From Mandarin To Cantonese Lexicography

From Mandarin to Cantonese lexicography
A genealogical study of Robert Morrison’s

Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect (1828)
Beijing Normal University - Library (jbid109685) IP: 59.64.50.51 On: Tue, 10 Oct 2023 09:20:22
Rui Li
Guangdong University of Finance & Economics | Aarhus University
The Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect, compiled by Robert Morrison

(1782–1834) and published in 1828 in Macao, was the first bilingual dictio-
nary of Cantonese in a Western language. This article traces the genealogy
of the Vocabulary by examining Morrison’s sources. It is shown how Morri-
son availed himself of the resources of Mandarin dictionaries and of the lex-
icographical work on Cantonese undertaken in the 1820s.
1. Introduction
Mandarin Chinese, as seen in dictionaries and other written materials, was
traditionally recorded mostly in the form of classical Chinese. Spoken Mandarin
was seldom recorded in official documents. However, the 16th century saw a sig-
nificant change with the arrival of western missionaries in China. They broke
away from traditional lexicographical practices by compiling bilingual dictionar-
ies, both published and unpublished, recording spoken Mandarin, Hokkien and
Cantonese with glosses in Western languages. Instead of using fǎnqiè 反切1, a
traditional method in Chinese lexicography to indicate the pronunciation of a
monosyllabic character by using two other characters, the first having the same
consonant and the second having the same vowel and tone, Catholic mission-
aries, particularly Jesuits, focused mainly on Guānhuà 官話, also called Man-
darin, the language of the officials, which was an official “language common to
the whole Empire”, rather than on “the various dialects of the different provinces”
(Ricci 1953 [1615]: 28). The Protestants, especially after the Opium War, placed
1. In the fǎnqiè 反切 system, for example, the pronunciation of the character dīng 丁 [tiŋ˥],
is explained by the expression dāng jīng qiè 當經切 [dāng and jīng for dīng], meaning ‘take
the initial sound ([t-]) of dāng 當 [tɑŋ˥] and the final sound and tone pitch ([-iŋ˥]) of jīng 經
[tɕiŋ˥], and put them together’.
https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.00118.li | Published online: 25 July 2023

Historiographia Linguistica ISSN 0302-5160 | E‑ISSN 1569-9781 © 2023 John Benjamins Publishing Company
[2] Rui Li
great emphasis on the description of major southern dialects in their dictionary-

making work, distinguishing themselves from the Catholic tradition.
In 1822, Robert Morrison (1782–1834), the first protestant missionary to
China from the London Missionary Society (LMS), published his Mandarin dic-
tionary in Macao, called the Dictionary of the Chinese Language in Three Parts
(1815–1823). It was the world’s first Chinese-English/English-Chinese dictionary,
consisting of three relatively independent parts: Zìdiǎn 字典 [The Dictionary]
in three volumes (1815, 1822, 1823) arranged according to the 214 Chinese rad-
icals2; Wǔchē yùnfǔ 五車韻府 [Erudition Syllabic Dictionary] in two volumes
(1819, 1820) arranged alphabetically; and English and Chinese (1822) without a
specific Chinese title (cf. Yang 2014: 303; Li & Hansen 2018: 263). A couple of
years after completing his 6-volume Mandarin dictionary, Morrison published
a dictionary of English and Cantonese, the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect
(1828). This article attempts to trace the genealogy of the Vocabulary of the Can-
ton Dialect by examining Morrison’s sources and explains how Morrison com-
piled his Cantonese dictionary during the late 1820s.
2. The Chinese radical (or key) refers to that graphical component of a Chinese character
in Chinese lexicography which is used for arranging and indexing the characters in Chinese
dictionaries. In 1615, the publication of the character dictionary Zìhuì 字彙 [Collection of
Characters] established the system for retrieving characters according to the 214 radicals. Since
then, this system had been widely used by Chinese and European lexicographers. For example,
Kāngxī zidian 康熙字典 [Kangxi Classic of Characters] was arranged according to the 214 rad-
icals of the dictionary (see Li & Hansen 2018; Li & Hansen 2022).
From Mandarin to Cantonese lexicography [3]
2. Morrison’s Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect: A study in Lexicographic

Archaeology
2.1 Morrison’s Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect3
The English-Chinese/Chinese-English Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect of
Morrison, simply referred to here as the Vocabulary, was sponsored and published
by the British East India Company in Macao, as was his Dictionary of the Chinese
Language. It bore the Chinese title Guǎngdōngshěng tǔhuà zìhuì 廣東省土話字
彙 [Vocabulary of Guangdong Provincial Dialect]. The dictionary has 670 pages,

but the absence of page numbers makes it difficult for readers to locate entries.
It contains three relatively independent parts: Part I, English and Chinese (an E-
C dictionary); Part II, Chinese and English (a C-E dictionary); Part III, Chinese
Words and Phrases (a C-E idiom dictionary).
The first part, entitled “English and Chinese”, is an English-Chinese dic-
tionary arranged alphabetically according to the English headwords. It consists
of 206 pages in total, including the title page, an “introduction” on two pages,
one-page “owers of the letters”4, a 198-page wordlist, and a few blank pages. It
contains about 2,321 English entries providing English headwords written in
uppercase letters with their Chinese equivalents, some of which are accompa-
nied by phrasal and sentential examples with their Chinese translations. Morri-
son provides transliterations (or what he calls “orthography”) for each character
3. “The old language–dialect debate is of particular relevance to Cantonese, or Yue” that

“belongs to the Sino-Tibetan language family” (Cheng & Tang 2016: 18–19). Cantonese shares
much vocabulary with Mandarin, but the two are mutually unintelligible (phonological,
grammatical, and lexical differences). This article does not focus on the issue of the status of
Cantonese as dialect or language but follows Morrison’s understanding of the “Canton dialect”.
In addition, the term “Cantonese” is ambiguous, since “[i]n English, the term ‘Cantonese’ either
refers to the speech of Canton, modern-day Guangzhou city of Guangdong province, or the
entire Yue group of similar tongues, or just any variety within the group” (Cheng & Tang
2016: 18). In this article, “Cantonese” or what Morrison called “Canton dialect” refers to the
prestige variety as it is spoken in Guangzhou, because according to Wàn and Zhēn (2009: 2),
Morrison in the Vocabulary “used the Romanized letter to record the speech of Guangzhou at
that time” (translated from Chinese). Following Morrison, who generally designated Cantonese
as Chinese, and entitled the three parts of the Vocabulary respectively as English and Chinese,
Chinese and English, and Chinese Words and Phrases, this article also uses Chinese to refer to
Cantonese and dose not distinguish Mandarin and Cantonese when quantitatively counting
the Mandarin and Cantonese words and analyzing the genealogy of the Vocabulary. Morrison
adopted a number of Mandarin words and phrases as entries, equivalents, and examples in
his Vocabulary from his Mandarin dictionary, so the Mandarin and Cantonese words and
expressions could not be counted separately.
4. “Owers of the letters” should be read as “powers of the letters”, as seen in the English and
Chinese (Morrison 1822: 5).
[4] Rui Li
in the whole dictionary, based on their Cantonese pronunciations. He devised his

