DONE 1. Text-editing and translation philosophy (glossary) +
biblio
DONE 2. Literature / puns / rhymes
DONE3. Cross referencing internal and external (dialogue)
4.
Stratification /
History / DONE
Exclusions DONE
3098
Namelessness
wu ming 無名
Stillness jing 靜
Unworked
simplicity pu 樸
Return fugui
復歸
Elusiveness
Early Dao
(27
chapters)
No Sage, not
Early Dao
(30 chapters)
Sage 聖人
sheng ren
(27 chapters)
32, 37
1,41
---
15, 16, 37
15, 28, 32,
37
14 16 28 52
45, 26, 61
19
57
28
---
---
---
---
45
5
1, 61
28
9 hits in 30
chapters
4 hits in 27
chapters
14, 15, 25,
35, 56
Inexhaustibility 4, 5, 6, 35,
52
Female / mother 6, 10, 20,
25, 28, 55, 59
30 hits in 27
chapters
xxx
Check below
UNCLUNK
EARLY
SAGE / DAO cf 34
LATE 15
HARD TO READ.
COMPOSITE INTEGRAL EDITED CHAPTERS
*******
YANG ZHU etc.
*****
Secret society
Disciplined authentication
Ca. 275 official collection and official sequence
Later 81 chapters (SOME chapters already)
Grew like Mass
Councils and committees
Co-authorship not anonymous
Oral disciplined by literate elite
No textual piety
Duples
No original
EDITING STRATEGY
CHAPTER FORMATION
WAVES OF EDITING.
DISSEMINATED
Early Dao and the rest of the Daodejing 4555
My definition of the early Dao group has changed over
time, but there are nineteen chapters (groups I-V here, with the
exception of chapter 7 in group V) which I have always regarded
as early. Because of the presence of the Sage I have had my
doubts about chapter 7, but its opening lines fit with chapters 4
through 6 too well for me to leave it out. Chapters 32, 33, 34, 35,
37, 54, and 59 and the tag-endings of some chapters have always
seemed so0mewhat problematic, but I ended up including them in
the Early Dao group because there’s nowhere else to put them.
(the majority of these problematic chapters are found in the GD
text and thus cannot be called “late”).
I have rearranged the sequence of the chapters and have
divided them into subgroups, and I have also divided a number of
chapters. The 5000-word text of the DDJ was not gathered and
sequenced until about 275-250 BC, and it is my premise that this
sequence produced a literary unity at the cost of making the
history of the text hard to reconstruct by obscuring the
interrelationships of the various passages. Likewise, not only are
most chapters composites, but some of them are not chapters at
all. The division of the DDJ into 81 chapters was later still,
probably during the Han dynasty, and a number of chapters (in
terms of my argument, notably chapters 5, 20, and 28) consist of
unrelated passages defined as a chapter by an editor aiming at the
magic number of 81.
My editing was not quite as aggressive as it might seem; my
early Dao group includes 22 chapters in their entirety, and only six
passages from five chapters have been removed and assigned to a
later group. These are the mentions of the Sage in chapters 5 and
28, the opening passages of chapters 20, 56, and 59, and the
closing passage of chapter 5. My treatment of chapters 5 and 20
can be justified in terms of the GD text, and only the removal of
the two appearances of the Sage contributed to my attempt to
define an early Dao group contrasting with the rest of the DDJ.
My division of the early Dao into seven groups was mostly
for the purpose of presentation and doesn’t usualy represent a
claim about the history of the text. The exceptions are groups VII
and VIII, which do seem somewhat extraneous to the rest of the
group.
The selection of chapters was done in terms of the
commonly-held theory that the DDJ consists of earlier
contemplative material to which didactic and politically-oriented
chapters were added. Group I is different than the others and has
been put at the beginning because I believe that the school of the
DDJ (whatever its other sources) had its origin in Tang Zhu’s
rejection of war, public service, and the life of the court. The
coherence of groups II-VI, once defined, seems fairly self-evident.
Similarities of form and style, shared topics and themes, and the
relative or absolute absence of various later themes of the DDJ
set them off quite clearly from the rest of the text. Groups VII
and VIII are problematic, as I have said -- group VIII especially
so since it is primarily made up of passages removed from other
early Dao chapters.
