 So, so just to refresh our memory from where we left off yesterday, we this is our second visit to the station series. The first visit was for what let's say, was largely logical for our current purposes was reconstructing simplex initials. And now we're working on constant cluster and then yesterday we got through the assets. And today, we will be the constant clusters. Other than this, and so here kind of daily content. And he paid. And then in a slightly different treatment. Okay, so now I will just flip through the slides that we did yesterday to remind you, you know, of all the exciting as fuckers that we work at. Okay, so. Resonance with you viewers. I'm organized it by the reflex in military or the outcome. Right. So so and show. Okay. Okay, so now where we left off. Let's say she's on connections that suggest that we could should reconstruct clusters with the new book. So here we have a. And then you know, you might be tempted to construct the Lego dealer or something like that. But why not say pk cluster. So, there you go. We actually reconstruct one of the reasons. And then here is a pq cluster where we have a hub in the same series with a p. Yeah, and so this is about this is about as strange as a series can get right. So, yeah, so that's why we construct this cluster here. And then people for a shop. So, remember that he can go back to a truck, you can go back to other things as well. When we construct here a, but now you say like, okay, but you know, there's lots of other things that this, you know, you could, you can take this back to a THR or something and then make pthr. Yeah. Well, that's where other arguments probably come in about morphology or etymology. This is what back means regarding in this case. And now we did for the piece. So, as you see, we went on and on and on by X clusters, and just maybe three for examples of fee clusters. So now we move on to the K clusters. Okay, so here we have. These two, right. It's usually, at least in my own mind, helpful to sort of build up a station series from the simpler cases to the, to the more complicated cases. So in this case, maybe identify this. And then we say, okay, well, either we're in a dental series, or we're in a lateral series. And then we see the young. So now we know we're in a lateral series. So, then we know that the D and the young go back to a simple L. And then we see that we have this here. And we say, okay, well, we've seen it can go back to tie and go back to shrub. But because it's an L series, then it has to go back to show up. And then we get to this day, and we have no way of explaining so far, we don't expect a K in a lateral series. But why not, then just really drop. Yeah. Okay. So, here is a. Okay. So, I mean, you probably, this is a nice one you all know these characters right. And they look really similar. How do you explain it. Well, well, basically always goes back to our. And then what do we do about this. Hey, well, a R, right. But why not just a R, because we saw here that came on, you know, that's KL. And I guess they need the, I think they need the R to be voiceless in order to get the aspiration. I think that's what they're thinking is there. Right. So that and then this is the case that was asked about yesterday. So this is how they constructed. And then they also saw, and then a, having contacts, and what you should like if I gave you on your homework, you know, reconstruct this series, what you should do is take this one back to a queue, and this one to a queue with a loose pre initial like so capital C point q, or it could be actually it would have to be capital C dot q. So, or, yeah, least pre initial before you feel it. So, why don't they do that. Well, this is what I just said they would normally do that. Do I have another slide. No. Yes, I do. Okay, so it appears that they prefer not to take this back to your viewer because they don't like to change from theory to represent the same syllable type and by syllable type again I mean a particular rhyme with a particular place of representation, you know, regardless of the manner of articulation. Okay. So, this one that we're talking about, they, they see as representing global stock, yeah, whereas this one, they see as representing q. And if you look at that station series, we have, and this one. So this series really, really screams out, I have to be a, a uvular and, and this one that we were looking at. It kind of also screams out I have to be a uvular, but, but you don't have the yaw, for instance, you don't have a so it's not screaming quite as loud that it, that it wants to be reconstructed as uvular. So, one solution would be to just reconstruct them both as you dealers, but then you would have them both representing the same syllable type, which would be q uj. So I think that's their thinking here is they, they don't want this one to be q uj. So they have to make it something else. So they make global stock uj. Now again, they're not quite the, the hypothesis that each station series represents a different syllable type is not something that they come out, you know right up front within their book, and they never invoke it as a specific principle and they say, Oh, you know, this is how we reconstruct the chase on series so it's a little bit exegetical, but I think we can reconstruct, or we can, maybe I shouldn't say reconstruct