials, the words 草民are used.


----------



## Skatinginbc

Jher said:


> 臣is no slave...


See this.
奴才參見老佛爺 ==> 奴才 corresponds to 臣.


----------



## Jher

Okay. But that is only for Qing Dynasty.


----------



## Skatinginbc

It is an analogy, man--the same mentality.


----------



## kategogogo

Not to challange the native. I agree with Jher. Despite of the original meaning, 臣 has evolued through history and until 汉 dynasty, the meaning was no longer as belittled or insignificant as 'slave' , but merely a term that ancient Chinese ministers used to humbly address themselves. Those ministers wouldn't be caught dead calling themselves 'slaves' because most of them were well-educated intellectuals with high self-esteem.

And as Jher has pointed out, the term '奴才' wasn't introduced to the imperial court until Qing dynasty. To me, 奴才 is much more along the line of 'slave'. And 奴才 was used by Manchu misisters and eunuchs only.


----------



## brofeelgood

Historical texts and narratives state clearly that during the Qing dynasty, "奴才" was a privileged honorific reserved only for the Manchus. "臣" was a *lesser title* that the Hans were obliged to use.

那些史上不能曝光的幕後真相事件簿

魯迅先生的雜文《隔膜》裡的一段話,也印證了這個問題,他說:「滿洲人自己,就嚴分著主奴,大臣奏事,必稱『奴才』,而漢人卻稱『臣』就好。這並非因為是『 炎黃之胄』 ， 特地優待， 賜以佳名的， 其實是所以別於滿人的『 奴才』 ， 其地位還下於『 奴才』 數等」 。


----------



## Skatinginbc

Gosh, how many times do I have to repeat that 奴才 was mentioned as an analogy?
(1) Like 奴才, 臣 originally means "slave".  This is an indisputable fact: 甲骨文象箕坐之形，身手都被束缚。一般都作家臣，或人臣解，也可解为宫廷诸侯大夫家中，当使唤做家务的佣人. 書經．費誓：「臣妾逋逃。」孔安國．傳: 「役人賤者，男曰臣，女曰妾。」禮記．少儀：「臣則左之。」鄭玄．注：「臣，謂囚俘。」
(2) Like 奴才, 臣 was used as a humble self-address to the king.  Yes, 奴才 was used in the Qing dynasty, but that's not the point. If I say 書 corresponds to "book", don't tell me "No, they are different.  書 is Chinese; 'book' is English".  That's not the point, man.
(3) Like those that addressed themselves as 奴才 to a Qing emperor, most of the people that addressed themselves as 臣 in ancient China considered it merely a proper, conventional self-address and did not have the feeling of self-abasement or self-denigration.  In the Qing dynasty, many "_well-educated intellectuals with high self-esteem_" called themselves 奴才 and were proud of it (Note: 清朝的“奴才”地位比“臣”高, 臣比奴才還賤, Also see Brofeelgood #12 ).  It is like "賤內"--How many people say "賤內" and seriously think their wives are "賤"? (Note: 賤內 is mentioned here as an analogy, so please don't tell me that "賤內" refers to one's wife and is therefore different from 臣).


----------



## kategogogo

> If I say 書 corresponds to "book", don't tell me "No, 書 is Chinese; 'book' is English"


I am well aware that '奴'才 doesn't correspond 100% to 'slave' in English. And I'm well aware that different languages just don't work this way. I used the word 'slave' as a quote *from you* (臣: male slave, subject) thinking it might help bring us on the same page (well obviously I only made things unnecessarily complicated).



> In the Qing dynasty, many "_well-educated intellectuals with high self-esteem_" addressed themselves 奴才 and were proud of it. It is like "賤內"--How many people say "賤內" and seriously think their wives are "賤"? (Note: 賤內 is mentioned here as an analogy, so please don't tell me that "賤內" is different from 臣 because the former refers to one's wife).





> Gosh, how many times do I have to repeat that 奴才 was mentioned as an analogy?


Skatinginbc, before you freak out and rush into the conclusion who is right and who is wrong, please reread my post. Yes, 奴才 and 臣 are analogies and yes one is a title superior to the other (In Qing, 奴才 is privileged not because it's a nobler term, but because 满人 were* born superior* to 汉人. Whatever title they came up with to call themselves in front of the emperor, it would automatically be privileged than that of 汉臣. Again, my personal opinion. Just don't say anything if you don't agree). Not in a single word that I was questioning the analogy relationship. What I was comparing was the intonation of *your translation 'male slave'* (you were quoting the original meaning I know) and 臣.


