 OK, happy to start it. So today my topic is about the old Chinese reconstruction of the monstrosities, shi, shi, and si. These three words that, according to traditional commentaries that they are synonyms, but there are lots of issues surrounding these three. I think that since Chinese has been a monolithic language for quite a while, and then the writing system sort of also reinforces it somehow, that we are easily into believing that the Chinese texts convey only meaning. And we sometimes neglect that the sound that goes with every word, that's something that's important, too. So I think Baxter and Sagao Spook mentioned that how useful the new old Chinese reconstruction intends for reading texts, reading especially those pedographic texts written in pedographs. And I actually also think that when it comes to interpreting Chinese grammar, that knowing the sound is also important. The modern Chinese, modern Mandarin, negative Mei, for example, might not have been derived from verb, like some suggested, but from phonologically reduced the form of Wu as Pan Wu proposed. So having the phonological knowledge, in my opinion, is important when it comes to deciphering Chinese syntax. Saying that, I feel a little guilty that I cannot give you a very beautiful solution to the things that I'm about to say. Rather that I happily came here with lots of my questions and those things that bothered me and troubled me, make me puzzled and can't sleep at night, then I would like to come here and actually get helped by so many excellent specialists in Chinese phonology and related fields. So I see that if you could help me for these sets of demonstrators that I work on. More precisely, I like the idea that the OC reconstruction assumption that the old Chinese reconstruction should maximally reveal the linguistic history of the items that we are reconstructing. And when it comes to these three words, I think that what concerns this graphic or telegraphing connections among them and possible etymological and morphological connections. Speaking of etymological and morphological relation, Puli Black had a study on the morphology of Chinese demonstrative pronouns in classical Chinese. And the first quote that he identified are the cognates on the divas in the, I don't know how to pronounce it correctly again, corresponds to Chinese Zhi and this Li corresponds to Chinese Shi. Because of this, it really gave me confidence that I probably was right that by writing Shi and Zhi as dental, because as you know, the middle Chinese is the palatose that the default or Chinese source is dental. And that's what I thought. And seeing this Tibetan cognates that it makes me believe that what I think is right. But Puli Black doesn't think that this kind of dietic contrast between the Tibetan demonstratives applied to Chinese. He rather thinks that this is something independently developed in Tibetan. But in any case, I think writing something in English that makes us wonder about what kind of phonetic value that we should give. Because if you were writing in Chinese that I don't really have to give a pronunciation to Zhi or Shi or Zi or whatever I could just write. And so that was the question that I had. So when I did my dissertation, I asked around and made sure that the dental is the right form. So I'm obsessed with this because of the things that I'm about to say later. But in any case, Puli Black also noted that this Zi and Zi, which is this, and Shi and Shi, the status in the demonstrative system is a little bit tricky. But that's a little bit for the timing. But this too says that it's easy for you to see that they have this alternation between the Zhi Hu Zhe and Zhi group, and the other Yi Zhi group. So the Zhi Fu and Zhi group. So he thinks that this Zi, which is the one on the right, is the right from Zi in the same way as Shi, the right from Shi. And the Shi is, according to him, morphologically related to but stronger and more independent because of the power that is belonging to his category of the more extrovert one so that he has more independence. No, the introvert one so that he has more independence. But in any case, this study is done based on classical Chinese. And what I would like to explore is what it is like in the text that now received the text or more precisely in the Orca bone inscriptions and the Brown's inscriptions. And first, if we look at the Shuo Wen's interpretation of these three graphs, this is the Xiao Zhan poems, that the Shi Sheng lost Zhi as Chu to come out or to go, and Shi as Zhi, and Zi as to stop. And the graphic interpretation is that the Zhi is the pictograph that's depicting the brass overgrowing out of the ground. And Shi consists of two. It is Cong, X, Y, and that means that he... I mean, we think that Shi Sheng thinks that they are the Hui in the category and has these two semantic particles that combine together to give the meaning of the character. And the same thing with Zi. You have to combine to stop and be. And be he thinks that the means to put against each other. By looking at the small Xiao Zhan poem, that we don't see much similarity among these three. But somehow that we can see that the top part of this tree at the bottom part of here and left part of here looks kind of similar, but not exactly. But if we go into the bone graphs, which is around the 14th to 11th century BC, the earliest graph for Zhi consists of a foot. And with a very exaggerated... Do you call that thumb? The big toe. Anyway, so that's the finger of