or reconstitute their thinking in the way I was presented. So let's get for the k prefixes. So again, very few examples of k prefixes on the basis of chase on series when we saw a whole bunch of k fixes that they reconstructed on the basis of long words for right. Okay, so now on to the T pre initials. So we have here a cave. And here, a key, so a reference to the initial. And this is how they reconstruct it. Now, you could say, Well, why don't they just do the opposite. Why don't they take this one back to TR. And then this one to a, a key, for instance, that would work. Yeah. But I think there are two reasons why they want to do it this way. One is that this is the basic one. And this is the derived one, right. So if this one had a K in it, you kind of somehow want the K to be in this one. So I think that's one issue is, is who's being used as a phonetic for, for, for who here. Right. So the mother has a K, then you maybe want the a in the dollar now. Now that's not like a rule that they use absolutely there's all kinds of circumstances where there's extra stuff in the mother that doesn't carry over to your daughter is like a meal are or the tone for that matter. But I think this is a split. Because the question is, what is the place of articulation of the whole series. And there, you know, you have basically the choice of the dealer and the dental, and maybe we defer to the mother character in this case. Yeah, I mean, it's a very small shit in series. So it's quite hard to know. Yeah. So I don't understand, if you indicate there is a dog meat like either or it's like, no, no, no. You can, you can understand that as being a shot. Thank you. Yeah, I always get a little myself confused with the dog, because they do write the schwa sometimes. So I so now I think the dog actually means there's no schwa there. But why would they not, why don't they just like to pay our, because they always like to tell you what they think the morphological status of the prefix is. And so they would use like a hyphen, if they thought it was some kind of morphological prefix. And then they use the dog if they don't know. So, so that's, that's what they're, you know, I find all these conventions and there's a little bit cumbersome. So, so maybe I would just write PTR and not worry about it. But for instance, you know, a lot of these S prefixes are cosmic. So they would write that one as hyphen. Now, and then the other thing is that this is a number nine, right. And this means elbow, and the, and the young word for elbow starts with a T prefix. Almost all shout out nouns, if you ask me store the T prefix. But the reason for that is actually that it's it's it's a slot where yellow marks possession, so they need to possess their nouns. So the T prefix in yellow actually is like the, the third person. The third person possession so his elbow, I think I got this right, but I'm not a dog specialist. So the theory that the sort of sign of to that in this style, including, I think, especially cigar here is that the I'm going to try this again. The books are so close. So the theory is that, you know, the, basically, you have the possessed form of nouns, and, and at least some nouns like elbow are probably inalienable so they always have to be assessed. And then Chinese level this out. And they leveled it out in favor of the his elbow. So, for your purposes, maybe the point is just we have a story to tell about the team prefix, and it has cognates in other scientific languages. So if your, if your choice is between a, a T cluster for the first one or a TK cluster for the second one TK cluster looks better right be both because it explains why one is being used as a finite for the other one. And it's also explains why, why we have this topic. Now, someone who knows sign language will say, Well, there's also a T prefix in the word for nine. Yeah. And sure enough, like the Tibetan word for night is cool. Yeah. And I have seen in the past cigar reconstruct the loose pre initial T in the word for nine, probably thinking along those lines. And also make this series look even better right, but they don't do that in their books so I don't do it here. Yeah, I have a question. It normally wouldn't occur to me, looking at the kaishu characters that those that those last two characters were part of a series. So does that. Is that what you were talking about when you said you can't, you can't you can't let yourself be misled by the kaishu characters because these were these were these phonetic series created using the show junk script. So the, I mean, though, so, so I would say 95% of the time you can allow yourself to be misled by characters. And when you can't, I put the preaching character on the slide. Um, basically, if you only rely on characters, you will end up being a splitter. Yeah, you'll have, you'll have more and smaller station series. Whereas if you are willing to let yourself look at older fairly graphic forms, then you'll turn into something more of a lumper. Yeah. Now, as for which variety of the script, the station series can work with, well, for, for certain reasons that I will explain in just a moment, that's I think not the right way to look at it right because there's because the, the, the, the you know, different character who are invented different times. And each time the character is invented, someone has