----------



## twinklestar

奴才
1. =servants, which was a unique term in Manchu;


> 乾隆帝则在一份奏折上朱谕一大段，对称臣、称奴才做了强调：“……向来奏折满洲率称奴才，汉官率称臣，*此不过相沿旧例*，且亦惟请安、谢恩及陈奏己事则然，若因公奏事，则满汉俱应称臣。*盖奴才则仆、仆即臣，本属一体，朕从不稍存歧视。*不过书臣觉字面冠冕耳！初非称奴才即为亲近而尽敬、称臣即为自疏而失礼也！且为君者，岂系臣下之称臣、称奴才为荣辱乎？今天保、马人龙之折如此，朕所不取。若不即为指斥，恐此后转相效尤，而无知之徒，或因献媚否或窃为后言，不可不防其渐……”（乾隆38年，皇帝谕）。



2. ＝ a pejorative term to refer a man.



> 宝玉也不知是何缘故,忙赶来时,贾政便问:“该死的奴才!你在家不读书也罢了,怎么又做出这些无法无天的事来!那琪官现是忠顺王爷驾前承奉之人,你是何等草芥


《红楼梦》

3. = a male servant regardless of his ethnicity to refer himself. In this sense, I would say 奴才 is a loan word as 马马虎虎 from Manchu language。



> "人家的奴才跟主子赚些好体面，我们这等奴才白陪着挨打受骂的。"




4. =in modern Chinese it refers a person who has slavish mentality.


臣＝servant(s) in Han or subject(s)；the etymology of the character originally referred to slave(s);

奴才＝/=奴或奴隶
奴才 who had freedom, and could be senior Manchu officials to refer themselves; slave(s), 奴隶 或奴， who didn't have freedom.


----------



## Skatinginbc

kategogogo said:


> What I was comparing was the intonation of *your translation 'male slave'* (you were quoting the original meaning I know) and 臣.


My translation for 臣 in 臣参见陛下 is "_your humble servant_" (see #6.  I chose the word "servant" because it may refer to a domestic servant, a "public servant" 仕於公曰臣, or any service provider.  It is also an archaic English self-address used at the end of a letter or as a form of courtesy).
And then I gave definitions for each word: 臣: male slave, subject ==> You knew I was quoting its original meaning, so what's your point?


----------



## kategogogo

My point is: this is where I will end the dicussion and do things more valuable with my time.


----------



## Skatinginbc

I think the controversy concerns the literal meaning of 臣 in 臣参见陛下.  Is it "slave (servant)" or "minister"?  In other words, do we consider 臣 in 臣参见陛下 a 謙稱 (a humble address for oneself) or a job title (e.g., 老師 as a self-address in 老師是為你好 meaning 我是為你好)?  If it is a 謙稱, then the translation would be "I, your servant."  If not, then the translation would be "I, your minister."
諸葛亮《出師表》臣本布衣，躬耕南陽...深追先帝遺詔，臣不勝受恩感激 ==> Do you think 諸葛亮 addressed himself as "your minister" or "your servant" to the king?


----------



## twinklestar

In the similar context, 臣 , which had been clarified by Emperor Qianlong in black and white, meant "servant(s)", when his subjects refered to themselves in the capacity of being officials, according to strict imperial etiquette of Chinese dynasties.

臣 was never specified as any official titles -i.e. minister.

I wouldn't rigidly literally translate 臣 as "your serveant" or whatever, but "I" only in English, but I would try to imply the sense of humbleness in the wording. There is not exact English equivalent for the Chinese word.

Even in the translation of modern Chinese, I doubt anyone would translate 臣 as "仆人我“ or “丞相我”, but simply "我“。

However we are not talking about translation, but helping non-native learners to understand the meaning and connotation, aren't we?


----------



## Jher

Skatinginbc said:


> Gosh, how many times do I have to repeat that 奴才 was mentioned as an analogy?
> (1) Like 奴才, 臣 originally means "slave".  This is an indisputable fact: 甲骨文象箕坐之形，身手都被束缚。一般都作家臣，或人臣解，也可解为宫廷诸侯大夫家中，当使唤做家务的佣人. 書經．費誓：「臣妾逋逃。」孔安國．傳: 「役人賤者，男曰臣，女曰妾。」禮記．少儀：「臣則左之。」鄭玄．注：「臣，謂囚俘。」
> (2) Like 奴才, 臣 was used as a humble self-address to the king.  Yes, 奴才 was used in the Qing dynasty, but that's not the point. If I say 書 corresponds to "book", don't tell me "No, they are different.  書 is Chinese; 'book' is English".  That's not the point, man.
> (3) Like those that addressed themselves as 奴才 to a Qing emperor, most of the people that addressed themselves as 臣 in ancient China considered it merely a proper, conventional self-address and did not have the feeling of self-abasement or self-denigration.  In the Qing dynasty, many "_well-educated intellectuals with high self-esteem_" called themselves 奴才 and were proud of it (Note: 清朝的“奴才”地位比“臣”高, 臣比奴才還賤, Also see Brofeelgood #12 ).  It is like "賤內"--How many people say "賤內" and seriously think their wives are "賤"? (Note: 賤內 is mentioned here as an analogy, so please don't tell me that "賤內" refers to one's wife and is therefore different from 臣).