the foot. And so going... It seems like meaning to go, but not so nice examples of the meaning to go is found in bone inscriptions. But in any case, we have this food radical... The food component in the bones, but in the bronze, which is the Western Joe after 11th century BC. And it seems that the what Xi Shan said about this Zhi, like grass growing out, growing, seems to be relevant here, that the right side looks like a plant branching out. So we see that this corruption of this foot shape in the bronze graphs. And I can give you a very, very brief history about what happened to Zhi from the bone inscriptions to the bronze inscriptions based on Jean-Marie's study. It's similar to just called others so that I don't have to exist. I have some similar theory, but it's easier that we can find something here. So in the Xiang or Koubo inscriptions, Zhi contrasts with Zi. It is problematic that it is kind of hard to find a very strong evidence that indicating Zhi is non... I mean, indicating any type of dietic interpretation of Zhi because it's just used metaphorically, referring to something that you mentioned before. And in that usage, like we can think about English word that or this. If you use this or that, referring to things that I just said or referring to something I just mentioned, and then it doesn't matter if this or that, either way, either one can be used. So it is not a very strong indication about that. So that's why it became very controversial about what indeed is the dietic value of this Zhi. But in any case, according to Jean-Marie's study, that he finds that normally when Zi is used, it refers to the space or time occupied by the speaker. And even in the aneuphoric use, Zhi refers to the space or time that the speaker does not occupy. Based on this, mainly based on this, that he thinks that Zhi is non-proxima. But he argues that during the Western Joe, this Zhi has become neutral in terms of dietic contrast. So it's not approximate or not approximate anymore, according to him. And Zhi evolved into two directions, depending on the syntactic context. It was at a nominal position that it evolved towards a third-person foreigner, which the process, according to Jean-Marie, that completed at the spring and autumn period. And at the other context between two nouns, that the Zhi evolved into an attribute-marking particle. So in any case, you don't have to remember all this history, but a very key change took place in the Western Joe, that the Zhi became neutral in terms of dietic contrast. So that I have these questions regarding what I have said. So although Xu Zheng's interpretation of Zhi does not fit the bone graphs, it seems acceptable based on Brown's graphs. And remember that Xu Zheng used this Chu, the word Chu. That's something that when I was reading the new book, the New York's Construction of Old Chinese, that is done now for me, is that this Chu has this T pre-initial plus K. And it's used to glass Zhi, so Zhi is Chu Ye. So is there any significance in this glass? But of course, for the rhyme part, we can tell for sure that it doesn't match a Zhi, but why is this Chu deliberately chosen to glass Zhi? This is something I thought. Also that we also find that the construction of the food components co-occur with the time that when Zhi lost its dietic contrast. So does the, are they somehow related to the same kind of reason? And also the last, this graphic change, does it, there's some kind of sound change behind it from Malaysia to West Indoe, especially this shape of food, which is this the, we constructed before Chinese. If we can interpret that over like the branching out or like growing out grass or branches, does it refer to this word Zhi like to branch or to branch out? And in that case, that we get this vowel E, okay? But it's just speculation and some, those things that bothered me. And then anyway, I'll go on. So that's, we remember that the, in the Xiao Zhuang form, the small seal form Shi is analyzed as consist of Zhi and Zheng. But if you look at the paragraphs, you can see from Gommings with the bronze and the seal or bamboo forms that the Shi originally actually also has this food part. And then with this spoon shape component. And it is Guo Mo Ruo who said that the top part is the spoon or ladle. And then it's the primary graph for the word Zhi. And if we look at this sound, Shi and Zhi, and they do match quite well. But another thing that I actually noticed is something, this is the excursion but it doesn't lead any well but I just think that it's kind of very interesting to bring up if you have some kind of knowledge about pre-classical Chinese text. That is, you notice that some of the forms that, why are some of the just simple that this kind of handle of the spoon is quite simple across. But some has some like fork-like shape. So something like this. And if you sort of bend this part somehow and you count the components, something looks like a zi, something looks like zi, and then you have this fork-like shape. And you get somehow look like shi, the small silver form of shi. So it's the what we know that in those pre-classical texts that some scholars would attribute to the time of Western Zhou and there is a demonstrative written as Shi, exactly the time Shi. So, and this form is actually regarded as an earlier form of Shi. But if this is true that they actually are not quite like this earlier and later type of relationship. Also, we look at the Pyramid History of Shi. And the Shi, the graph that is