Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T15:54:55.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SUBTLE AND DANGEROUS: THE CROSSBOW TRIGGER METAPHOR IN EARLY CHINA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 September 2021

Boqun Zhou
Boqun Zhou*
Affiliation:
Boqun Zhou, 周博群, Tsinghua University; email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The crossbow trigger was a powerful device in early Chinese warfare that had a profound impact on military tactics. Against such a background, the word for “trigger,” namely ji, became a pregnant metaphor in ancient texts from the Warring States onwards. It refers to the correlation between a “subtle” initial state and a “dangerous” and far-reaching consequence, because the small movement of pulling the trigger may kill a person at a great distance. Borrowing insights from Hans Blumenberg's metaphorology, I offer a new theory of the original meaning of ji and argue that the trigger mechanism inspires a complex metaphorical scheme that consists of three levels of ambiguities and a web of associated images. It provides a linguistic and cognitive pattern for organizing a wide range of heterogeneous life-world situations, from the moral precariousness of human speech to the vulnerability of an outnumbered army in battle.

提要

提要

弩機是中國古代戰爭中威力巨大的機械裝置，對戰國時期軍事策略以及作戰方式都產生了影響深遠。在弩機的物理功能基礎上，上古漢語中的“機”（及其同源詞“幾”）發展為一則具有豐富內涵的隱喻，意味著一個“微小”的初始狀態引發了“危險”而災難性的後果。本文擬借鑒德國哲學家漢斯.布魯門貝格的“隱喻學”方法分析“機”的本義及其喻義，並指出“機”代表的不只是一個隱喻詞，而是一個囊括了三層歧義和多種關聯意象的隱喻體系。這一體系將生活世界中的諸般經驗（如朝廷中的人言可畏和戰場上的以少勝多）組織起來，並賦予其共同的語言及認知形式。

Keywords

metaphormachinecrossbow triggermetaphorology隱喻機弩機隱喻學
Type
Research Article
Information
Early China , Volume 44 , September 2021 , pp. 465 - 492
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for the Study of Early China and Cambridge University Press 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For textual and archaeological evidence of the crossbow and its trigger, see Zhixi, Gao 高至喜, “Ji Changsha, Changde chutu nuji de Zhanguo mu—jiantan youguan nuji gongshi de jige wenti” 記長沙、常德出土弩機的戰國墓—兼談有關弩機、弓矢的幾個問题, Wenwu 6 (1964), 33–45Google Scholar; Needham, Joseph and McEwen, Edward, “Projectile weapons: I. Archery,” in Military Technology: Missiles and Sieges, part 6 of Science and Civilization in China, vol. 5: Chemistry and Chemical Technology, ed. Needham, Joseph (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 126–35Google Scholar; Ying, Mao 毛穎, “Nuji gailun” 弩機概論, Dongnan wenhua 3 (1998), 109–17Google Scholar. For a phonological study of nu 弩 “crossbow” and its possible southern origin, see Norman, Jerry and Mei, Tsu-lin, “The Austroasiatics in Ancient South China: Some Lexical Evidence,” Monumenta Serica 32.1 (1976), 274–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 For another study of the trigger metaphor, see Li Zhichao 李志超, “Jifa lun—youwei de kexue guan” 機發論—有為的科學觀, Ziran kexueshi yanjiu 9.1 (1990), 1–8. Li argues that ji is a “cybernetic” metaphor and situates it in the history of scientific thought. His article is a helpful starting point, but it includes many examples of ji that cannot be securely identified as the trigger metaphor while leaving others out.

3 One anonymous reviewer points out correctly that ji is closely related to some other metaphors (such as quan 權 “weighing,” “leverage”) and wonders why I never discuss their relationship. In fact, this article is part of a much larger project that systematically examines early Chinese mechanical metaphors. By limiting myself to the case of ji here, I do not mean to suggest that it is more prototypical than quan.

4 Blumenberg, Hans, Paradigms for a Metaphorology, trans. Savage, Robert (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2010), 1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar, originally published in German as “Paradigmen zu einer Metaphorologie,” Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte 6 (1960), 7–142. As far as I know, the only English article that adopts metaphorological approach to Chinese thought is Zürn, Tobias Benedikt, “Overgrown Courtyards and Tilled Fields: Image-Based Debates on Governance and Body Politics in the Mengzi, Zhuangzi, and Huainanzi,” Early China 41 (2018), 297–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Blumenberg, Paradigms for a Metaphorology, 1.