清朝大臣的地位低，而且大多是是满洲人。
明朝时就比较好，而宋朝则更好，有宰相。
汉唐时大臣的地位高至宰相，也就是等于目前的CEO，而皇帝不过是董事主席，他是不直接处理朝政的。
春秋战国时代，臣的地位跟王的地位是亦师亦友，臣不必永远忠于一位君主，地位很崇高，如吴起、孔子等。

把臣等于奴才是以偏概全。


twinklestar said:


> In the similar context, 臣 , which had been clarified by Emperor Qianlong in black and white, meant "servant(s)", when his subjects refered to themselves in the capacity of being officials, according to strict imperial etiquette of Chinese dynasties.
> 
> 臣 was never specified as any official titles -i.e. minister.
> 
> I wouldn't rigidly literally translate 臣 as "your serveant" or whatever, but "I" only in English, but I would try to imply the sense of humbleness in the wording. There is not exact English equivalent for the Chinese word.
> 
> Even in the translation of modern Chinese, I doubt anyone would translate 臣 as "仆人我“ or “丞相我”, but simply "我“。
> 
> However we are not talking about translation, but helping non-native learners to understand the meaning and connotation, aren't we?



You are right. We should not confuse and mislead Foreign Chinese language learners.


----------



## Skatinginbc

Jher said:


> 臣is no slave. Only officials can call themselves 臣.





Jher said:


> We should not confuse and mislead Foreign Chinese language learners.


Indeed, we should not confuse and mislead people.  And claiming "臣 is no slave.  Only officials can call themselves 臣" is confusing and misleading, if not downright wrong:
文選西都賦李周翰注：「臣者，男子之賤稱，古人謙退皆稱之。」
王廷贤文言修辞新论 page. 118: 「古时君王之下,一切人均可对君上称臣。」

臣 is analogous to 僕 "servant", which can also serve as a 謙稱:  For example, 白居易與元微之書: 僕自到九江，已涉三載.
臣 as a self-address is NOT analogous to 官 "official" (as in 下官) or 職 "officer" (as in 卑職).
對長官稱臣是謀逆不軌. 對皇帝自稱下官是大不敬.


Jher said:


> 臣的地位跟王的地位是亦师亦友，臣不必永远忠于一位君主


中國上古封建時期, 俯首稱臣是收徒結友, 無 "pledge of allegiance" 的概念??  You didn't confuse 臣 with 門客, did you?


----------



## Flaminius

Skatinginbc said:


> indisputable fact: 甲骨文象箕坐之形，身手都被束缚。一般都作家臣，或人臣解，也可解为宫廷诸侯大夫家中，当使唤做家务的佣人. 書經．費誓：「臣妾逋逃。」孔安國．傳: 「役人賤者，男曰臣，女曰妾。」禮記．少儀：「臣則左之。」鄭玄．注：「臣，謂囚俘。」


Bone oracles depict a person bending over, bound and/or kneeling by 奚, 妾, 服, 令, 敬 and maybe more.  They all have meanings related to submission. A person looking downwards is depicted in 監.  This character is for overseeing.  It is hard to look for the submission sense of 臣 etymologically.

Bronze inscriptions from 殷 and 周 such as 小臣余 (同犠尊), 臣辰 (同尊) and 畯臣天子 (颂鼎) does not suggest that 臣 was only for slaves.  (There are uses of 臣 that means a group of people treated like movables; e.g., 臣三品.)

What 曹操 meant by addressing himself as 臣 need to be seen in relation to other uses of 臣 in the contemporary records.  Is there anyone who cares to go over 史記, 漢書, and 三国志?


----------



## Skatinginbc

Flaminius said:


> What 曹操 meant by addressing himself as 臣 need to be seen in relation to other uses of 臣 in the contemporary records.


That's why I quoted 諸葛亮《出師表》. Who can argue that 諸葛亮 is not contemporary with 曹操?  I also quoted 孔安國 「役人賤者，男曰臣」 and 鄭玄「臣，謂囚俘」.  Both 孔安國(西汉鲁国曲阜人) and 鄭玄(东汉北海高密人) are scholars of the Han Dynasty.


Flaminius said:


> It is hard to look for the submission sense of 臣 etymologically.


甲文臧象以戈刺目爲奴，省戈表不刺者則爲臣，專指役使於家內者.《說文》臣，牽也，事君也。象屈服之形。==> The authoritative dictionary of the Han Dynasty clearly states that the character 臣 is a pictogram depicting the image of submission.
宦 (从宀从臣) OC *_ɡʷˁran-s _is a cognate of the Proto-Lolo-Burmese _gywan_ 'slave' (Matisoff, James A. 2003. Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: System and philosophy of Sino-Tibetan reconstruction).  Note: "从宀从臣" means that the meaning of 宦, a cognate of the Proto-Lolo-Burmese 'slave', derives from both 宀 "roof" (here referring to the imperial household) and 臣 "slave, servant" (合起来的意思是家室奴仆。本义:做奴隶主或帝王的奴仆).