own transliteration system based on English orthography (see Coblin 2003: 342),
though it was not the first romanization for a Chinese variety. His Cantonese
romanization for the Vocabulary was itself based on an earlier system he had
developed for Mandarin.
The second part, “Chinese and English”, as the title indicates, is a Chinese-
English dictionary arranged alphabetically based on the transliterations of the
Chinese headwords. It contains 94 pages and about 1,504 Chinese entries, includ-
ing a title page, a 90-page wordlist, and three blank pages. Morrison’s way of
including entries in Part II is quite distinct from the traditional Chinese way in
zìshū 字書 [Chinese Character dictionary, a kind of dictionary that includes and
lists individual Chinese character; also, a major dictionary form in ancient Chi-
nese lexicography], which centers on and includes individual Chinese characters
as the entry headwords. Unlike zìshū and Morrison’s Mandarin dictionary, Part
II (1828) contains Chinese words as headwords. The entries in Part II are com-
posed of the Romanized Chinese headwords (with the first letter uppercase and
a hyphen (-)5 between the two romanized characters) and their Chinese char-
acters, equivalents/definitions in English, and Chinese phrasal illustrations with
their English translations. Sentence examples are rarely provided.
The third part, “Chinese Words and Phrases”, is a Chinese-English idiom dic-
tionary, arranged according to subjects. It has 357 pages, including a title page,
a table of contents without indicating the page numbers (called “an appendix of
Chinese words and phrases; classed, by natives”), a 353-page wordlist containing
about 3,589 entries, and a couple of blank pages. The entries in this part include
Chinese words, phrases, and sentences, mostly idioms, which were described as
“miscellaneous phrases” by Morrison under the dictionary title. The entries are
divided into 24 subjects, each of which is composed of the Romanized Chinese
headword (with the first letter uppercase) and its Chinese characters, a definition
or explanation in English.6 Part III (1828) sometimes provides the literal mean-
ings as well as the overall meaning of the idioms, such as the entry “Mong kwo
fa” (as shown in Figure 1). Instead of the hanging indent applied in the first two
parts, Part III adopts the indentation for the first line.
Morrison’s shift from Mandarin to Cantonese was a major step in the history
of Protestant missionary lexicography. As a Mandarin dictionary compiler, Morri-
5. The hyphen (-) between the two Romanized characters was only adopted in Part II. In Part
I and Part III, a space was applied instead of the hyphen.
6. These subjects comprise topics such as “Affairs of the world”, “Astronomy, times & seasons”,
“Birds and beasts”, etc., see more details in Section 3.5.
Figure 1. Entry Mong kwa fa (Morrison 1828, Part III, Section I, “Affairs of the world”, no
page numbering)
son had made extensive use of the largest character dictionary7 of traditional Chi-
nese, Kāngxī zìdiǎn 康熙字典 [Kangxi Classic of Characters, 1716], and Catholic
dictionaries (cf. Yang 2014), the combined legacies of which influenced Chinese
lexicography in the 19th century. However, for the compilation of his Cantonese
dictionary, Morrison decided not to rely on local written Cantonese sources8.
Extensive research has been carried out on Morrison’s life and contribu-
tions, mostly focusing on his theological views and missionary activities (e.g.,
Townsend 1890; Box 1904; Gù 1985; Yeung 2007; Ying 2007, 2012; Hancock
2008; Daily 2012, 2013), his biography or achievements (e.g., Morrison 1839;
Rutherford 1902; Broomhall 1924; Hayes 1925; Ride 1957; Starr 1998; Bigalke
2011), his linguistic and lexicographical works and translation (e.g., Máo 2004;
Mǎ, 2004; Hallihan 2008; Xú 2009; Wu & Zheng 2009; Si, 2011), and others
(e.g., Scott 1961; West 1998; Lee 2007). There are numerous existing studies of
Morrison’s Dictionary of the Chinese Language, which treat the linguistic, lexico-
graphical as well as historical aspects of this work. On the other hand, little has
been published on the Vocabulary. Hallihan (2008), for example, who presents a
brief timeline of Robert Morrison, does not mention it. Liáng and Qiū (2019: 37)
claimed that “there were not many related studies, so there was still a large room
for researching and digging for further information”, though “there were detailed
studies on the phonetics of this book” (translated from Chinese).
Most studies of the Vocabulary focus on its linguistic and lexicographical fea-
tures, including its dialectological properties, entry selection principles, etc. (e.g.,
Bolton 2001: xxvi–xxxiv; Huáng, et al., 2003; Dīng, 2007; Chén & Liú, 2009; Wàn
& Zhēn, 2009; Cheng & Tang, 2016; Chén, 2017; Liáng & Qiū, 2019; Chén, 2019,
2021). Few studies focus on the sources and compilation methods used by Morri-
7. According to Couling (1917: 298), in China, “native Chinese dictionaries may be divided
into three categories; i. Analogical dictionaries, arranged by categories of subjects; ii. Graphic
dictionaries [or zìshū 字書 (character dictionaries)], arranged by radicals; and iii. Phonetic dic-
tionaries, arranged by rhymes.” (cf. Li & Hansen 2022: 359)
8. For example, earlier than Morrison, there was a Cantonese rhyming dictionary, Fēnyùn
cuòyào 分韻撮要 [Summary of Rhyme Classification], the earliest rhyming book for the Can-
tonese known so far.
[6] Rui Li
son, as well as the compilation process and genealogical relationships of this dic-
tionary. This paper attempts to fill this gap. Chén (2019: 85) has refuted the idea
that the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect had any source at all by arguing that “as
the first Cantonese dictionary, the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect was built up
from nothing, when there were not any models or formats available for Morrison
to rely on, a fact that lets us imagine how difficult the task of compiling must have
been”, but he mentioned that “based on his experience of compiling the Dictio-
nary of the Chinese Language, Morrison constructed the framework and content
of this book [the Vocabulary] according to the Cantonese features and the social
needs of the time” (translated from Chinese). Bolton (2001: xxviii) argued that
“we might logically infer that in compiling the former he may have simply edited
his earlier work, selecting from the English-Chinese section in particular” and
“[m]any of the items in Part I and II of the Vocabulary are also included in Mor-
rison’s larger Dictionary of the Chinese Language”. Chén (2021: 257) believed that
“the classification of the Cantonese words in the third part of the Vocabulary of
the Canton Dialect followed the classification criteria in terms of meaning formed
since the Ěryǎ 爾雅 [Approaching what is correct]” (translated from Chinese). In
addition, Morrison in his communication with the Directors of the mission and
others, in his diary, and in the introduction to the Vocabulary seldom explained
the apporach he took in compiling the dictionary and the source(s) he drew on. In
order to investigate the process of compiling the Vocabulary, this article attempts
to answer the questions of what source(s) the Vocabulary was based on, and how
Morrison developed his lexicographical methods from the compiling practice of
the Mandarin dictionary to the Cantonese dictionary under the framework of
Lexicographic Archaeology which “consists in the comparison” of “different dic-
tionaries from the same publisher” (Ilson 1986: 127) for the sake of genealogical
research on dictionaries.
2.2 Lexicographic Archaeology