6 Blumenberg, Paradigms for a Metaphorology, 3–4.

7 Blumenberg, Paradigms for a Metaphorology, 6–30.

8 Tang Junyi, Zhongguo zhexue yuanlun: yuan dao pian 中國哲學原論: 原道篇 (Taipei: Taiwan xuesheng, 1976), vol.1, 6–7. Translation is mine.

9 The word translated as “pointing” (zhi) also means “finger” and “meaning.”

10 Tang Junyi, Zhongguo zhexue yuanlun: yuan dao pian, 10.

11 Lakoff, George and Johnson, Mark, Metaphors We Live By (Chicago: University Of Chicago Press, 1980)Google Scholar. For discussions and critiques of this theory in sinology, see Allan, Sarah, The Way of Water and Sprouts of Virtue (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997)Google Scholar; Slingerland, Edward, Effortless Action: Wu-wei As Conceptual Metaphor and Spiritual Ideal in Early China (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003)Google Scholar; “Conceptual Metaphor Theory as Methodology for Comparative Religion,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 72.1 (2004), 1–31; “Metaphor and Meaning in Early China,” Dao 10.1 (2011), 1–30; Cline, Erin, “Mirrors, Minds, and Metaphors,” Philosophy East & West 58.3 (2008), 337–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Camus, Rina Marie, “Comparison by Metaphor: Archery in Confucius and Aristotle,” Dao 16.2 (2017), 165–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mason, Joshua, “Generalizations, Cultural Essentialism, and Metaphorical Gulfs,” Dao 17.4 (2018), 479–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gandolfo, Stefano, “Metaphors of Metaphors: Reflections on the Use of Conceptual Metaphor Theory in Premodern Chinese Texts,” Dao 18.3 (2019), 323–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 It has already been suggested that Blumenberg is one of the overlooked predecessors of cognitive theories of metaphor. See Jäkel, Olaf, “Kant, Blumenberg, Weinrich: Some Forgotten Contributions to the Cognitive Theory of Metaphor,” in Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics, ed. Gibbs, Raymond W. Jr. and Steen, Gerard J. (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1999), 1–27Google Scholar.

13 Duan Yucai, Shuowen jiezi zhu 說文解字注 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1988), vol. 4b, 3a; see also vol. 6a, 48b–49a. The Shuowen does not specify how the combination of “silk” and “to guard” gives “dangerous.”

14 For example, the Shuowen defines zhu 杼, the second character after ji, as “that which holds the weft on the loom” (ji chi wei zhe 機持緯者). See Duan Yucai, Shuowen jiezi zhu, vol. 6a, 49a.

15 See Xusheng, Ji, Shuowen xinzheng 說文新證 (Fuzhou: Fujian renmin, 2010), 323Google Scholar.

16 Ji Xusheng, Shuowen xinzheng, 324. The 戍 in the standard form is obviously derived from the combination of 人 and 戈.

17 Pankenier, David W., “Weaving Metaphors and Cosmo-political Thought in Early China,” T’oung Pao 101.1–3 (2015), 21–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Pankenier misunderstands the Shuowen definition of ji 幾 by quoting only its first half and translating dai 殆 as an adverb “close, nearly.” It is true that dai can mean both “nearly” and “dangerous,” but the second half unequivocally takes dai to mean “dangerous.” Moreover, the entry of dai itself defines it as wei 危 “dangerous.” See Duan Yucai, Shuowen jiezi zhu, vol. 4b, 12a.

18 He does point out that even the workings of the loom involve triggering actions. See Pankenier, “Weaving Metaphors and Cosmo-political Thought in Early China,” 24.

19 Junsheng, Zhu, Shuowen tongxun dingsheng 說文通訓定聲 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1984), vol. 12, 39bGoogle Scholar.

20 See Huainan honglie jijie 淮南鴻烈集解, ed. Liu Wendian 劉文典 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1989), 422.