specially designed specially for the word time, it was not attested until the warring state period. Before that, according to two studies done by Takashima in 2006, the graph for日 represent 2000. One is Sunday and the other one is Shi. So, if you want to write the word Shi, you use the graph日. So that means that the graph, this Shi graph was created much later than Shi. Although that's written in received text, that Shi is identified as an earlier form. But the graph that actually assigned to this Shi, identified as Shi, it's not really the Shi. So it's kind of a little bizarre to have this. But it's just an expression we can come back to Shi. If you're interested that maybe we can talk after later. Okay, anyway, there's something also remarkable is the graphic presentation of Shi during the warring state period that in two Zhongshan Brazis that dated to the warring state period as Shi, is written six times as Shi, the plan Shi. And mostly in the phrase of Shi, but not all the time. And in the manuscripts, this Shi and this plan Shi, they are also found as the phonetic loans for each other. So according to the reconstruction in the Bachelor of Arts New Book, and this Shi should be reconstructed and then so it poses the question. Has prioritization taken place at least in some words during the warring state period or the initial of the plan Shi still was keeping this pre-initial during that time. Anyway, so what I was trying to say is that it does no strong evidence, but there seems to be some little bit hints about whether we give a little bit, we include some kind of viewer elements in the reconstruction of Shi or Shi. We mentioned that it seems that from Shang to Zhou that the graph changed from representing, I mean depicting food to depicting some kind of like branching out. And then Xu Sheng lives the grass, Chu Ye for Shi. And also we have this Shi, we written as the clan Shi with the viewer. So this is why that I was really obsessed with whether I'm happy with just write it as the and which makes me really comfortable because then you have this Tibetan cognate or that you have something that makes us think that is the contact with the core which actually is originally started me, I started thinking about this because Meizu Lin had, I forgot the week here, but very long time ago had an article about the Zhi Ran Qi and he reconstructed the Zhi with Ge Xiang and had provided some evidence that but some of them are not that, I think not that strong, but he later gave up this morphological relation between Zhu and Qi because it seems that Qi, it's kind of hard to establish its pronominal usage at the earlier period. But I think Takashima had a paper in press that actually he also had the, he and the Nibbison had the articles of thinking about actually Qi is both model and pronominal so that if this kind of morphological process is going on between Zhi and Qi and Zhi actually has this kind of K-table thing. I cannot sort things out but I'm just providing you with what I found and hopefully that you can sort of help me to just maybe dismiss it or you know, so be happy and sleep well or I can really do something different. Another thing that I found quite entertaining is if you look at the graph of Zhi, this is the bone graph, this is the brown step, he also has this foot and the right side is the, this is B. In the bones, the graphs for person and graphs for spoon, it's kind of hard to distinguish, kind of all mixed. But in any case, look at the brown step and you will see that it's like this stuff, the side view of this spoon. And if this is true, and you will see that the Shi having a component that's the front view of a spoon and then Zhi has the side view of a spoon and this one has Zhi and that one has Zhi too. So I don't know why it is just an accidental similarity or it has some deeper reason. I haven't sorted it out, but I just thought it's interesting. But we can actually look at, further look at this graph in connection with Zhi, the spoon. The common interpretation, actually follow the Zhuowen jiezi by Xu Sheng, is Xu Sheng said, Bi Yi actually had two meanings, thank you. One is to, it's similar with this Bi put against each other, and it's also the things that used to scoop rice. And so in this meaning, it's also called Si. So, Blimey Tai's commentary says that this graph of Bi represent two words, first to compare and the other one, the spoon. And he said that only the second one meaning survived and the other one died out. And this Chi is not attested. In so-called the Jin, those classic texts. According to those Zhuowen scholars studied out, this is one of them, I won't read, said that it's, the earliest mentioning of this graph is in my name. And he says that, so they, the scholars claim that this is the name that the graph was created during the Han dynasty because that they, this is Han person, Han people's way of calling spoon. And I think, I didn't call it here, but there's a commentary to Han Zhu saying like this big foreign, so the Northerners call Bi as Shi in case, in one way's opinion that the Bi and the Zhi have the same similar sounds, Yi Sheng Chu Zhuang, and because the sound changed and then this Shi was added to indicate the sound because this is Han, so I just put the little Han reconstruction by Shi's work there. So, you see that the, it seems, it seems this Bi, if this means spoon, represent the word spoon, is not read as Bi, or it should be something that's similar to Shi, which, I mean, sounding like Shi during the