to think of it as having a phonetic and a semantic right like if someone invented a new character today, which they're perfectly do, right, people do it in Taiwan, just to give their kids hard to spell names. Yeah. Then you have to be able to analyze what's the semantic and what's the phonetic of that character, right. And then the person coining a new character will base it on the phonology of their time in place. So we expect, you know, the oldest characters to have been to be encoding shish on relationships that were clear during the Shang dynasty, right. And then as more and more characters were invented. They would be invented as appropriate for whatever phonology was happening at that time. Yeah. And we do see, for instance, I wish I had some examples to hand I don't where the character is given more and more phonetics, because the old phonetics have stopped making sense to the speakers, right. So, does that answer your question. Yes, thank you. So actually, I have a follow up question to this slide as well. So what's like a relationship between the character for nine and the character for like fun. I obviously know he's done for this to it. Yeah. Yeah. I suppose it's also being part of the situation series or no, because I'm kind of confused right now. Oh, know what I mean. So you draw it. Well, the kind of the right part of the Joe. Yeah, he would pronounce Joe that he bothered. Yeah, the kind of. Oh, this soon. Is it also part of the decisions. Oh, that's a good question. Because it also like exists. Yeah, I think it's, I think it's part of this series. Yeah. So, so basically, this is a case where like, you know, there's going to be a daughter chasing series coming from this one. But, and it's only when you look at the orthographic, you know, let's let me put it this way. I think the structure of our of our sort of network will go like this. Which is, because, because this link has become obscure. The one that does on the left being, being not being nine. Yeah, no nine. No elbow. All right. Okay, but please don't try that right. I see. Okay, so you can, in order to get so. So, so, so in nine, I could have with a shop, right. Do I think I don't have a chain. This right. You could do this. Because you can always like, because because the only, yeah, let's say these loose. Prefixes, you know, like a law. So these loose prefixes, what effect do they have on the development of the, of the syllable, generally speaking, none. Right. In certain cases and you have to be on your toes to look at them like I think, I think we saw them so low developed into something I don't remember quite, but in general, these are just dropped, and they don't leave any trace at all, except they would leave. I think they would leave that you can get spiritization in. And maybe that's why they don't do it there. But from the perspective of, you know, from the perspective of sort of the journey from all Chinese to middle Chinese, these, the loose prefixes don't have any effect. So now you say, okay, then, and I think this is a question, let's just stick with cool as let's imagine, we have a root cool in, in old Chinese. And then we have different morphological suffixes like we have a vaunted and and a causative s and, you know, a and an instrumental s or something can we do this, you know, and then maybe some sort of a certain stanchal now, he or something right, but you do this, right. The answer is back to us are never do this, but there's nothing in their presentation that would forbid as far as I can tell. And actually, you can lie, I will not show ability to get this right has pointed out in a very very recent article that they're their actual reconstructions are either this or this. So here we go. And then he has a story to tell about accentuation and a possible thing with that. But I think that's, you know, let's say that kind of thing that kind of observation that he's made that they only have these two syllable structures that they construct and and the fact that maybe he can tell a story about it. I think shows that believing Baxter and cigar can be a useful thing to do. Right. Like, you just defer to their intuition. And then. And then you, and then you see what that gets gets you right. Even though they themselves never point this out. And as far as I can tell, they would let you have as many draws as you want. Okay, so that's nine. Yeah. Yeah. So it seems to be hiding the latest type is most of it. Yes. So this is, let's say we. It's like this. This is a pre initial. This is a new screen. Yeah, and I should have said, you know, they do allow this to, but I think this is, I think they can have like s e. I think it's only loose, but I would have to check because there are two reasons they recon that like there are two kinds of things they look at one is what are called the program in stocks soften. Yeah, program in has softened initials, and they also use that for for reconstructing these loose things. And I'm not quite sure I need to check exactly the difference in how they use the program in and how they use Vietnamese. And I haven't discussed program in at all in this course, because it looks like maybe the reconstruction of program in that they were using is wrong on this point. So I think that's actually, you know, a serious sort of caveat lecture, right, is that they, that if they're reconstructing