Hartmann (2001: 40) distinguishes “seven different aspects” of the historical
study of dictionaries that are conducive to finding out how these dictionaries
and their compilers “have contributed to cultural development, social progress
and scientific knowledge” (Hartmann 2001: 39), among which the genealogical
approach aims “at finding out how different reference works are ‘family-related’”
(Hartmann 2003: 3), and “uncovers ‘family’ resemblances between dictionaries of
successive generations” (Hartmann 1992: 154). The genealogical approach offers
a new view for analyzing and unearthing “the filiational (or ‘family-tree’) relations
between dictionaries, their mutual influences and derivations” (Hartmann
2001: 44), “finding out how different types of dictionaries have evolved for differ-
ent purposes” (Hartmann 2001: 40).
In 1986, Robert Ilson developed the genealogical approach into “Lexico-
graphic Archaeology” (calqued on ‘Industrial Archaeology’) as “one of the com-
ponent disciplines of lexicography” (Ilson 1986: 127; Li & Hansen 2018: 265). It
“consists in the comparison of different editions of the same dictionary, of dif-
ferent dictionaries derived from a common source, or different dictionaries from
the same publisher” (Ilson 1986: 127). Lexicographic Archaeology is “an espe-
cially manageable instance of the more general enterprise of comparing dictionar-
ies critically” that can “cast light on important problems of dictionary-making”
(Ilson 1986: 127). By proposing “Lexicographic Archaeology”, Ilson aims at fos-
tering the genealogical approach and encouraging the scholars in lexicography to
concentrate on the genealogical research of dictionaries in the past and present,
to “emphasise the differences” (Ilson 1986: 134) as well as to identify their com-
mon ground. Through the genealogical analysis, Ilson also attempts to encourage
interest in illustrating “it with concrete evidence of genetic relationships between
several sets of dictionaries” (Hartmann 2003: 7).
The compilation of one dictionary is more or less dependent on previous
dictionaries or other resources. Reinhard Hartmann (1986: vii) argued that “most
dictionaries have forerunners, and all have imitators; an understanding of the his-
torical foundations of dictionary-making is therefore one of the preconditions of
further progress in academic lexicography”. However, not enough attention has
been paid to the genealogical studies of the dictionaries of Chinese and western
languages in the 19th century under the genealogical approach and Lexicographic
Archaeology (cf. Yang 2014; Li & Hansen 2018; Li & Hansen 2022; Li, et al. 2022).
Unfortunately, little research has been done on the genealogical links
between the Vocabulary and the other sources, which makes it difficult to under-
stand how this pioneering work was originally designed, constructed and
received, given the historical context of the time. Through the historical and
social analysis, as well as textual comparison, this article, in Section 3, confirms
the links between the Vocabulary and Dictionary of the Chinese Language, both
of which are “different dictionaries from the same publisher” (Ilson 1986: 127),
allowing the methodology of Lexicographic Archaeology to be applied. Therefore,
based on the genealogical approach and Lexicographic Archaeology, this article
attempts to uncover “family resemblances between different dictionaries by study-
ing their contents and genetic connections” (Hartmann 2001: 45), to identify the
source(s) that Morrison relied on, to reveal his compilation process, and to under-
stand the impact of limited resources on his approach to lexicography.
[8] Rui Li
3. A genealogical study of the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect

3.1 Disputes over the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect
Before further discussing whether Morrison had relied on any sources to
compile his Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect, it is important to find out when
Morrison started to compile the dictionary and how long it took to complete the
work. Unfortunately, the date of compilation is not certain.
In terms of the dates in which work on the dictionary was undertaken, Wàn
and Zhēn (2009: 2) argued that the Vocabulary “was written during the years
1824–1828” (translated from Chinese), but according to Sū (2014: 56), “in 1828,
the President of the Select Committee asked Morrison to compile this Vocab-
ulary in addition to teaching…” (translated from Chinese). Sū (2000: 103) also
pointed out that “in February and October in 1828, Morrison, who had returned
to China, reported twice that the Select Committee in China asked him to com-
pile a Canton dialect [Cantonese] dictionary for company staff to learn and use,
and it would be published by the company’s press” (translated from Chinese). I
disagree with Wàn and Zhēn (2009: 2) and believe that Morrison started compil-
ing the dictionary no earlier than 1828, because according to Morrison (1839, II:
404), “[d]uring the summer of this year [1828] he [Morrison] also commenced a
Dictionary of the provincial dialect of Canton, with the hope of its tending to the
final object of the Mission”. This conclusion indicated that Morrison compiled the
dictionary in a relatively short time.
About the date of completion and publication, most scholars agree that the
Vocabulary was published in 1828 (e.g., Chén and Liú, 2009; Chén, 2017; Liáng
and Qiū, 2019; Chén, 2019), as indicated on the title page. However, according
to Sū (2000: 103), “although the publication date on the cover was the year of
1828, in fact, Morrison only completed the draft by February 1829”; “what’s more,
the Select Committee in China did not send the printed book to the Honourable
Court of Directors in London until January 1830” (translated from Chinese). The
date of publication could be confirmed by a letter of Morrison addressed “to Sir
George Staunton” (February 24, 1829), in which he stated that “I [Morrison] have
just now completed a third part of a Canton vocabulary”, and “it has become the
fashion to study it [Cantonese] in preference to the Mandarin tongue” (Morrison
1839, II: 424). Morrison’s wife, Eliza Morrison (1839, II: 428) also confirmed that
“[i]n the beginning of this year [1829], Dr. Morrison finished the ‘Third part of the
Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect;’ and he continued his other literary and min-
isterial labours as usual, during the summer” (Morrison 1839, II: 428). It could
be confirmed that Morrison completed the first two parts ahead of the third part,
but his compilation process is still unclear. In addition, I agree with Sū (2000: 103)
that the Vocabulary was published in full after 1828, but Sū may not notice that
the three parts of the Vocabulary were not printed at the same time. According to
Morrison (1839, II: 82), before completing the full volume, “[f ]orty copies of a
work compiled by Dr. Morrison […] are forwarded to your Honourable Court”,
and “[t]his work has been divided into three parts, and we [the Select Committee
in China] considered it desirable to wait the completion of the whole before we
transmitted it to England”. So, I speculate that the year of 1828 on the title page
might refer to the year when the first one (or two) parts were printed; neverthe-
less, it can be confirmed that Morrison compiled this dictionary in less than a year
between 1828 and 1829. To sum up, Morrison compiled this “first” Vocabulary in
a relatively short period of time, and he must have had one or more sources on
which he drew in this work.
3.2 The first Cantonese romanization system derived from Mandarin