Flaminius said:


> 小臣余 (同犠尊), 臣辰 (同尊) and 畯臣天子 (颂鼎)


臣 in 小臣艅: noun "servant, retainer, minion" (from the perspective of the lord), or "minor official" (from the perspective of the commoners).
臣 in 臣辰: noun "servant" (from the perspective of the lord), or "official" (from the perspective of the commoners).
臣 in 畯臣天子: verb "submit oneself to, serve"
Their meanings can all be seen as derivatives of 《說文》事君也 "to serve a superior; anyone whose life is dedicated to serving a superior".

I never deny that 臣 already had multiple meanings. My main argument is that not all of those meanings can fit the context (i.e., as a self-address) syntactically (a noun, an adjective, a verb?), semantically (Does it make logical sense?), and pragmatically (Can it be a proper self-address to the king?).  The definition of "minister, officer, official" is rejected due to its pragmatic incompatibility.


----------



## retrogradedwithwind

首先说一句，两位日本友人的汉语英语水平，以及对汉文化的了解，实在是让我觉得汗颜。自愧不如啊。
至少让我用英语讨论臣字意义演变就非常困难。

关于臣字意义的演变，以及臣和奴才两词的区别，已经有很多研究了。百度即可。

奴才和臣
奴才为满语之汉译，满语原文为aha。另有 booi（包衣）。满清实行八旗制度，旗主是主子，旗民就是aha，即奴才。所以奴才这词，如不是旗人，是不能用的。不是同一旗的，也不能乱用。皇帝只领三旗，其余五旗的人是不能对皇帝自称奴才的。
臣更近于官称，而奴才，却近于私下的亲密称呼。不是奴才比臣高等（其实低等），而是奴才比臣更显亲近。皇帝的狗也比屁民高贵不是！

臣义的演变
臣字，在汉以后一般之指臣属，没有奴隶的含义了。上面引用的那段话也说“不过书臣觉字面冠冕耳！”
所以这里只是自称罢了。没有仆人之义。
但同时，相对平等的自称是吾、我等字，用臣字表明双方身份，也是某种自谦。


----------



## Skatinginbc

retrogradedwithwind said:


> 上面引用的那段话也说“不过书臣觉字面冠冕耳！”  所以这里只是自称罢了。没有仆人之义。


盖奴才则仆、仆即臣，本属一体...不过书臣觉字面冠冕耳! ==> It clearly points out that 臣 was an equivalent of 仆 although 臣 is high-sounding (冠冕) now.  In other words, it recognizes that the literal meaning of 臣 as a self-address is originally 仆 "servant".  It is like the literal (non-figurative) meaning of 賤 in 賤內 "my wife" is "lowly" 賤, not "my" 自己的.  In #6, I wrote: 臣参见陛下 literally "I, your humble servant, am here to pay my respects and see Your Majesty."  It is the literal (non-figurative) meaning that I have been discussing.


retrogradedwithwind said:


> 臣字，在汉以后一般之指臣属，没有奴隶的含义了。


noun 臣仆，俘虏: 南唐 李煜 《破阵子》词：“一旦归为臣虏，沈腰潘鬓消磨。”


----------



## Flaminius

Skatinginbc said:


> That's why I quoted 諸葛亮《出師表》. Who can argue that 諸葛亮 is not contemporary with 曹操?


The words of 孔明 and 曹操 as quoted only mean that people referred to themselves as 臣 in front of the emperor.



> I also quoted 孔安國 「役人賤者，男曰臣」 and 鄭玄「臣，謂囚俘」.  Both 孔安國(西汉鲁国曲阜人) and 鄭玄(东汉北海高密人) are scholars of the Han Dynasty.


The works by 孔安國 and 鄭玄 are of antiquarian nature.  They did not comment on the sense of 臣 in 前漢 or 後漢.  Did anyone buy slaves in the 長安 market and say, "Oh, the 臣's I bought today were such a bargain"?



> 甲文臧象以戈刺目爲奴，省戈表不刺者則爲臣，專指役使於家內者.《說文》臣，牽也，事君也。象屈服之形。==> The authoritative dictionary of the Han Dynasty clearly states that the character 臣 is a pictogram depicting the image of submission.


Being the authority does not exempt 許慎 from inquiry on what grounds he wrote such an opinion.  The shape of 臣 in 說文 does not immediately reminds one of 牽 or 屈服之形.  The previous "甲文臧象 etc." is a modern opinion since 許慎 was unaware of the existence of bone oracles.  I tentatively see that 臧 is no more likely the origin of 臣 than 監 or 望.