loose green initials, because of the program in softened initials. It's possible that they're just relying on outdated program in reconstructions program in is moving fast right at the moment. So, you know, I'm embarrassed to say, as you can tell, there was a few too many details for for me to keep in my head. I think that teaching course like this is that I have to go and check it all. But the nice thing is their books there. So you can always check these things and then also they have a spreadsheet of all their reconstructions. But but it's often quite difficult to. Yeah, like what what what you would really want, right, is what you would really want is to have like, I don't know, let's say it's, you know, we have something like this. You know, in the middle Chinese, and then we'll just make a transfer. Now you check the shen sheng series, and you know enough to say okay either this goes back to the age, or it goes back to or it goes back to love. Or it goes back to now I think. So, then you ask yourself which of these it is. And then you ask yourself, is there some, some sort of, you know, maybe it goes back to, you know, or to love. Yeah, so you need certain pieces of information right you need like one or two links in the shen sheng series you potentially you know what it means you potentially need a product on a, and it would be nice if there was a sort of dictionary, if you'd like to just gave you the minimum amount of information you need in each case to reconstruct the old Chinese, no such resource exists. I have a student who actually who said that he thinks that backs from stars book would be more useful. If it were just that if it were just rather than being organized by telling you about the syllable of old Chinese like oh this is why we reconstruct pre initials. This is why we reconstruct final are he thought it should just be a list and you know, giving the reader the information needed for the reader to be able to reconstruct themselves. So absent that your choices are to use someone else's reconstruction blindly trust their reconstructions, or try to figure out, try to kind of retrace this steps. And, personally, I use actual truth service reconstructions, as a kind of point of departure, and then try and ask myself like, well, what, what, what are the disagreements when actually trust learn backs and backs and cigar and can I come up with my own back strings to go our style reconstruction. And it's very hard to know that you have, you know, gotten to where they would have gone, unless you just check their spreadsheet and then you don't know how they got there. But I guess what I was saying earlier is, is someone like you fun just trust them. And then notice the certain patterns in their reconstructions. So I do think that trusting them. is going to be a profitable strategy, even if it's sort of makes you feel uncomfortable. Okay, so we were on key prefixes. And, and here's one. So we have a G. And this is show. And chose come from cars. So, so they reconstructed to the initial. And then, um, here we have it's going to record classes that is a little bit so what we have here, this is again, the next, this is a better one, we have three characters. It's like, it looks slightly longer. So we have a case, we really know we're in a K land here, right. And yes, case can go back to you learn, but there's nothing pointing us to you feel it. So it really seems like the syllable being recorded here is come. But yeah, here's something with the tea in it. So we added tea. Yeah. Okay, and so that was it for the teams. So we did the, the piece the case and tease. And now on the stock free initials for four residents. And I was kind of on the fence about whether to include this slide, because in a sense is given, he's on shish on relationships. And since they are, so I decided to include them, because this character has two reasons. One is him and one is link. And this character has two reasons one is chip and one is not. This character has two readings one is quick and one is me. Yeah. So what they propose is that these are cases where one reading is from one dialogue one reading is from another dialect. So there's, you have to reconstruct something that then has two different dialect reflexes, and that is a nasal in some cases, or, or no, I should say a resident in some cases, and a stop. So what they reconstruct is a stop before a resident. And then, why do I see this as a shesha connection. Well, because it's a shesha connection in the sense that, you know, this character with this reading is connected with this character with this reading. Right. So same character but it's still still sort of changing connection in the sense that they have the same phonetic these two readings right. So actually, I'm getting phone call from a friend of mine again and again. So I'm just going to text him saying that I need class. And by the sexy. I'm telling you, because we have three different pronunciations that also show that two pronunciations are similar all these spaces. You know, a bit of a mess. Oh no there's lots of cases where, you know, let's say this. Yeah, we might have the same character and the two readings are just tone differences or something like that. I would say 90% of characters with two readings. They, the two readings are really similar. Yeah. I'll give you another one