21 Song Zhaolin and He Qiyao, “Cong shaoshu minzu de munu kan nu de qiyuan” 從少數民族的木弩看弩的起源, Kaogu 1 (1980), 77–83. For a different speculation about origin, see Needham and McEwen, “Projectile weapons: I. Archery,” p. 135–40.

22 Song and He, “Cong shaoshu minzu de munu kan nu de qiyuan,” 78.

23 Shi ji 史記 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1963), 6.265.

24 This is discovered by Qiu Xigui 裘錫圭 in a series of classic articles. See Qiu Xigui, “Shi Yinxu jiaguwen li de ‘yuan’ ‘er’ ji youguan zhuzi” 釋殷墟甲骨文裏的”遠”“邇”及有關諸字, in Qiu Xigui xueshu wenji 裘錫圭學術文集, vol. 1 (Shanghai: Fudan daxue, 2012), 167–76; “Guwenxian zhong duwei ‘she’ de ‘shi’ ji qi yu ‘zhi’ hu e zhi li” 古文獻中讀為“設” 的“埶”及其與 “執” 互訛之例, in Qiu Xigui xueshu wenji, vol. 4, 451–60; “Zai tan guwenxian yi ‘shi’ biao ‘she’” 再談古文獻以“埶”表“設,” in Qiu Xigui xueshu wenji, vol. 4, 484–95.

25 I am in general agreement with Ames’ analysis of this development. See Ames, Roger T., The Art of Rulership: A Study in Ancient Chinese Political Thought (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 1983), 65–107Google Scholar.

26 Zhuangzi jishi 莊子集釋, ed. Guo Qingfan 郭慶藩 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 2012), 438.

27 Hanfeizi jijie 韓非子集解, ed. Wang Xianshen 王先慎 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 2003), 367.

28 Paul M. Thompson, The Shen Tzu Fragments (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979), vol. 2, 435.

29 The concept of divergence is similar to Zürn’s idea of “image-based debates,” but I prefer the word “divergence” because in many cases we cannot be certain whether the divergent meanings are part of an actual debate or not. See Zürn, “Overgrown Courtyards and Tilled Fields,” 328–32. The concept of convergence comes close to Graham’s idea of the “interweaving of metaphors” in the Laozi. See Graham, A. C., Disputers of the Tao (La Salle: Open Court, 1989), 218Google Scholar. For a more detailed analysis of metaphorical convergence in the Laozi, see Moeller, Hans-Georg, The Philosophy of the Daodejing (New York: Columbia University Press, 2006), 1–20Google Scholar.

30 A notable exception may be an enigmatic passage from the Zhuangzi that describes a generative cycle of various life forms including human beings. It makes ji the beginning and end of the cycle by saying that “the ten thousand things all come out of the triggering function and go back into the triggering function” (wanwu jie chu yu ji, jie ru yu ji 萬物皆出於機皆入於機). If the ji here is indeed a trigger metaphor, then it seems totally natural without ethical or instrumental implications. However, the passage is so obscure that the meaning of many characters remains controversial, including the very first character, zhong 種, which can mean either “species” or “seed.” I cannot be sure about the exact role ji plays in it. See Zhuangzi jishi, 624–25.

31 Wei li zhi dao 為吏之道, in Shuihudi Qinmu jiandu 睡虎地秦墓簡牘, vol. 1 of Qin jiandu heji 秦簡牘合集, eds. Wuhan daxue jianbo yanjiu zhongxin 武漢大學簡帛研究中心, Hubei sheng bowuguan 湖北省博物館, and Hubei sheng wenwu kaogu yanjiusuo 湖北省文物考古研究所 (Wuhan: Wuhan daxue, 2014), 347. The current title The Way of Being an Official is given by the editors of the manuscript. It is clear that The Way of Being an Official belongs to a popular genre of textbook at the time, because similar manuscripts with overlapping materials have been discovered elsewhere.

32 Zhouyi zhengyi 周易正義, in Shisan jing zhushu 十三經注疏, ed. Ruan Yuan 阮元 (Taipei: Yiwen, 2001), vol. 7, 17b–18a (“Xi ci” 繫辭).