I have divided the DDJ into four groups in all, which I call
early Dao (here), middle Dao, Sage Dao, and final Dao. (The
sequence here is not necessarily the sequence of production,
though I think that it usually is, but rather the sequence of entry
into the text). The contiguous core of the middle Dao group is
chapters 38-46; the core of the Sage group is chapters 60-66, and
the core of the final Dao group is chapters 67-81, leaving 23
chapters which have not been assigned to any group.
Middle Dao rarely mentions the Sage, but compared to
early Dao it is more engaged in the world, tending more toward
persuasive discourse of a somewhat philosophical type and less
toward contemplative poetry. I suspect that this group marks the
entry of the school of the DDJ into the Hundred Schools debates.
Besides its core in Chapters 60-66, the Sage Dao at least
includes chapter 49 and the passages mentioning the Sage cut
from chapters 5 and 28. These passages together with chapter 60
are the main chapters within which the Sage is the actual topic of
the chapter rather than merely part of the editorial formula
“Therefore the Sage....” Chapters 5, 49 and 62 all seem to have
been influenced by Shen Dao, and others such chapters include
chapter 23 and 27 which I have also put into the Sage group,
which now includes 10 chapters and parts of two others. Of all
these passages, only chapters 63, 64, and 66 are included in the
GD text – none of the Shen Dao chapters and none of the
chapters in which the Sage is the topic. In all, the Sage appears in
5 of the 31 GD chapters, which is less than would be expected,
and while chapter 19 and part of chapter 5 are included in GD,
the sage within these chapters is not included. My belief is that the
GD manuscripts were produced at the time when the Sage was
just starting to make its presence felt in the DDJ.
The final Dao, chapters 67-81, is not included in the GD
text at all. In the MWD DDJ there is also a break in the sequence
after chapter 66, and I believe that chapters 67-81 are a coherent
group. The Sage also plays a role in the final Dao, and it is notable
that of the only 6 chapters in which Dao and the Sage appear in
the same chapter, half are in this small group. Most chapters of
the final Dao are clearly written discussions of a single topic, and
these chapters are also consistent in theme. They are more
didactic than contemplative and advocate magnanimity,
forbearance, peace, mercy, and frugality, and the strategic cunning
of Sage Dao is mostly absent. I believe that this final section was
added to the DDJ after the Sage Dao chapters were already part
of it, and serves to some extent as a corrective to Sage Dao as well
as a summation of the book as a whole.
Below shows the incidences of a group of key themes in the
27 early Dao chapters as they appear undivided in the traditional
DDJ, in chapters outside the early Dao which do not include the
Sage, and in chapters which do include the Sage. (This totals 84
because the Sage is seen in chapters 5, 7, and 28 of the early Dao).
When I divide chapters the picture is even more striking, with
chapter 57 the only Sage chapter including any early Dao themes
at all.
Namelessness
wu ming 無名
Stillness jing 靜
Unworked
simplicity pu 樸
Return fugui
復歸
Elusiveness
Early Dao
(27
chapters)
No Sage, not
Early Dao
(30 chapters)
Sage 聖人
sheng ren
(27 chapters)
32, 37
1,41
---
15, 16, 37
15, 28, 32,
37
14 16 28 52
45, 26, 61
19
57
28
---
---
---
---
45
5
1, 61
28
9x in 30
chapters
4x in 3 of 27
chapters.
14, 15, 25,
35, 56
Inexhaustibility 4, 5, 6, 35,
52
Female / mother 6, 10, 20,
25, 28, 55, 59
30x in 27
chapters
Divided Chapters
While my treatment of the DDJ has varied greatly over the
years, 19 chapters have always been part of the early Dao group,
and 53 chapters have never been part of it. Only nine chapters
have ever been doubtful, and I ended up including three of them.
While I could have defined an early Dao group made up
entirely of whole chapters, there are reasons why I wanted to
divide a number of chapters. This step is justifiable. The chapterdivisions of the received DDJ have been doubted for some time,
and the GD text (ca. 300 BC) confirms these doubts: 8 of the 31
DDJ chapters found in GD are fragmentary.
The DDJ’s problematic chapters are either arbitrarilydefined chapters consisting of unrelated passages, or else chapters
to which extraneous concluding tags have been added. Many or
most chapters of the DDJ are composites, however, so the
removal of tags also requires a judgment as to their quality or
relevance. Fortunately, my mixed methodology allows this, since
my goals are not purely historical and neutral.