that we use a lot in alternative reconstruction, which is you get like, you know, the character difficult. None. None. Yeah, I'm not going to write it because because I'll mess it up even though I do more or less know it. So it has to read none and none. So this we also think is a dialogue issue but but I won't go into it right now. But but in any case you see this is also still pretty close, right. Even here, right. They, like, they will then be like, they will then in and at the same nuclear battle like you don't expect a character to have wildly different readings, although that is hypothesis hypothesized to happen in the very earliest Chinese by Bolts and I'll just give you one example, which is that this character has two modern descendants. One is this one and the other one is she what is so and so so these are totally unrelated words. Yeah, this one means even and this one means evening. And in the earliest Chinese this character could write both more and that is a thing that happens. Yeah, but this kind of phenomenon can only happen as long as the character is iconic, right. If someone sees this and put a picture of the moon. Then they can say, maybe it's for the morphing moon, or maybe it's for the morphing night. Yeah, but as soon as it becomes conventional eyes so no longer iconic, then it then it's a logogram. So, so you only get this kind of thing where you have fundamentally totally unrelated readings of characters when when it's still iconic. This for me seems to be the typical relationship between the economy and metaphor, right, so the way that they diverse so one will be a part of the whole, like the whole idea though, and the other like the metaphor right so the moon is time for the night. Yeah, actually that sounds pretty good because another one is is this character, which as this is all according to bowls has I don't know what it looked like in the enormous difference. I'll say it looked like this. Usually, I don't know any Chinese experts. Oh yeah, you're right. It's a nearly moment. So this has two reading, no, and on. So, so peace is a piece. Yeah. Yeah. So again, this, you know, this is where we were not going to try and say, Oh, the original word for woman was I'm not or something you know, no. I think that there's two unrelated more themes that in strong dynasty Chinese, they wrote with this woman character, one that mean woman, and one that means peace. This would be the metaphor because I don't know, like, I don't know, maybe that like, like this. These kind of multiple readings of simple iconic characters would have happened kind of in the first five minutes of the script developing right. Yeah, because it's because as soon as it becomes iconic you can't do this. Yeah, one thing that's nice. Samaritan has examples like this. Yeah, which is basically how do you get how you get readings for things you don't have characters for yet. You have to use the reverse principle or you can use a principle like this. For those who, you know, who would mean something. This guy shoes on said there were six types of Chinese characters. And one of them that he analyzed is called way. And the way characters are supposed to have two semantics. So for instance, what is it that that woman loss child. But I wrote it wrong. Okay, so one in child. This is pronounced how in modern Chinese. I mean, good, right. And then, if you study Chinese, they will always say, like, you know, Chinese script, it captures the meaning of the words and that's because you know, when a woman is with a child, it's good. Well, you know, you could also have a picture of me and cheese cake or something. But both says no, in case like this, always one of them is semantic and one of them is connected. Yeah. And so he's the, and I'll say allowing himself to give one iconic character to readings that are unrelated is one of the ways he gets himself extra phonetics in order to explain the way each characters. Yeah. And, and this is quite controversial. Let's say like not everyone agrees with Bill Holt. But I think he's right. I think it's a very profitable line of research. Yeah. I think that the reason it says something you can have a character. Yeah, there's I mean and I actually someone the left the evening lecture I gave. And two years ago I talked about this, this cuneiform example of mouth, where the, where the word for mouth is like, is like the character for head with like basically an arrow pointing his mouth. And the, let's say one tradition says, oh, you know, this is a character with two semantics. One is the head semantic and one is the arrow semantic right. And then I think what both would say what I would say is no, it's a picture of an arrow pointing at a guy's mouth. And, and the moment that it becomes an alignable as come as, you know, having a phonetic and semantic component, then it's not iconic anymore. Right. So, so don't go around trying to make things have components when they're still iconic. Right. I think that's one lesson of both. Okay, so now we go to the nasal before you viewers, and I will just mention that you cannot tell which nasal it is right so they and they they one component of their system is morphological speculation which I'm not covering in this class. But so they think, for instance, that I'm not pre initial, could be a additional marker. So you can change, you