33 Liji zhushu 禮記注疏, in Shisan jing zhushu, vol. 60, 8b (“Da xue” 大學).

34 Zhuangzi jishi, 57.

35 Xunzi jijie 荀子集解, ed. Wang Xianqian 王先謙 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1988), 400. In this context, “precarious” refers to an easily tempted state of mind that must be controlled by force, while “subtle” refers to an effortless immunity to temptation.

36 Hanfeizi xin jiaozhu 韓非子新校注, ed. Chen Qiyou 陳奇猷 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2000), 47–58; see also 254–70.

37 Zhouyi zhengyi, vol. 8, 13a–b.

38 Lüshi chunqiu jishi 呂氏春秋集釋, ed. Xu Weiyu 許維遹 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 2009), 420–21.

39 Guiguzi jijiao jizhu 鬼谷子集校集注, ed. Xu Fuhong 許富宏 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 2010), 134.

40 Creel, Herrlee G., Shen Pu-hai: A Chinese Political Philosopher of the Fourth Century B.C. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1974), 354–55Google Scholar. A textual variant for ji in the Yi lin 意林 quotation of this passage is qie 篋 “bamboo basket.” Creel argues that “bamboo basket” does not make good sense in the context and suggests that ji refers to the door pivot, but the name for the door pivot is usually shu 樞 rather than ji. The textual problem can be solved by considering the “three cun” length of the object here. We know from excavated measurement tools that the length of a Warring States cun is roughly 2.3 cm. The length of one bronze trigger excavated from a mid-Warring States Chu tomb, or more precisely the part known as the “suspended blade” (xuandao 懸刀), is 6.7 cm, almost exactly three cun. It seems certain that the object here is a trigger. See Qiu Guangming 邱光明, Qiu Long 邱隆, and Yang Ping 楊平, Zhongguo kexue jishushi: duliangheng juan 中國科學技術史：度量衡卷 (Beijing: Kexue, 2001), 156; see also 178–79; Mao Ying, “Nuji gailun,” 109.

41 Wuzi bingfa 吳子兵法, in Wujing qi shu 武經七書, ed. Pian Yuqian 駢宇騫 et al. (Beijing: Zhonghua, 2007), 115.

42 Ma Shi 馬蒔, Huangdi neijing lingshu zhuzheng fawei 黃帝內經靈樞注正發微 (Beijing: Renmin weisheng, 1994), 2. Two early commentaries to this passage, on which my interpretation is based, can be found in the Huangdi neijing itself. See the “Xiao zhen jie” 小鍼解 chapter of the Ling shu in Ma Shi, Huangdi neijing lingshu zhuzheng fawei, 24; see also the “Li he zhen xie” 離合真邪 chapter of the Su wen 素問 in Guo Aichun 郭靄春, Huangdi neijing suwen jiaozhu yuyi (shang) 黃帝內經素問校注語譯(上), vol. 1, (Guiyang: Guizhou jiaoyu, 2010), 166–67.

43 Both shuji 樞機 “axle-trigger” and jiguan 機關 “trigger-latch” are compounds from late Warring States onwards.

44 Shuoyuan jiaozheng 說苑校證, ed. Xiang Zonglu 向宗魯 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1987), 402.

45 Huainan honglie jijie 淮南鴻烈集解, ed. Liu Wendian 劉文典 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 2013), 301–2.

46 Hanfeizi xin jiaozhu, 829.

47 Hanfeizi xin jiaozhu, 670. A shorter and slightly different version of the story is found in the Mozi. See Mozi jiaozhu 墨子校注, ed. Wu Yujiang 吳毓江 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1993), 739–40.

48 Zhuangzi jishi, 591–95.

49 The Complete Works of Zhuangzi, trans. Burton Watson (New York: Columbia University Press, 2013), 133; Wandering on the Way: Early Taoist Tales and Parables of Chuang Tzu, trans. Victor H. Mair (New York: Bantam Books, 1994), 159; Zhuangzi: The Essential Writings, trans. Brook Ziporyn (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 2009), 73.

50 The distinction comes from Creel, Herrlee G., What is Taoism? And Other Studies in Chinese Cultural History (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970), 37—47Google Scholar.

51 Blumenberg, Hans, Shipwreck with Spectator: Paradigm of a Metaphor for Existence, trans. Rendall, Steven (Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1997)Google Scholar.

52 Blumenberg, Paradigms for a Metaphorology, 41.