I have made 15 cuts in 14 of the 22 chapters of the early
Dao group, while leaving 8 chapters intact. Four openings, one
middle, and ten conclusions have been removed. The GD text
provides support for six of the cuts. Four of the cut passages are
included in the GD text, and five are from chapters not included
in GD.
Only three of these cuts -- the passages which include the
shengren 聖聖 “Sage” in chapters 5, 7, and 28 -- are important to my
definition of the early Dao layer.
Chapter 5 is made up of three unrelated passages, only the
second of which is part of the GD text. I have included this
passage in the early Dao group and have moved the opening
passage mentioning the Sage and the concluding passage
elsewhere.
Chapter 28 is not part of the GD text, but the passage
mentioning the Sage at the end is entirely unrelated to the rest of
the chapter and I have cut it.
Finally, the tag including the Sage at the end of chapter 7
consists of a stereotyped formula also seen in chapters 34, 63, and
66. In chapter 7 this tag takes a naturalistic or cosmological
statement about Heaven and Earth (which perfectly fits with the
preceding passages from chapters 4, 5, and 6) and interprets it in
terms of an entirely different discourse about the career of the
Sage. There are many such mixed chapters in the DDJ and I have
excluded the rest of them from early Dao, but in this case the
dividing line within the chapter is sharp enough, and the
continuity with the preceding three chapters striking enough, to
justify making the cut.
Endings cut: 5, 7, 14, 16, 21, 25, 28, 30, 52, and 55.
Beginnings cut: 5, 20, 35, 56.
Middle cut: 4. (An identical passage in chapter 56 is kept).
Cuts justifiable by GD: 5 (two cuts), 16, 20, 30, 52.
Cuts not justifiable by GD: 25, 35, 55, 56.
Cuts from chapters not in GD: 4, 7, 14, 21, 28.
Arbitrarily-defined chapters: 5, 20, 28, 35, 56.
Extraneous tags: 7, 14, 16, 21, 25, 30, 52, 55.
Extraneous insertion: 4.
These passages (and my reasons for excluding them from
early Dao) will be discussed elsewhere; the Sage passages will be
important in my discussion of the Sage group in the DDJ. Some
of these passages are discussed here: John Emerson, "A
Stratification of Lao Tzu", Journal of Chinese Religions, Volume 23,
Fall 1995, pp. 1-28. (www.idiocentrism.com/china.strata.htm)
The history of the DDJ
My division of the DDJ and my definition of an early Dao
layer only make sense in terms of a theory of the history of the
DDJ and of the Daoist school. Because the decimation of sources
and the normalization of the surviving sources by Han dynasty
editors, this theory must of necessity be reconstructive and
somewhat conjectural, but the same is true any other theory.
In sum, it is my theory that starting about 350 BC the early
Daoists made a break with the political world and court life of
their time. (This break with court life has been credited to Yang
Zhu, a very shadowy figure, and to men who were described as
followers of Yang Zhu). The participants in early Daoism
probably included former or present courtiers (astrologers,
archivists, and ritualists) as well as fangshi ** (alchemist-like or
shaman-like healers -- men and women of power who were in
communication with the unseen). These early Daoists developed
meditational practices and yoga-like practices of physical
cultivation -- the “Nei Ye” chapter in Guanzi is thought to
represent their practices rather more concretely than does the
DDJ. It is my hypothesis that the 27 chapters I have translated
here consist mostly of the hymns and meditation texts of this
group but also include three chapters (chapters 13, 30, 31) which
stem from the initial break with court life.
The separation from court life may never have been total -even in this early Dao you find passages which assume that its
hearers are in some way connected with the royal service or even
the military. As time went on, in any case, the various courts
began to recruit the wise and powerful Daoists into their service,
while at the same time members of the group started taking
advantage of opportunities for public office, and the later
chapters of the DDJ concern themselves extensively with
problems of government. A dynamic something like this has been
in effect all through Chinese history, and few monastic groups or
individual recluses were ever entirely disengaged from the state
power.
When the Daoist grou (or individual Daoists) became more
publicly active they participated in the Hundred Schools debates
of the Warring States era, whether at the Jixia academy in Qin, at
the court of Hui Liang Wang (King Hui of Wei), or elsewhere.