> 宦 (从宀从臣) OC *_ɡʷˁran-s _is a cognate of the Proto-Lolo-Burmese _gywan_ 'slave' (Matisoff, James A. 2003. Handbook of Proto-Tibeto-Burman: System and philosophy of Sino-Tibetan reconstruction).


We agree that 臣 had two meanings from very old.  Is it not possible that 臣 had both senses when 宦 character was created?  To the best of my knowledge, 宦 does not appear until very late in West Zhou.  I am not familiar with the historical linguistics that attempts at reconstructing a common proto-language for Chinese, Burmese and others.  So I refrain from commenting on the work of Mr. Matisoff.



> 臣 in 小臣艅: noun "servant, retainer, minion" (from the perspective of the lord), or "minor official" (from the perspective of the commoners).
> 臣 in 臣辰: noun "servant" (from the perspective of the lord), or "official" (from the perspective of the commoners).


Offices and titles in 殷周期 cannot be taken literally.  小子 was not a small child and 多子 is not many children.  At least, the two could not have meant "slave."



> 臣 in 畯臣天子: verb "submit oneself to, serve"
> Their meanings can all be seen as derivatives of 《說文》事君也 "to serve a superior; anyone whose life is dedicated to serving a superior".


The difference between "to serve a superior" and "anyone whose life is dedicated to serving a superior" is huge.  In other words, serving a liege does not necessarily make one a slave of the liege.  We should also take note that the phrase appears in the ending part of the inscription where auspicious words are usually placed.  Slave is at odds with the general tone of the inscription made for glorifying the maker and pass his feats down to "the son of the son, the grandson of the grandson."



> I never deny that 臣 already had multiple meanings. My main argument is that not all of those meanings can fit the context (i.e., as a self-address) syntactically (a noun, an adjective, a verb?), semantically (Does it make logical sense?), and pragmatically (Can it be a proper self-address to the king?).  The definition of "minister, officer, official" is rejected due to its pragmatic incompatibility.


These do not necessarily opt for understanding the self-address 臣 as synonym to slave.  Classical literatures as well as exavated materials speak of word pairs 君臣 and 宗臣 (liege-vassal).  Translating 曹操's 臣 into "your servant" is well within the translator's license but equating it with "slave" is too much for a pround 漢朝之臣.


----------



## retrogradedwithwind

*盖奴才则仆、仆即臣，本属一体，朕从不稍存歧视。*
*
这句话不是在讨论字义……*


----------



## Skatinginbc

Flaminius said:


> The works by 孔安國 and 鄭玄 are of antiquarian nature.


Many, if not most, of the 自謙词 involve archaism.  For example, 在下 _is_ an archaic expression although it can still be seen in modern Mandarin. 敝, despite being frequently used as a 自謙词 (e.g., 敝校), is obsolete and hardly can exist as a standalone morpheme in modern Mandarin. The tone of archaism may make a word all the more fitting in an extra-formal context (e.g., speaking in the Imperial court, writing an official report addressed to the king).

The sense of "slave" for 臣 of course existed in the Han Dynasty (e.g., 史記:口食監門之養，手持臣虜之作哉, not to mention examples for "to enslave").  I'm too lazy to do a thorough research on whether it had become a bound-morpheme or not by the Han Dynasty, but it does not matter.  As I said, 敝 has become a bound-morpheme and yet is still used as a 自謙词 now.

I have clarified it before, and I will clarify it again:
臣参见陛下 _literally _"I, your humble servant, am here to pay my respects and see Your Majesty."
臣: male slave, subject
参: pay one's respects by rendering courtesy such as kneeling or bowing
见: see, meet
陛下: Your Majesty

The _literal_ meaning of 臣 in 臣参见陛下 is, in my opinion, "servant".
"male slave, subject" is the dictionary definition of 臣 that, I think, is relevant to this context (i.e., servant).  The reason that I gave that definition (in addition to my literal translation) was to facilitate understanding of how the sense of "servant" comes about.


Flaminius said:


> Is it not possible that 臣 had both senses when 宦 character was created?


Of course, yes.  But so what?  臣 might have many other definitions at that time, but it seems obvious to me that it is the sense of "slave, servant" that makes 宦 a cognate of the Proto-Lolo-Burmese word for slave that exhibits a regular sound correspondence with the Chinese 宦.


Flaminius said:


> The shape of 臣 in 說文 does not immediately reminds one of 牽 or 屈服之形.


Well, it certainly reminded 許慎 and the person who wrote "字形正表示了俯首屈从之意."
BTW, what 許慎 gave was two separate definitions.  屈服之形 is associated with 事君也, not necessarily with the definition 牽.  The 臣 meaning "牽" is probably a transliteration for a foreign word (OC *_ɡiŋ_ 臣 vs. Asakian _kɨ́ŋ_ 'pull', Jingpo _gaŋ_ 'pull') or a dialectal pronunciation for 牽 *_kʰˁin_.