know, something like, I don't know, for instance, to sleep, you can take a non additional verb to sleep and then if you say sleep, it means like to pretend to sleep or to try to go to sleep or something like that. So they think that my is a relational marker. And then I think this this is the capital here doesn't mean you've learned to pull capital. It means under specified place for articulation. They think that is, for instance, an anti passive. Yeah. So, will I be able to make up an anti passive on the spot that's I will fall into some trap. Um, but anyhow, you can't tell it based on station series before you viewers. So, and you also can't tell based on station series not for you viewers, not before you will use these both prefixes literally for voicing. So, so you would see, you know, in a normal station series, by which I mean the non eugler station series, you just see like pH, eb, yeah. And it could be that this e goes back to mb, mp, rather, but that's not something you're going to see in a station series because in a station series, you're allowed to mix. You can't have to get for instance, Mon, Mon, Mian, long ones or something like that, right? Can't see it in the station here, but you can see it with you've learned a station series. Because we have, like here we have this, this dealer nasal, and then it's in a, it's in a use your series right it's clear you your series because you've got a lot of stuff here and yeah here and the deal of here. And then you have this dealer nasal, but we take it back to some nasal prefixes. And then we have all these options, right, because we can't tell what the voicing of the initial was. And we can't tell whether the pre initial with an M or not. Sorry, an M or a, or a home or again. Here was here. Oh, this. I don't know, I don't check. Probably I did this on purpose. Okay, and then in another source. Well, is it a station series things and not a given certain we have to read this character, one with the L, the L you take back to R and yo, we take back to L. So then we have L R connection in in our sort of first class of all Chinese. So how do we get those just have the same initial. They say, well, it's maybe a nasal prefix so that the way you think of it is that the the nasal prefix protected the rub until after but but I mean something like what I was about to say R becomes L. So it's more like it's, it's, it's, it's a, it's a linear circumstance right that sort of yet love becomes yaw and fight these symbols and the rub also becomes yaw and fight these. Yeah, that the pre initial is a sort of linear circumstance that leads to that are merging with the elves. And also dialect variation, same. Okay, so. Now, one place we can see the end of the pre initial is before an end, because it messes up an end station series right so here this Yeah, so, so none goes back to me and yeah, those back to none here. Yeah, but also go back to now. And then what we're going to do about the end, well it should go back to an end, but then how do we explain this time I can be doing the villain is and the lady on it. So, well, maybe it's a, an end preface, others tell you just to give you a sense and how other people deal with the same stuff. What's Chris Beckwith does in this series, if he says that, that they all have ma, and that ma sort of fronted because of the front about yeah and then he points out that this happening in Tibet and you have things where, where Mia changes into Mia. So that is his idea, but the trouble with Chris Beckwith's idea is, he kind of throws out an idea like there. Sorry, so as an idea out there like that. But then doesn't say how that would affect the whole rest of the system right because, because if we propose that. You know, and before front vowels changes into Mia, then we should reexamine all the other names and, and so on and so on right, and that's kind of the thing with old Chinese is you change any piece and then you have to sort of check how it affects everything. So, although I think his idea is perfectly reasonable. I can't use it unless, you know, I try and reconstruct all Chinese as I imagine Chris Beckwith would do it. So I'm going to personally I'm going to stick by this idea instead. And then we also can see the same thing before dental nasal so this is before dealer nasal dental nasal same story so yeah goes back to not and then not enough and then yeah goes back to mom but then it should be connected with this now. No. Right. And then I've already touched this before but this is the moment where I officially presented. How do we do with dealers that are coming up in your dealer series. So, here's an example. We have a blog. So we have a young so we know we're in a new dealer series. And what do we do with this be well, we stick in a capital C and say, we don't know what it is, but some there's some, you know, conditioning environment for the for the fronting of the user to be heard. And then here is sort of typing circles. So, in this case, it's a K and a lot of stuff. And then just, you know, remind yourself, we could have done it by putting a tape prefix in front of a lot of stuff which is what they did in another case. Okay, and then here is before the, before the aspirin you your, and then here I be syllables. Oh, because of the background. I generally not been paying much attention to that but Okay, and that's it