(There are reasons to suspect that part of the DDJ developed in
the southern state of Chu and includes material from non-Zhou
traditions). In the course of these debates the DDJ picked up
terminology and themes from other “persuaders” of the era:
Sunzi, Shen Dao, Shen Buhai, the School of Names, the Mohists,
the Confucians, the Legalists, and so on. This should be thought
of in terms of dialogue and debate, however, or as the
appropriation, adaptation, and transformation of themes, and not
as the DDJ’s reception of “influences” from the Legalists,
Confucians, Mohists, et al For example, the term wuwei was used
by most of the thinkers of the time, but it is a contested or
“generic” concept -- every thinker used the term in his own way,
which usually contrasted with the ways the other thinkers used
the term.
The transmission of the DDJ was probably both oral and
written. Oral recitation is not merely a stopgap method for
reaching illiterates, but is in some respects a superior way of
transmitting and experiencing a text, and even the literate
probably first encountered the text in chanted and memorized
form. Oral transmission can be held responsible for many of the
variant forms taken by DDJ chapters, though constant re-editing
(and maybe even outright rewriting) are also part of the story.
However, while Daoists didn’t seem to have been fussy about the
exact written form of the text the way Confucians were, there
must have been some authority for what was included in the text
and what was not, because everything in the GD bundles A and B
an be matched with something in the traditional DDJ, and the
two or three non-matching passages tacked on to the end of
bundle C may not have been intended as part of the DDJ at all.
The GD text, according to my reading of the DDJ, includes
passages from all groupings within the present DDJ except three.
It does not include anything from chapters 67-81, which I surmise
were the last ones added; it does not include any of the passages
which seem to have some connection to Shen Dao (chapters 23,
27, 49, 60, and 62); and it does not include any of the key passages
where the Sage stands alone, outside the formula “Therefore the
Sage....” (in chapters 5, 18, 28, 49, 60, and 67-**81).
Over the decades paragraphs were gathered stage by stage
into chapters, often with chapter-ending tags of various sorts,
until around 275 BC the existing chapters and paragraphs were
gathered into a single 5000-word+ sequence. Only somewhat
latter was this text was divided into exactly 81 chapters, and while
some of the 81 chapters are matched exactly in the GD text, eight
of the Guodian passages are fragmentary from the point of view
of the traditional text, and it is reasonable to suspect that some of
the 81 chapters are not really chapters at all, but just groupings of
loosely-related or entirely unrelated sayings. (Even chapters 35
and 56, included in the GD text, seem to be composites). Finally,
even after the 81-chapter text had established a defined corpus
with a prescribed sequence, the tinkering and editing continued.
The final outcome was so discontinuous that it has been
suggested that either the collection was slapped together entirely
at random right at the beginning, or else that an originallycoherent text was physically garbled at some point during
transmission. In my opinion, however, the sequence of the DDJ
is intelligible when you consider the context and the editor’s (or
editors’) purposes. Someone reading through the DDJ in its
traditional sequence will repeatedly experience both
discontinuities and recapitulations. Sometimes when you move
from one passage to the next, even within a single chapter, there
is so little apparent continuity that you are forced to ask yourself
“What does this have to do with that?” At other times you might
find yourself asking, “Haven’t I heard this somewhere before?”
The DDJ might be compared to a stew of blended flavors: the
present sequence deliberately keeps the hearer off balance by
mixing things up while at the same time stitching the whole thing
together with reiterated themes. And if the DDJ is first
experienced in chanted form, these effects are especially vivid.
The DDJ does not want to be easily understood.
The relationships between the various levels of the DDJ -the Early Dao, the Sage Dao, and the Final Dao -- are not
obvious, but the relationships are real. **
The present order of passages forces the hearer to try to
find the interrelationships and the unity of the text, but without
making it easy for him or her. The editor did not want the text to
separate into layers from which readers could pick and choose
their favorites. In this sense, I am the anti-editor of the DDJ,
unediting it by undoing the real editor’s work.
My translation
The DDJ has been translated into English over 200 times.
This is testimony not only to the intrinsic general interest of this
dense and allusive text, but also to a special interest. In some way
it satisfies a critical present-day need.
Every translation is motivated to some extent by
dissatisfaction with earlier translations, but at the same time, every
translation repeats the same solutions and half-solutions to the
same problems, and all translators face the same dilemmas: Literal
translation, or paraphrase? An exact translation at the price of
clumsiness, or an eloquent translation at the cost of inaccuracy?
Transliterations, translations, or paraphrases?
I tend toward the literal end of the spectrum, partly because
I want my translation to be usable by those who can read Chinese.