Flaminius said:


> Classical literatures as well as exavated materials speak of word pairs 君臣 and 宗臣 (liege-vassal).


Why not 《詩·小雅》率土之濱，莫非王臣 "king and his subjects"?  Yes, 臣 has many meanings, which I never deny.
BTW, check *韋昭*（204年－273年）註 for 《國語．魯語下》：男女之饗，不及宗臣.  I would not classify 宗臣 (as well as 家臣) as "liege-vassal".


Flaminius said:


> The difference between "to serve a superior" and "anyone whose life is dedicated to serving a superior" is huge.


"To serve a superior" is my interpretation of 《說文》臣，事君也. "Anyone whose life is dedicated to serving a superior (as opposed to 士)" is quoted from S. Starostin's Old Chinese reconstruction, which emphasizes the distinction in meaning between 臣 ("slave, subject" Baxter-Sagart 2014) and 士 ("officer; gentleman", Baxter-Sagart 2014).


Flaminius said:


> Offices and titles in 殷周期 cannot be taken literally.  小子 was not a small child and 多子 is not many children.  At least, the two could not have meant "slave."


Did I ever say they mean "slave"?
The literal meaning of 小子 is indeed "little one".  And it is the literal meaning of 臣 that we are discussing, isn't it?  Let me emphasize it again, what I have been discussing is the literal meaning of 臣 in 臣参见陛下, the original literal meaning of 臣 when used as a self-address.


retrogradedwithwind said:


> 盖奴才则仆、仆即臣，本属一体，朕从不稍存歧视。这句话不是在讨论字义……


那是在讨论什麼?


----------



## retrogradedwithwind

这几个词所代表的实际身份


----------



## Jher

retrogradedwithwind said:


> *盖奴才则仆、仆即臣，本属一体，朕从不稍存歧视。
> 
> 这句话不是在讨论字义……*



我刚才搜了一下，那是清朝皇帝的说法。
清朝时汉人臣子没地位，比满人奴才还差，不奇怪，毕竟是被侵略占领了。
汉唐宋时臣子的地位还是蛮高的。


----------



## Skatinginbc

retrogradedwithwind said:


> 这几个词所代表的实际身份


所以臣的实际身份就是仆.


----------



## retrogradedwithwind

反了。不是臣是奴才，是奴才是臣。

别被汉语骗了。

在清朝宫廷，满人之间说的是满语，他们说的是aha，是满语aha，不是汉语奴才。只是因为现在用汉语记录，所以翻译成了奴才。

所有旗人，都对旗主自称aha。这个aha，就满语本意是奴才的意思，但正如汉语臣字经历了由奴到臣的转变，aha也经历了类似的变化。

所以奴才就是臣。


----------



## Skatinginbc

retrogradedwithwind said:


> 没有仆人之义...用臣字表明双方身份，也是某种自谦。


若原意非"僕", 何以自謙?  請問謙在何處?
若非自謙, 可以在皇帝面前不謙嗎?
The above questions are some of the pragmatic considerations I referred to in #24.  No one has yet explained how other definitions of 臣 could pragmatically be plausible as the original literal meaning of 臣 used as a self-address to the king.

臣参见陛下 is not pragmatically the same as "我來看你了, 皇帝," "我來拜见你了, 皇帝".


retrogradedwithwind said:


> 不是臣是奴才，是奴才是臣。


那麼僕也是臣 (奴才则仆、仆即臣)??  I have not found a dictionary that lists "official, officer" as a definition of 僕(or its ancient form 䑑 with the semantic component 臣).


retrogradedwithwind said:


> 这个aha，就满语本意是奴才的意思，但正如汉语臣字经历了由奴到臣的转变，aha也经历了类似的变化。。


Therefore, 奴才 (aha) is analogous to 臣. 
I would like to point out that "aha" in the memorials written by officials of banner status to the throne is commonly translated as "your slave" or "your servant", not "I".  Such translations can be easily found on the web.


----------



## retrogradedwithwind

《甲骨文字诂林》中介绍，在甲骨文时代，臣字就有两义，一是奴隶，二是臣僚。臣僚一义，有小臣、臣某及王臣三种。其中臣某的某，就是名字。

至少在甲骨文时代，臣已经是（某种程度的）自称之词了。

臣妾，男奴为臣，女奴为妾，而女子一直可以自称妾、贱妾以示谦卑。相类比，男子自称为臣也不奇怪。后世也有太监面对皇帝自称奴婢的，这是以家奴自居，和aha相似。

甲骨文之前就不知道了。

至于为什么以臣自称，就其起源说，我个人有两个猜想，一个是纯粹用臣字自称表谦恭，一个古代以臣（奴）为家臣，臣妾之流逐渐掌握权力，升级了。类似于马木留克。

面对上级，时刻表明自己的下属身份，当然是自谦。以臣自称，相当于今日以下属二字自称，当然是谦恭。


----------



## Skatinginbc

突厥沙缽略可汗搞不懂為何中國使節老是臣來臣去的:
沙缽略謂左右曰:「何謂臣?」左右曰:「隋言臣,猶此云奴耳。」 (see 資治通鑑).