for these, you know, using station series to reconstruct pre initials. Yeah. Yeah, well, so, so, yeah, so just to learn on others this guy shoes on who says there's six types of Chinese characters. Well, one of them no one knows what he was trying to say. And like the fifth of the sixth. The way he is the one that gets talked about, or I mean, and so on this is based on memory but he says let's just see if we can get all the time. That's the someone like often like, actually, there's an example. That's one of where we don't know. Okay, so one is like mountain, right. So, so that, you know, is just this. So that one we can call kind of simple iconic. Yeah. And then we have the, the, the, the, you know, 90% of the characters. I'll just stick with mountain. I don't know this character, but you know where now this would be, you know, a morphine that has to do with water that's pronounced like now, right. So this is our station, or that it's a change or in this context, but all of us to the station. So we have our station. I won't get these in the right order but we have the way, which are like this one. We think don't exist. One of them is, oh, I should have actually, but I'll remember. I'll say this is two, three, four, five, six. Another one is is sort of non iconic, but iconic. I don't remember how people talk about it. Right. Yeah, maybe you can call that so Sean means below. So this is shop. Yeah, I mean shop. Yeah. And I think in, I think in, you know, in Oracle, it was like, just a dog of all the line or something like that. So, you know, it's not representing anything. It's not a picture of a mountain, but it's sort of representation of an idea. Yeah. So that's one of them. This is another one. This is the main one. We think this one doesn't exist. And then one is the one that's called the loud cow one. And, and we don't know what he was trying to say there. And I don't remember what the other one is. I think we also don't know what he was trying to say it. I would say, I don't know, but say, you know, why am I wasting my time talking about this. I think like the fact that a second century lexicographer came up with division of characters into six types. I don't remember what the fifth one is. I think it's like, like, in this opinion, like, for example, you also take this example, like the one from like all the brother used to mean song, I guess, but then they like kind of made a new part. The fifth one is called home job. Yeah. And Tom job is when you use a character, kind of incorrectly is the easiest way to explain so like you have gone, and you have gone, you know, and you are supposed to write like this character, and instead you write this character. So that's called home job. And it's actually one of my transposer right is one if someone confused two characters, that means they must have had a similar pronunciation. But the thing is, Tom job is is like a, like it's, it's not obvious to me that it's a way of creating new characters in the same sense. Yeah, like, like it's a way of confusing existing characters. It's not a way of creating new characters. So, so this really feels like I need to be to risk, you know, being what is it that you do nowadays cancel to risk being canceled. For me, this really feels like four days with, you know, there are six types of animals, large animals, animals owned by the emperor bees, you know, So, I actually agree. I mean, when I first like know about it, I also thought that, especially like the last two are kind of like, right. Yeah. And, and, and, and just a strange artifice of kind of institutional inertia is like, this is also like, you know, often times like week two Chinese class they're like, in the second century, a man decided it's like, why are you telling me about this. Yeah. What was the name of it. And I'm not going to knock him is really God who did who wrote a book that was is incredibly valuable. Also this I this six. This analysis of there being six types of characters comes from the I think that post phase of his book, and it's not entirely clear that he wrote the post phase. So, maybe I can actually say that I think Shun is a total genius, one of the great minds of history, someone through some unfortunate classification of Chinese characters on any book. But anyhow, I, I don't know why someone, you know, trick me into talking about it. It's probably you. Like, interest that you don't even decide quite correct this. Because that's what they always tell us. Yeah, it's, well, it's a cute way of telling stories, right. Yeah, I agree. I mean, there's something to see that. I, you know, when I was first learning Chinese characters, which is when I was studying Japanese, I just felt like look my, I don't want to fill my head with falsehoods. So, so don't tell me cute stories about these Chinese characters. But I mean both as a book is now it's now dated you would like to come up with a new edition. And it uses weight Giles, I think, but a book from like 98 or something, where he really presents the, there are no weight characters and he also has some follow up articles there in the same vein including a very nice article on way is in the Wikipedia of Chinese language linguistics, which in general is a good resource. You know, unfortunately costs a million dollars or something like that. But maybe your institution subscribes to it.