I’ve come up with a few translation solutions which I haven’t seen
elsewhere (though I’ve only read about 20 of the 200
translations), and I’ve made a few original interpretations of the
Chinese text, but my translation itself probably isn’t original
enough to merit publication. The translation is meant yo be the
starting point for my presentation of my reading of the book.
Dao is translated “Dao”, wuwei and wei are translated
“wuwei” and “wei”. These are now English words, more or less,
which I have defined in the notes. De has been translated “virtue”
because none of the other translation equivalents seem to work,
and because De somehow does not seem to be convertible into a
proper English word. “Virtue” has been defined in the glossary
too, and hopefully readers will eventually come to accept De * as
one of various meanings of the English word “Virtue” -- along
with chastity, obedience to the categorical imperative, and the
virtus of the Renaissance and the classical age.
****Besides trying to isolate the early Dao, I have done two
things in this translation which aren’t always done. First, I have
paid considerable attention to puns and places where more than
one reading of a line can be regarded as valid. Second, the way
that DDJ was assembled, the same themes appear over and over
again, often in widely separated places -- sometimes in exactly the
same words, and sometimes using entirely different language, so I
have extensively cross-referenced the key themes and the key
terms, and where it seems useful I have also noted themes shared
by the DDJ and other works of that and earlier times.
My text
The text I have used for my translation is not really a critical
text as that term is usually used. I have merely have tried to put
together the best possible compromise text, a usable, readable
composite text based on all available texts, while at the same time
noting the tricky passages and the most interesting variants. My
work was constrained by the texts available and by what I know
about the Chinese language, but my criteria were not philological
but literary and philosophical. Is this what was really meant? Does
it get the ideas across? How well does this read?
In any case, I’m not sure that the Ur-Daodejing is
recoverable. The Ur-DDJ could only be the first compilation that
included all of the material of the present DDJ, and as I
understand things, this text was put together somewhere around
275 BC. But that text was just a compilation of already-existing,
widely-circulated materials, and multiple variant forms of various
passages were still current when the long version was assembled.
There was no way to keep these existing variants from reentering
the canonical text – and also no way to keep new variants from
being invented. All of texts of the DDJ that we now have show
signs of extensive later tampering and tinkering (which, ironically
enough, were often motivated by the hope of establishing the UrDDJ), and the newly-discovered MWD and GD texts have raised
more questions than they have answered.
The DDJ corpus is a braided stream of thoroughly churned
texts, and without many more archeological discoveries I don’t
think that we’ll get much closer to the Ur-DDJ than we already
are. Thus, the criteria for text-editing might as well be qualitative.
It is by no means certain that “later” means “worse” or
“adulterated”. If you compare the GD and MWD to other texts
which are presumably later in origin, many of the seemingly-new
passages seem like improvements.
I made a large number of choices silently and without
comment, and if a choice did not affect the meaning or the style I
did not worry about it much. I generally kept particles rather than
leaving them out, and in most cases I kept lines found in some
editions but not others. In the case of phonetic borrowings,
purely graphic variants, and taboo synonym-substitutes, I
normally chose the more common form, and I ignored rare
variants which I found unintelligible. I generally tried for
consistency of vocabulary across the text and usually favored
parallel constructions.
The exceptions are the cases when I thought that variants
might conceal a pun or a nuance of meaning, or when two or
more different readings both seemed plausible and interesting.
At one point I intended to show my sources in detail, line
by line, but given my methodology, there really is little reason to
do so. I usually started out by comparing Henricks’ Guodian text
(GD) and Lau’s Mawangdui and Wang Bi texts (MWD, WB).
Sometimes I checked against Ryden’s GD and Henricks’ MWD,
and then finally would take a look at the variants in Jiang
Xichang and Ma Xulun.
My hope has been to produce a readable text which avoids
sidetracking the reader with unimportant questions while
highlighting the real problems that remain.
Bibliography
Jacob Black-Michaud, Cohesive Force, Blackwell, 1975.
Stephen Bokencamp, Early Daoist Scriptures, Columbia, 1999.
Suzanne Cahill, Transcendence and Divine Passion, Stanford, 1993.
Aloysius Chang, "A Comparative Study of Yang Chu and the
Chapter on Yang Chu", Chinese Culture, Taipei; Part I, vol. 12, #4,
1971, pp. 49- 69; Part II, vol. 13, #1, 1972, pp. 44-84
Ellen Marie Chen, The Tao Te Ching, Paragon, 1989.