我終於把自己說煩了, 保證不會再來打擾各位.


----------



## Flaminius

周亞夫 (周勃's second son) referred to himself as 臣 speaking with 許負, the phrenologist:
亞夫笑曰：「臣之兄已代父侯矣，有如卒，子當代，亞夫何說侯乎？然既已貴如負言，又何說餓死？指示我。」(《絳侯周勃世家》12)

To answer one of the many good questions raised by *skating*, the 宗臣 I had in mind is 臣宗易位 from the inscription on 中山王錯方壺.  It's about 子噲 and 子之 transposing their ranks.


----------



## Flaminius

The phraseology of 周亞夫 is noteworthy because he calls 許負 by his given name.  臣 as self-address is not 自谦 here but an indication of his (or his family's) relation with the emperor.  How is he related to the emperor?  An obvious answer in this remark is his brother being certified as marquess.  Elsewhere, he calls himself 我.  I would say that 臣 here is synonymous to 封臣.  Needless to say 臣 is obliged to all the duties and fidelities as prescribed by 君臣之道.  Confucianism is very noisy about how the subject should be faithful to the lord but, as I have shown in the Zhongshan inscription, 君臣之道 is not necessarily a Confucianist moral.

The following links are useful for a historical inquiry of the origin of 臣.  I share them because they are important regardless of one's opinion in this thread.

Other historical instances of 臣 that I came across are:
帝五丯臣 in a bone oracle - this suggests 臣 were sacrifice or property of a god.
丞相臣斯…昧死言 in 泰山刻石

The 說文's account of 臣 having 象屈服之形 is explained by 郭沫若 as (《甲骨文字研究》):
（甲金文）均象一豎目之形。人首俯則目豎，所以‘象屈服之形’者，殆以此也。

Characters with 目豎 (an eye standing on the epicanthal fold) are 臧, 賢, 望
edit: 監 too!

For understanding 望, 合集6482 is important:
今者、王從望乘伐下危、受有祐


----------



## retrogradedwithwind

周亚夫那个是好例子。


----------



## Skatinginbc

Re: 周亚夫的例子
Check 漢典: 臣, 对一般人的自称。表示自谦; Check 國語辭典: 臣, 古人對君、父或一般人的自謙之詞.
墨子對公輸盤(魯班)說： 北方有侮臣者，願借子殺之 ==> 墨子不是封臣, 也不是魯班下屬.
呂公對劉季說： 臣少好相人，相人多矣，無如季相==> 當時, 呂公不是封臣, 社會地位也不低於劉季.
裴駰集解引張晏(東漢末三國初人)曰： 古人相與語多自稱臣，自卑下之道，若今人相與語皆自稱僕.==> "臣"用為一般自謙詞是先秦與西漢的一個習俗, 東漢末已罕見. 周亞夫是漢初人, 對一般人以"臣"自謙, 不足為怪. 至於"臣""我"交替, 也非奇特. 下面的例子甚至涉及"臣""朕"交替:
帝王自謙"臣":
楚簡《彭祖》： 狗老(= 句老, 句踐的句, 句老的身份為南國帝王)問于彭祖(錢鏗, 受封於大彭)：句是執心不忘，受命羕（= 永）長。 臣可(= 何）埶(= 藝, 才能)可（= 何）行，而營於朕身，而謐于帝常?

古人常以奴僕自謙, 休的大驚小怪(還有更卑下的“糞土臣”"牛馬走"呢!!!):
司馬遷寫給任少卿(任安): 僕雖罷駑亦嘗側聞長者之遺風矣 ==> 司馬遷社會地位不低於任安.
白居易與元微之(元稹)書: 僕自到九江，已涉三載 ==> 白居易與元稹齊名.
王昭君變文: 遠指白雲呼且住, 聽奴一曲別鄉關.
明．高明《琵琶記》： 奴自有些金珠，解當充糧米.


----------



## Flaminius

Oh, very nice!

Skating, what part of 史記集解 did you quote for 古人相與語多自稱臣etc.?


----------



## Skatinginbc

Flaminius said:


> Characters with 目豎 (an eye standing on the epicanthal fold) are 臧, 賢, 望 edit: 監 too!


Hi, it seems you have missed my point about 宦 in #24.
Characters that 从臣 (i.e., have 臣 as their semantic components): 臧 "slave" (从臣戕声), 宦 "serve as a slave; eunuch" (从宀从臣), etc.
Characters that do NOT 从臣 (i.e., do NOT have 臣 as their semantic components): 賢 (从貝臤聲), 望 (从亡朢省聲), 監 (从臥䘓省聲), 豎 (从臤豆聲), 臤 (从又臣聲), 臨 (从臥品聲), etc.
My point was: 臣 as a semantic radical means "slave".  This fact implies that "slave" was seen as the original meaning of 臣 when those characters (e.g., 宦) containing that semantic radical were coined.