Han dynasty, but something similar in earlier time. And in addition to Chi, we mentioned Si, right, so it's also called Si. And in the short list entry of Si, the Xu Sheng mentioned that Li, Li Ji, and so he basically is saying like in the Mi Ji, we don't have Bi, we have Si, and this is Cong Mu and Si Sheng, so Si is the phonetic. So does it mean that the Bi should be read in the sound of Si, which is the Zhi, the Fat Zhi, Ryan Bluth, and the Baxter, and some of our reconstructed with this slur, okay. And also that this is sometimes that we find, we less commonly find that this obviously not matching sound, but Bi, and Zhi, Bi, and Ni, that these two Bi are identified as phonetic in these two words by Xu Sheng. So does it mean that this Bi graph represent, can represent the Si represent some kind of Fat Zhi, that sound, and so I have no answer for that. But for the meaning, or for the words that the graphs represent and I can show you that the earliest chime, this graph existed in the earliest extent, in the oracles, and Zhang Yu Jing actually identified this one as a conjunction, thus, but many others don't take Zi as a function word here, but rather a kind of like a sacrifice here, which also makes sense. And so the main karma interpretations here as the type of sacrifice which scholars often do and they don't know what that word means. No, no, no. Anyway, then Zi definitely represents some kind of problem now in Western Joe Grants, because you can see that this person made the Father Xing or some vessel, and also he occurs as the emblem. It is in the early spring and autumn period that we found the earliest example of the use of Zi as this, as a demonstrative, and so that's the early spring and autumn period. So the karma claim between Zi and Zi that is Zi is the earlier form, and Zi is the later form, and the sound change that is involved in this change is not well studied, but at least we know that the Brahms' interpretations indicate that the Zi started to show up around the spring and autumn period, and the function and meaning stay similar to Zi, and in the Shijing and we can see that Zi occurs only 14 times, maybe in the Da'ai and Zhou's Dong section, whereas Zi occurred 86 times, and in the Shaoshu, which seems more conservative, Zi occurred 60 times and Zi only three times. So we can see, I have a question here that why was the graph formally used to represent the proper now adopted before representing approximate demonstratives around this time? So is there a particular reason that it's chosen? And also that as we have mentioned that the Puli Bank also noted that this time of alternation between these two sets. So if we look at the overall history of these three things, three words, during the Western Zhou, Zi became mutually in terms of distance contrast, Shi emerged as the sometimes emphatic and aphoric pronoun. So this used to assist the king, so use this, this use is there, so there is a proposing of the object. And this is the earliest use that tends to be for Shi. And as we noted that the generally, according that Zi continued to evolve towards the third person pronoun and the triple view marker during the three and author. And it is in this time that the Shi increased its use as the emphatic and aphoric pronoun and one instance of Shi used as a determiner. So Shi plus a noun is found and the most likely is so-called exphoric and that means like I'm just, it is in the physical existence of the situation and you pointed to this or that instead of an aphoric use in the piece that best dated to the late spring and autumn period and around this time spring and autumn also emerged as a proximal demonstrant. So my actual hypothesis is that the Shi actually emerged as some kind of alimony for Zi at the particular syntactic position which we have, I have some interpretation but we don't have to mention it, we can just say it's some special syntactic positions. And the time that when Shi appeared to the time that the Zi appeared, there is a gap of a couple hundred years, no, a few hundred years. And so it's kind of, I think it's very likely that they are derived in the same process instead that probably this Zi changed to Zi is trying to match the sound of Shi by analogy. And also during this time Shi started to acquire the syntactic function. And the further, my further hypothesis is probably this proximal made through two different processes that they compete for that slot of proximate pronoun this in Chinese language from that point on and then probably this one, this one, one and then give our job if you think about the pronunciation too. And this is a myth that hasn't been solved in the Chinese syntax, the history of syntax that which form gives the modern Chinese job and there are many Zhi or something but Zhi phonetically, Zhi doesn't, the Zhi-Hu-Zhe-Yu-Zhi doesn't work well but if you think about Shi in terms of graphic formation and in terms of sound Shi is a quite good candidate to give job in Chinese. Anyway, the last thing I want to mention that is we see that this food radical in all these three so this might be just accidental but if it's not, what was the function of this food? Is he trying to indicate some kind of phonetic value but we see that the phonetic value seems to be not, not, not, not like compatible? Is it some kind of semantic indicator that they are somehow all related to some at least a pronominal kind of usage? So that's something that I haven't decided but that's all that I'm presenting today. Thank you.