romanization
Morrison, unlike the latecomers who had access to a large number of
resources and were able to benefit from the help of native speakers when treaties
opened some Chinese ports to foreigners, made great achievements in Chinese
lexicography in the early 19th century with extremely limited support. As I
showed in Section 3.1, Morrison completed his Vocabulary in three parts in less
than a year. I assume that Morrison must have relied on some source(s) in order
to complete this work in such a short time. In sections from 3.2 to 3.5, I pose sev-
eral hypotheses on Morrison’s potential sources by examining his romanization
system and the content of the dictionary.
As the English title indicated, Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect is a dictio-
nary of Cantonese. “The publication of Cantonese dictionaries in the early nine-
teenth century, intended for the Western readers, marked the beginning of a time
when substantial work was done to Romanize Cantonese”, and the Vocabulary
“was one of these earliest attempts to offer transcription for Cantonese words in
Roman letters” (Cheng & Tang 2016: 37). In his introduction, Morrison describes
his purpose and the difficulties he faced in compiling this Cantonese dictionary
(see too Morrison 1839, II: 81 and Bolton 2001: xxvi–xxvii):
This Vocabulary was undertaken, in the hope that the Language could be com-
municated to Europeans without the Chinese Character; but it was found that the
want of the Character made the mode of communication very imperfect, unless
the Learner had the constant assistance of a person who already knew the Roman
letters and the Chinese Language. To convey the spoken Language without the
Character is not impracticable; but it is difficult, and often embarrassing to the
Learner: whereas the Character being presented to the eye of the Native makes
all simple and easy. The writer has therefore failed in his expectation, and con-
sequently has not carried forward the Vocabulary to the extent which he would
[10] Rui Li
otherwise have done. The names of foreign articles of commerce in Canton are
very irregularly and variously written among different shopmen and dealers.
Names of goods are sometimes entirely foreign: at other times a translation of for-
eign Names; and occasionally they are half Chinese and half foreign.
The distinctions of silks, skins & c., & c., are known only to the respective man-
ufacturers and dealers. To enquire among them and Settle their nomenclature
was a task for which the writer was by no means qualified. He requested assis-
tance from European dealers and received some, but it was scanty and defective.
(Morrison 1828: introduction)
Sponsored by the British East India Company, Morrison was committed to help-
ing the Company to better engage in business activities thanks to the assistance
of his Cantonese dictionary. As a missionary of LMS, he compiled this dictionary
also with the aim of assisting missionaries in Canton and Macao in learning local
languages for preaching. However, Morrison’s Mandarin Romanization to sim-
plify Chinese-language characters for the Western world was not adequate for the
needs of learning Cantonese. By comparing Morrison’s two systems of roman-
ization applied in his Mandarin dictionary (1822) and his Cantonese dictionary
(1828), both published by the same printing press, the East India Company’s
Press in Macao, this article argues that Morrison drew inspiration from his Man-
darin Romanization when he designed his Cantonese Romanization.
In traditional Chinese linguistics, the Chinese syllable9 consists of three
parts: shēng 聲 [the initial, or the onset], yùn 韻 [the final], and diào 調 [the
tones]. Most syllables are a combination of an initial, a final, and a tone, though
some syllables have no initials or tones. These three components of the Chinese
syllable, including shēng, yùn, and diào of the Vocabulary have been summarized
by several previous studies on Morrison’s Cantonese Romanization, cf. Dīng
(2007); Wàn and Zhēn (2009), etc. The components yùn 韻 are parts of Chinese
syllables other than initials and tones, sometimes with a terminal [n] or [ŋ]; in
Cantonese, a final could be [n], [m], [ŋ], [p], [t], and [k]. Morrison made a basi-
cally accurate description of yùn in his system of romanizing Cantonese, but
when collecting the pronunciation of Cantonese, Morrison might mark the same
character with different sound scripts due to the different “speakers”; in addition,
there are “many errors related to printing and proofreading” (Dīng 2007: 95).
9. The initial is usually made up of a consonant, except for those cases where the so-called líng
shēngmǔ 零聲母 [zero initial] occurs. The final can be divided into three parts: yùntóu/jièyīn
韻頭/介音 [the medial (the onglide, head vowel of the final)], yùnfù/zhǔyào yuányīn 韻腹/主
要元音 [the nucleus (the essential vowel of the final, the nuclear vowel)], and yùnwěi 韻尾 [the
coda (ending of the final), which can be either a vowel (offglide) or a consonant (a nasal or a
voiceless stop)], cf. Kurpaska (2010: 15).
Although Morrison made great effort to “ensure that the Romanization given
resembled the native language of the target readers”, who were English speak-
ers, he neither distinguished “between aspirated and unaspirated sounds” (Yeung
2021: 123), nor addressed “the indication of tones” (Cheng & Tang 2016: 37). Ear-
lier than Morrison, Joshua Marshman (1768–1837), another British missionary,
had already used “the letter ‘h’ to indicate aspirated sounds” (Yeung 2021: 123); in
addition, Morrison also distinguished the aspirates for shēng in the first (Zìdiǎn
字典, 1815, 1822, 1823) and second (Wǔchē yùnfǔ 五車韻府 1819, 1820) parts
of the Dictionary of the Chinese Language. However, Morrison failed to mark the
aspirates for shēng 聲 and diào 調 in the third part (1822) of his Mandarin dictio-
nary as well as in the Vocabulary. This was because he believed that “[t]he Tones
and Aspirates, are quite of a secondary nature”, and “[s]uch distinctions do exist,
but they are not necessary to write the Language, nor yet to speak it intelligibly”
(Morrison 1815: x; Bolton 2001: xxii).
Morrison’s decision not to mark the aspirates and tones in both his Man-
darin dictionary (1822) and Cantonese dictionary (1828), reflected his linguistic
and lexicographic views on Mandarin and Cantonese, during the 1820s. Although
Morrison’s recording of initial consonants of Cantonese is relatively rough, it has
inspired modern scholars to understand the development of the Cantonese pro-
nunciations dating back two hundred years (e.g., see Wàn & Zhēn 2009). By
comparing the two systems of romanizing Mandarin and Cantonese devised by
Morrison, a conclusion has been drawn that Morrison’s Cantonese Romanization
was also deeply influenced by his Mandarin Romanization, which was established
in the 1810s. Table 1 shows the similarities between his Cantonese and Mandarin
Romanizations.
Table 1. Morrison’s explanations of how the romanized phonetic letters are pronounced
Cantonese
Letters Romanization Mandarin Romanization
a Always as in Shall. As in Hard.
ă Short as in Hat. As in Hat.
ae / Broad a coalescing with e, forming a sound like igh in High.
ai As the sound of Lie. /
ăw Short, abrupt. /
aou Long, and broad. Broad a and ou coalescing.
ay / As in May.
e/ě “e”, *
in the middle of “ě”, as in Met.
a word as in Met.
[12] Rui Li
Table 1. (continued)
Cantonese
Letters Romanization Mandarin Romanization
e At the end of a Final, as in Me.
Syllable as in Me.
ee As in Seen. /
ei As in Height. /
eu / As the sound of eu in the French word Peu.