Flaminius said:


> what part of 史記集解 did you quote for 古人相與語多自稱臣etc.?


Just google "古人相與語多自稱臣."

Summary:
(1) 字典明明白白地指出"臣"的原意是"奴" (see 漢典).
(2) "臣"作為表意部首是"奴僕"的意思(e.g., 䑑 "servant"), 証明"臣"的原意是"奴僕" (evidenced by characters with 臣 as their semantic radical).
(3) 以奴僕自謙是中國封建時代的常見風俗 (evidenced by examples in ancient literature).
(4) 古人自稱"臣"，相當於自稱"僕" (see 裴駰集解).
(5) 自稱詞"臣"被翻譯成突厥語的"奴" (see 資治通鑑).
(6) 自稱詞"臣"相當於滿語的"奴才" (see 乾隆詔諭).

自稱詞"臣"(as in 臣参见陛下)的原意是"奴僕", 這對我來說是想當然耳, 萬萬沒想到在此卻是一人對眾口, 彷彿自己是強詞奪理, 無趣得很.


----------



## Flaminius

Skatinginbc said:


> Characters that do NOT 从臣 (i.e., do NOT have 臣 as their semantic components): 賢 (从貝臤聲), 望 (从亡朢省聲), 監 (从臥䘓省聲), 豎 (从臤豆聲), 臤 (从又臣聲), 臨 (从臥品聲), etc.


Among the characters that "do NOT 从臣," those that have 臤 did not originally have 臣.  So they should be excluded from the discussion.  Still 望, 監 and 臨 had the eye looking downwards in their shapes on bone oracles.  許慎 is hopelessly lost about 望 (after 射, it's the second best evidence I know that he was not familiar with bone oracles or bronze inscriptions).  In order to verify (2) (*Skatinginbc* #41), I needed to check how these characters above have developed from the time of bone oracles.  The following is a modification of (2) to make it a more rigorous argument.  説文 turned out to be right but I still say it arrived at the right conclusion from the wrong premise.  Until the previous post, I have dropped objections for points (1), (3), (4), (5), and (6).

Characters 望, 監 and 臨 have an eye looking downwards but cannot be associated with enslavement.  They are pictographically contrasted with 臧, 宦, and possibly with 臣 by the rest of the body drawn with the eye.  In other words, the pictographic difference between the group with clear link to slavery and the one without is that the former is drawn without the body to which the eye is attached.

This brings us back to the conundrum of 象屈服之形, a part of 說文's definition of 臣.  How the shape 臣 stands for submission?  A typical answer by 郭沫若 (quoted in *Flaminius* #37) is inadequate for the eye also looks downwards in characters 望, 監 and 臨.

I will tentatively answer this with the bone oracle that has 帝五丯臣 on. 郭沫若 catalogued it as 殷契粋編 12.  As seen below, 臣 in this oracle is drawn with bent legs:




 

Checking bone oracle databases, I learnt that 臣 with bent legs is a minority variation but it seems to be the oldest form.  The submission sense of 臣 is now more clearly associated with its shape.

The legs are not as conspicuous as those in 夷, 女 or 見 and could have been lost at the slightest pressure for the economy of strokes.  When paired with 見, the urge for the change could have been even greater.  Although 見 is usually depicted with a man on his knees, the angle of the eye is various.  Some eyes are horizontal but others are almost vertical.  When contrasted with the oldest form of 臣, the latter group may have posed difficulty telling 見 from 臣.


----------



## Skatinginbc

Flaminius said:


> the pictographic difference between the group with clear link to slavery and the one without is that the former is drawn without the body to which the eye is attached.


Agree .
Like a mongoose standing up at guard whose body posture and wide eyes together translate the sense of "watchfulness", the body plus the eye (as in 見, 監, 望, and 臨) forms a semantic unit (e.g., in 說文, 臨 was analyzed as 从臥, not 从臣).

Also, abnormal bulging eye (with the eye ball bulging out of the eye socket 突出眶外, 臣, 臧, 宦) vs. normal watchful eye (exaggerated but not bulging, e.g., 見, 監) ==> The slaves had abnormal eyes because it was once a custom to pierce their eyes (刺盲俘虜).  The bulging eye also conveys a sense of 敬恐 "in fear and awe" (Note: 臣 as a 發語辭 means 惶恐).  Of course, not all characters with the bulging eye mean "slave".  It depends on whether they also come with a "body."


----------



## Flaminius

For your reference, 张铭 now proposes that 臣 depicts a subordinate holding hands in submission (拱手).


----------