Ch’en Ku-ying (Chen Guying), tr. Ames and Young, Lao Tzu:
Text, Notes, And Comments, CMC, 1981.
A. Conrady, “Zu Lao-Tze cap. 6”, Asia Major (first Series), Vol. 7,
1836, pp. 150-6.
Arthur Cooper, The Creation of the Chinese Script, China Society
Occasional Papers, #20, 1978, London.
W.A.C.H. Dobson, The Language of the Book of Songs, Toronto,
1966. (Dobson)
*J. Duyvendak, tr., The Book of Lord Shang Yang, Chinese Materials
Center, 1974.
John Emerson, "A Stratification of Lao Tzu", Journal of Chinese
Religions, Volume 23, Fall 1995, pp. 1-28.
(www.idiocentrism.com/china.strata.htm)
John Emerson haquelebac
John Emerson, “Yang Chu’s Discovery of the Body”, Philosophy
East and West, Volume 46-4, October 1996, pp. 533-566:
http://www.idiocentrism.com/china.yangchu.htm
John Emerson, “Yang Chu in the History of Chinese
Philosophy”, unpublished:
http://www.idiocentrism.com/china.yanghist.htm
Emerson, John, "The Highest Virtue Is Like the Valley", Taoist
Resources, Vol. 3 #2, May 1992, pp. 47-62.
*URL www.idiocentrism.com/
Morton Fried, The Evolution of Political Society, McGraw Hill, 1967.
Gao Dingyi, Laozi Daodejing Yanjiu, Beijing 1999.
A.C. Graham, Disputers of the Tao, Open Court, 1989.
Robert Henricks, Lao Tzu: The Te Tao Ching, Ballantine, 1989
(MWD).
Robert Henricks, Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching, Columbia, 2000 (GD).
Philip Ivanhoe, The Daodejing of Laozi, Hackett, 2002.
Jiang Xichang, *Laozi jiao gu, Taibei, 1958.
Bernhard Karlgren Grammata
Stockholm, 1957 (K).
Serica
Recensa,
BMFEA,
Russell Kirkland, Taoism, Routledge, 2004.
Lafargue, Michael, The Tao of the Tao Te Ching, SUNY, 1992
(especially “A reasoned approach to interpreting the Tao Te
Ching”, pp.189-213.).
D. C. Lau, Tao Te Ching, Chinese U. Press, Hong Kong, 1982.
Mark Edward Lewis, Sanctioned Violence in Early China, SUNY,
1989.
Bruce Lincoln, “Banquets and Brawls” in Discourse and the
Construction of Society, Oxford, 1992.
Ling Shun-sheng, “Chung-kuo tzu-miao te ch’i-yuan”, two articles
in Min-tso-hsue yen-chiu-suo chi-k’an, Taipei, 1959.
Richard John Lynn, The Classic of the Way and Virtue, Columbia,
1999.
Rodney Needham, Right and Left, Chicago, 1978.
Ma Xulun, *Laozi Jiaogu, Beijing, 1974.
Victor Mair, Tao Te Ching, Bantam, 1990.
David Nivison, “Royal ‘Virtue’ in Shang Oracle Inscriptions”,
Early China, vol. 4, 1978-9, pp. 52-5.
Bill Porter (Red Pine), Laotzu’s Taoteching, Mercury House, 1996.
Harold Roth, Original Dao, Columbia, 1999.
Edmund Ryden, “Edition of the Bamboo-slip Laozi” in Sarah
Allan and Crispin Williams, The Guodian Laozi, SSEC and IEAS,
2000.
Edmund Ryden, Daodejing, Oxford World Classics, 2008.
Edward Schafer, The Divine Woman, California, 1973.
Laurence Schneider, Madman of Ch'u, California, 1986.
Axel Schuessler, Minimal Old Chinese and Later Han Chinese,
Hawai’i, 2009. (S)
Axel Schuessler A Dictionary of Early Zhou Chinese, Hawai’i, 1987.
(EZC)
Axel Schuessler, ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese, Hawai’i,
2007. (EDOC)
Rudolph Wagner, A Chinese Reading of the Daodejing, SUNY, 2003.
Arthur Waley, The Way and its Power, Grove, 1958.
Wang Li, Gu Hanyu Zidian, Zhonghua Shuju, 2000. (Wang)
*Burton Watson, tr., Tso Chuan, Columbia, 1992.
Yan Lingfeng, Daojia Sizi Xinbian, Xueshang Shuju, 1968.