ew / As in New.
g / Is hard in Gǐh.
i As in Sit. /
ǐh / A sound similar to that given by the Letter i, when in
pronouncing the word With, the reader stops short at the i.
j / As in French.
o As in Long. /
ǒ Before short As in Hot.
consonants as in
Hot.
ow/ ów, as in How. ow, as in How.
ów **
oy As in boy. /
u Alone like the Nearly like eu, as above.
French in Peu.
ǔh / As in Hut.
uy Peculiar Chinese /
Sounds.
sze/ze Peculiar Chinese A buzzing sound, which cannot be expressed by the Roman
Sounds. Alphabet.
* In the “[p]owers of the letters” in Part I of the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect, the first “e” was
wrongly written as “e”, which should be written as “ě”, the same as in Morrison (1815: xvii) and Mor-
rison (1822: 5).
** In the “[p]owers of the letters”, “ów” should be written as “ow”, because it mostly has been written
as “ow” through the dictionary.
Morrison, in the “[p]owers of the letters” of his Cantonese dictionary, Vocab-

ulary of the Canton Dialect (1828), and the “introduction” of his Mandarin dic-
tionary, Zìdiǎn (1815) explained how the romanized phonetic letters were
pronounced, as illustrated respectively in the second and third columns in
Table 1, with the Mandarin dictionary playing an important role for the Can-
tonese vocabulary. As for the shēng 聲, Morrison distinguished the aspirates for
shēng in the first and second parts of the Dictionary of the Chinese Language, but
unfortunately, he failed to mark the aspirates for shēng 聲 in the third part (Eng-
lish and Chinese, 1822) of the same dictionary. Aspirates are likewise unmarked
in the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect. The influence of Morrison’s English and
Chinese (1822) on his Vocabulary is also reflected in the diào 調. Unlike the first
two parts of the Dictionary of the Chinese Language that sometimes marked the
diào, in the third part (1822) Morrison failed to label the diào 調, and this prac-
tice was carried over to his system for romanizing Cantonese in the Vocabulary of
the Canton Dialect (1828). In addition, in Wǔchē yùnfǔ, Morrison has labelled the
transliterations of Cantonese for each syllable in a way which is very similar to the
transliterations of the Vocabulary (1828).
Morrison’s Mandarin dictionary Dictionary of the Chinese Language not
only influenced his Cantonese Vocabulary concerning the ways of romanizing the
characters, but also the selection of the entries, equivalents, illustrative examples,
and their translations. From Sections 3.3 to 3.5, through case studies illustrating
our framework of Lexicographic Archaeology, this article investigates how Morri-
son constructed the lexicography of Cantonese using his Mandarin dictionary.
3.3 Identifying the source of Part I of the Vocabulary

Though there are numerous studies on the 19th-century bilingual dictio-
naries of Eastern and Western languages, insufficient attention has been paid to
their genealogy under the approach or Lexicographic Archaeology, and as a con-
sequence Morrison’s potential sources for his Vocabulary have been little investi-
gated. In Section 3.2, the genealogical links between Morrison’s two dictionaries
in phonetic transcriptions were discussed. In terms of dictionary content, the
overlaps between the two dictionaries emphasize the connections between them.
The first case study attempts to answer the question of whether Morrison
compiled the first dictionary of Cantonese by referencing any sources in terms of
the texts of the entries. The dictionaries that Morrison had access to for the Vocab-
ulary were very limited in the 1820s, so he had to consider using his Mandarin
dictionary as a reference. However, when it comes to Part II of the Vocabulary, it
was difficult for Morrison to compile a Cantonese-English vocabulary based on
his Mandarin and English dictionary (Part I & II, Zìdiǎn, and Wǔchē yùnfǔ) espe-
cially with regard to selecting and sorting the entries because the two dictionar-
ies differed in scales, systems of romanizations, and lexicographic units. Firstly,
the scales of the two dictionaries are very different. The Mandarin dictionary col-
lected respectively 47,035 Chinese entries (in Zìdiǎn) and 12,674 Chinese entries
(in Wǔchē yùnfǔ), whereas his dictionary of Cantonese only included 1,504 Chi-
nese entries (in the second part). Secondly, the two dictionaries arranged alpha-
[14] Rui Li
betically use different systems of romanizing Cantonese and Mandarin, which

made it difficult for Morrison to directly select Chinese entries for the Cantonese
dictionary based on the Mandarin dictionary. Moreover, the included units (the
lexicographic units of inclusion as entries) of the two dictionaries are different.
Morrison’s Mandarin dictionary (Part I & II) contains an individual Chinese
character as the entry headword, thus following the traditional approach in zìshū
字書. But later, Morrison chose to include Chinese words as entry headwords
when compiling the Cantonese dictionary (Part II).

However, as will be demonstrated below, Morrison based his Cantonese dic-
tionary (Part I) on the third part of his Mandarin dictionary, English and Chinese
(1822). The entries from the beginning, middle, and end of the first part of Morri-
son’s dialect dictionary (entries with the initial letters A, I, J, Q, and Y, 190 English
entries in total) are selected and respectively contrasted10 with the corresponding
entries in English and Chinese (1822). In the strict sense11, 161 entries (84.74%)
in the Vocabulary overlap with the entries of English and Chinese in terms of the
entry selection, as shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Overlap between Vocabulary (1828) and English and Chinese (1822) in terms of
entry selection
Number of entries in Overlapping entries with English Overlapping
Vocabulary (1868) and Chinese (1822) percentages
A 82 70 85.37%
I 57 48 84.21%
J 24 19 79.17%
Q 15 14 93.33%
Y 12 10 83.33%
Total 190 161 84.74%
In addition, though Morrison only included 2,321 English entries in the first
part of the Vocabulary, he collected many words that were not commonly used
10. When comparing entries, only the words using all capitals are regarded as the headwords.
11. In the broad sense, 177 entries (93.16%) in the Vocabulary resemble (or are derived from)
the corresponding entries in English and Chinese, as far as the entry selection is concerned, such
as “instalment” in English and Chinese and “instalments” in Vocabulary as below:
INSTALMENT or first period of payment, 初夘; 初限 (Morrison 1822: 231).
INSTALMENTS, 分年償還, Divide years pay. First, 初夘; or 初限. (Morrison 1828, Part I, no
page numbering).
but overlapped with the corresponding entries in English and Chinese, such as
“almanack”, “arrow-root”, “infanticide”. In Table 3, the entries with the initial letter
Q in Morrison’s two dictionaries are taken as examples in order to show the extent
to which the first part of the Vocabulary relied on English and Chinese (1822).
Table 3. The entries with the initial letter Q in Morrison’s two dictionaries
Entries Morrison (1828) Morrison (1822)
1 Quadrangle — QUADRANGLE, or quadrilateral figure,

containing four angles, 四邊線函四角形.
2 Quadrant QUADRANT, or Sextants, QUADRANT, amongst mathematicians, 勾
*
量天尺, Measure heaven 股.
cubit. Quadrants and sextants, 量天尺.
3 Quadrilateral — QUADRILATERAL figure, 四邊線形.
4 Quadruped — QUADRUPED, any four footed animal, 獸.
5 Quail QUAIL, 鵪鶉. QUAIL, 鵪鶉; shun is also written 𪂹. In
some places called 鵇母, and 鴽.
6 Quake — QUAKE with fear, 振怕.
7 Quality QUALITY or Sort, 等, or 品: QUALITY, or degree, 等; first quality, said of
有三等; 上中下, Have three goods, 上等; Middling quality, 中等; inferior
qualities, Superior, middling, or low quality, 下等. These all are good
inferior. The best quality, 上 qualities in the character of Leaou-kwan, 這
等. The very best quality, 頂都是笑官的好處.
上等.
8 Quantity — QUANTITY, what, how much? 幾多;多少;
若干. Quantity (or the measurement of it)
the principles of, 幾何原本.
9 Quarrel QUARREL, 相鬧. 相爭, QUARREL, dispute, 爭. Petty brawl, 拌嘴;
These expressions only refer 相罵.
to words. 相打, Denotes that To quarrel and fight, 爭竸; 爭鬦.
the parties have come to To excite a quarrel in the hope of getting well
blows. rewarded in the midst of it, 搆衅而圖其重
酬.
Not hitherto accustomed to quarrel with
people, 向來不曾和人拌嘴.
10 Quarrelsome — QUARRELSOME man, 好爭鬦的人.
11 Quarry QUARRY, 取石杯; 取石既 QUARRY, for stone, 石礦; 石山.
山.
[16] Rui Li
12 Quarter QUARTER, 四分之一, i.e. QUARTER, a fourth part, 四分之一.
four part’s one. Quarter of an hour, 時辰一刻.
On giving quarter in battle, a Tartar
manifesto to the Chinese runs thus, 凡我軍
所至有拒戰敗走爲我追擒者殺之不拒戰者
俘之 wherever our army comes, if any

persons oppose it, fight, are defeated and
run, when pursued and taken they are killed,
those who do not oppose nor fight, are taken
prisoners.
13 Quartz — QUARTZ, chrystals of, 白石英.
14 Quash — QUASH, or annul the decisions of an inferior
court, 駁案.
15 Quay QUAY, 海邊步頭, or 河邊步 —
頭, River side step head.
16 Queen — QUEEN, wife of an emperor, 后; 皇后.
The acts of government still originated with
the queen, 朝政猶出於后.
Queen of heaven, 天后, a goddess much
worshipped in China; she 昇化, ascended
and was transformed, about A. D. 971.
Queen bee, the Chinese call 蜜皇, the honey
emperor.
17 Quench QUENCH fire, 救火. QUENCH fire, 滅火; 救火.
Quench thirst, 解渴. To quench thirst, 解渴.
Distant water cannot quench fire that is near,
遠水救不得近火.
18 Question QUESTION, 問話, Asking QUESTION, to ask, 問.
words. Question and answer, A question, 問話.
問答. They say, 試問, try and Question, I’ll put one to try you, 吾試問爾.
ask. Question, to ask of, 推問.
19 Quick — QUICK, living, 活的. Swift, 速; 疾速.
Quickness of talent is expressed by 天才敏
捷.
20 Quickly — QUICKLY, come here quickly, 快些來.
21 Quicksilver QUICKSILVER, 水銀. QUICKSILVER, 水銀. Yin occurs written 硍;
汞.
22 Quiet QUIET, 安靜. QUIET, still, 沉靜. A quiet peaceable man,
恬靜之人.
Very quiet (said of people), 甚屬安靜.
Quiet comfortable state of rest, 平安的; 平穩
的. Quiet gentle disposition, 溫和的.
To become quiet and still, after a storm in

nature or of the passions, 平息了.
23 Quietism — QUIETISM, of the Taou sect is thus
expressed, 靜坐無思無念 ‘tranquil sitting,
devoid of thought, devoid of reflection;’ —
bodily quiet and mental abstraction.
24 Quill QUILL, Goose, 鵝毛, Goose QUILL, 翎; 羽翎; 羽毛.
feather.
25 Quinces QUINCES, 木瓜; 萬壽果. QUINCES, 木瓜.
26 Quinquefolium — QUINQUEFOLIUM. The Panax is always
quinquefolium, 人參皆有五葉.
27 Quire QUIRE of Paper, 一刀紙. QUIRE of China paper, 一刀紙.
28 Quisqualis — QUISQUALIS, or Quisqualis Indica, 使君子;
or 君子.
29 Quite — QUITE right, 正是.
Quite certain, 决定.
Quite good, 甚好; 狠好; 絶好; 萬好; 千萬
好.
Quite determined, 决定主意.
Quite sufficient, 儘彀.
30 Quiver QUIVER for arrow, 箭袋. QUIVER for the arrows of a hand bow, 箭室;
弓箭葫蘆.
31 Quote — QUOTE, to cite an author, 引書; 援引.
The names of persons quoted, 引用姓氏.
* The overlaps are marked in highlight (under a strict standard). The transliterations are all omitted
here in Table 3.
Table 3 contains 15 entries in Part I of the Vocabulary that start with the letter
Q, of which 14 entries overlap with the entries in Part III of the Dictionary of
the Chinese Language. The degree of overlap in the selection of entries is 93.3%.
Regarding the Mandarin and Cantonese equivalents or English phrases of the
entries, 11 out of 15 entries of Morrison (1828) referenced Morrison (1822) to
[18] Rui Li
some extent, as highlighted in Table 3. Although many Chinese equivalents in

his Mandarin dictionary do not apply to the Cantonese dictionary, Morrison
relied heavily on his E-C Mandarin dictionary in terms of the entry selection. We
may therefore conclude that the first part of Morrison’s Vocabulary was compiled
out of the third part of his Dictionary of the Chinese Language in Three Parts.
Morrison’s Mandarin dictionary greatly influenced his Cantonese dictionary for
the selection of the Chinese equivalents, the phrasal examples, and the entries,
but significant changes were made in the Cantonese dictionary. These included
providing Cantonese equivalents, editing the English definitions, eliminating the
archaic words/expressions, and simplifying the historical and cultural knowledge
and many of the phrasal/sentential examples.
3.4 Compiling part II by reversing Part I of the Vocabulary

The second case study examines whether the compilation of Morrison’s
three parts of the Vocabulary was carried out simultaneously and in what order
he must have compiled the three parts. By carefully comparing entries from Part I
and Part II of the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect, many overlaps can be identi-
fied. First, the entries from the beginning and end of the second part of Morrison’s
Vocabulary have been selected as sample entries, i.e., entries with the initial letters
A, C, U, W, and Y, 330 Chinese entries in total. Then, the Chinese headwords of
sample entries are mapped12 to the corresponding entries in Part I (1828), con-
trasting the Chinese headwords in Part II (1828) with the Chinese equivalents of
the corresponding entries in Part I of the same dictionary. The results can be seen
in Table 4. Among the 330 Chinese entries, 206 Chinese headwords in 206 entries
(62.42%) in Part II (1828) overlap with the 206 Chinese equivalents in the entries
in Part I (1828).
In terms of the entry selection of Part II, the high overlapping percentages
(> 50%) indicate that the first part of the Vocabulary was an important reference
for the second part. After completing the first part (1828) by using English and
Chinese (1822), Morrison reversed the first part and used it as a basis for including
Chinese entries, while adding new entries from other sources. The English def-
initions of the Chinese entries in Part II (1828) were also closely related to the
English translations of the corresponding Chinese equivalents in Part I (1828). To
illustrate this point, we take the Chinese entries (from the third page to the fifth
12. Affected by the arbitrary use of Chinese characters and the restrictions of printing tech-
nique, there were many wrongly written characters, variant Chinese characters, and misused
characters in the Vocabulary. At this point, the concept “overlap” is defined relatively loosely
and when comparing entries, the similar Chinese words in the above situations are regarded as
“overlaps”.
Table 4. Overlap between Part I and II of the Vocabulary

Number of entry headwords Overlapping Chinese headwords Overlapping
in Part II (1828) with Part I (1828) percentages
A 25 22 88%
C 142 93 65.49%
U 33 18 54.55%
W 36 20 55.56%
Y 94 53 56.38%
Total 330 206 62.42%
page starting from the dictionary content of Part II) with the character chá 茶
[tea] in Part II of the Vocabulary as examples, and then match them with the Chi-
nese equivalents with the character chá 茶 [tea] in Part I, as illustrated in Table 5.
Table 5. Entries with the character chá in Part I & II (1828)

Chinese equivalents with the
Items Entries with the character chá in Part II character chá in Part I
1 茶 CHA, 茶 * Tea. […]. ** TEA, 茶 Cha. […].

2 茶匙 Cha-che, 茶匙 A tea spoon. TEA SPOON, 茶匙 Cha che.
3 茶盅 Cha-chung, 茶盅 A Chinese Tea-cup. TEA CUP, of the Chinese, 茶盅
Cha chung. […].
4 茶葉 Cha-eep, 茶葉 Tea leaf. TEA, 茶 Cha. 茶葉 Cha eep, Tea
leaf. […].
5 茶花 Cha-fa, 茶花 The camellia Japonica. CAMELLIA, Japonica, 茶花 Cha
fa.
6 茶客 Cha-hak, 茶客 Tea merchant who goes to the MERCHANT, […]. Tea merchant
Hills. who goes to the hills, 茶客 Cha
hak.
7 茶行 Cha-hong, 茶行 Tea warehouse in Canton where —
the Cha-hak, Deposit their Teas.
***
8 茶几 Cha-ke, 茶几 A small stand or Table on which to STAND to place Tea on, 茶基
place Tea. Cha ke.
9 茶罐 Cha-koon, 茶罐 A tea canister of lead or tin. TEA CANNISTER, 茶礶 **** Cha
koon.
10 茶末 Cha-moot, 茶末 Broken leaves of Tea; Tea dust. TEA, […] Broken leaf, 茶末 Cha
moot, […].
[20] Rui Li
Chinese equivalents with the
Items Entries with the character chá in Part II character chá in Part I
11 茶壺 Cha-oo, 茶壺 A tea pot. TEA POT, 茶壺 Cha oo.
12 茶杯 Cha-pooy, 茶杯 A tea cup. TEA CUP, of the Chinese, […]
*****
Foreign, 茶盃 Cha-pooy.
13 茶箱 Cha-seong, 茶箱 A tea chest. CHEST, […] Tea chest, 茶箱 Cha-

seong.
14 茶船 Cha-shune, 茶船 Tea ship, a Chinese Sawcer. SAWCER of the Chinese, 茶船
Cha shune, Tea boat.
15 茶師 Cha-sze, 茶師 Inspector. INSPECTOR of Tea, 茶師 Cha
sze, […].
16 茶頭 Cha-tăw, 茶頭 The stalky part of Tea; […] —
17 茶仔 Cha-tsei, 茶仔 The broken refuse of Tea, –some REFUSE of Tea, 茶仔 Cha tsei.
is used to drink, and some for washing the hands.
18 茶桶 Cha-tung, 茶桶 The Chinese tea bucket. BUCKET, for Tea, used by the
Chinese, 茶桶 Cha tung.
19 茶油 Cha-yăw, 茶油 Tea oil. OIL, […]. Tea oil, 茶油 Cha yăw.
20 斟茶 Chăm-cha, 斟茶 Pour out Tea. POUR out Tea, 斟茶 Chăm cha.
[…].
* The overlaps (in a broad sense) are marked in highlight.

** Some information that is irrelevant is omitted by “[…]”.
*** Morrison sometimes uses variant Chinese characters to indicate the same characters in his Can-
tonese dictionary as well as in his Mandarin dictionary, so they are treated as the same characters in
Table 4 to facilitate the investigation on the genealogical study of Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect in
this article. The Chinese word “茶基” is a variant Chinese character of “茶几”.
**** The same as above. The Chinese word “茶礶” is a variant Chinese character of “茶罐”.
***** The same as above. The Chinese word “茶盃” is a variant Chinese character of “茶杯”.
The second column in Table 5 lists 20 entry headwords with the character
chá in Part II, the third column illustrates those twenty entries in Part II, and the
fourth column shows the corresponding entries in Part I (1828) in which the Chi-
nese (Cantonese) equivalents with the character chá 茶 [tea] are matched to the
third column. As shown in Table 5, 18 out of 20 entries with the character chá in
Part II overlap with the Chinese equivalents of the entries in Part I. This includes
the overlapping of the Chinese headwords/equivalents and the transliterations of
the Chinese characters, as well as the similarities in the English translation.
Part II (1828) includes only a few phrasal and sentential elements, some of
which overlap with the entries in Part I (1828). Here again, the entry chá 茶 is
taken as an example, as it contains the largest number of occurrences in Part II.

Morrison included 18 Chinese words as phrasal examples for the entry chá 茶
(such as 茶葉, 武𢑱茶, 大茶, 綠茶, 押冬茶, 工夫茶, 包種茶, 熙春茶, 正茶, 雨
前茶, 白毫茶, 屯溪茶, 小種茶, 小焙茶, 珠茶, 揀焙茶, 松羅茶, 皮茶). 10 out of
these 18 Chinese words could be identified in Part I (highlighted words). Morri-
son included additional entries referenced in his Wǔchē yùnfǔ (1819) and English
and Chinese (1822).13
We conclude that Morrison compiled Part II of his Vocabulary of the Canton

Dialect mainly on the basis of its first part, be it by selecting entries, providing
English definitions, or including examples. He reversed Part I, English and Chi-
nese (1828), and used it as a basis to add more entries and examples, and modify
the definitions. His using the second and third parts of his Mandarin dictionary
served to enrich the second part of the Vocabulary. The second part of Morrison’s
Cantonese dictionary, thanks to his effort in enlarging it, was more like an inde-
pendent dictionary than simply an index of the first part.
3.5 Compiling part III: Miscellaneous phrases from miscellaneous sources

Part III, entitled Chinese Words and Phrases, comprises about half of the
Vocabulary. On the first page of its 353-page wordlist, this part is also referred to
as “Miscellaneous Phrases”. According to the statistics, Morrison collected around
3,589 Chinese entries in this part,14 organized by subject matter. The entries are
arranged into 24 sections as follows:
1. Affairs of the world. 2. Astronomy, times & seasons 3. Birds and beasts. 4.
Colo[u]rs.15 5. Difficulties & distresses. 6. Diseases. 7. Drinking and eating. 8.
Feelings passions & c. 9. Fish. 10. Friendship. 11. Kindred. 12. Laughing and jest-
ing. 13. Letters. 14. Military phrases. 15. Names and characters of persons. 16.
Places. 17. Poverty. 18. Qualities of persons. 19. Quarrelling & railing. 20. Riches
and honors. 21. Theft and robbery. 22. Trade. 23. Utensils, furniture & c. 24.
Wicked banditti.
13. The entries with the initial letter C are taken as examples. There are 142 entries included
in Part II (1828), of which 49 entries do not overlap with the corresponding entries in Part I
(1828). 16 out of 49 entries overlap with the corresponding entries in Wǔchē yùnfǔ (1819) and
English and Chinese (1822).
14. According to Liáng & Qiū (2019: 38), the number of entries in Vocabulary of the Canton
Dialect was 6,996, including 1,899 idioms. According to Chén (2019: 85), the number of entries
in Part III is 3,639.
15. In the table of contents of Part III, the title of the fourth section was written as “COLORS”,
but in the dictionary, the title of this section was written as “COLOURS”.
[22] Rui Li
The entries in this part mainly consist of Chinese headwords (including translit-
erations and characters) and their English translations. The headwords of the
entries are mostly nominal words, phrasal and sentential idioms. The entries in
each section (or subject) are not arranged in a balanced manner. In some sections,
only dozens of entries were included (such as “Section IV. Colours”, and “Section
IX. Fish, insects & c.” ), whereas in some sections, dozens of pages were filled with
hundreds of entries (such as “Section I. Affairs of the world”). In some sections,
almost all the collected entries were idioms (such as “Section VIII. Feelings pas-
sions & c.” ), but in some sections, hardly any idioms were included (such as “Sec-
tion XXIII. Utensils, furniture & c.” ).
The arrangement of Part III according to subjects follows the approach of
Ěryǎ 爾雅 [Approaching what is correct]16 (Chén 2019: 86; Chén 2021: 257), but
Morrison does not directly refer to Ěryǎ. A comparison of the entries in Ěryǎ and
the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect shows that there are few overlaps between
these topics. No genealogical relations have been identified between the two dic-
tionaries. In the third case study, sources for a number of the entries in Part III
(1828) can be identified, by comparing them with the three parts of Morrison’s
Dictionary of the Chinese Language (including, Part I, Zìdiǎn 字典 in three vol-
umes [1815, 1822, 1823], Part II, Wǔchē yùnfǔ 五車韻府 in two volumes [1819,
1820], and Part III, English and Chinese [1822]) and the first two parts of the
Vocabulary (including, Part I, English and Chinese [1828], and Part II, Chinese
and English [1828]). Given that the entries in Part III (1828) include words and
idioms, and that idioms were missing from the first two parts of the Vocabulary,
two types of entries are examined here.
Table 6. Overlap between Part III (1828) and the Dictionary of the Chinese Language
Entries in Part III (1828) * Corresponding entries in source dictionaries

1 人無遠慮必有近憂 ** A CARELESS, 不用心; 不小心; 不仔細. […] Be who is careless
man if not concerned about distant evils, will have sorrows near at hand, 人無遠慮必
about what is distant, (or 有近憂. (Morrison 1822: 61)
future); will have (one day)
16. The Ěryǎ has 19 subjects, including 1) shìgǔ 釋詁 [explaining the old words], 2) shìyán
釋言 [explaining words], 3) shìxùn 釋訓 [explaining instructions], 4) shìqīn 釋親 [explaining
relatives], 5) shìgōng 釋宮 [explaining dwellings], 6) Shiqi 釋器 [explaining utensils], 7) shìyuè
釋樂 [explaining music], 8) shìtiān 釋天 [explaining heaven], 9) shìdì 釋地 [explaining earth],
10) shìqiū 釋丘 [explaining hills], 11) shìshān 釋山 [explaining mountains], 12) shìshuǐ 釋
水 [explaining rivers], 13) shìcǎo 釋草 [explaining plants], 14) shìmù 釋木 [explaining trees],
15) shìchóng 釋蟲 [explaining insects], 16) shìyú 釋魚 [explaining fishes], 17) shìniǎo 釋
鳥 [explaining birds], 18) shìshòu 釋獸 [explaining beasts], and 19) shìchù 釋畜 [explaining
domestic animals].

sorrow near (at hand). FUTURE, that will be hereafter, 後來; 將來. […] If people will
(Section I) not concern themselves about what is future, distress will
assuredly be present, 人無遠慮必有近憂 […]. (Morrison
1822: 183)
2 不三不四 Not three, not 不 8701. Not. 不得已, not can stop; […] 丨三丨四, not three, not
four; said of a person who four; neither one thing nor another; an unsteady person who
is irregular in his conduct; commands no respect. […]. (Morrison 1819: 684)
neither one thing for
another. (Section I)
3 言三語四 Say three, talk 七 10750. Seven. A surname. […]丨嘴八舌 [/] 言三語丨[四]
four; aperson [a person] seven lips and eight tongues; saying three and uttering four,
who talks wildly and denote inconsistent, incoherent verbiage. (Morrison 1819: 893)
irregularly. (Section I)
4 調戱成姦 To seduce and SEDUCE, or tempt to some vice, 挑唆; 挑弄; 引誘; 誘惑.
jest and complete illicit Seduce and commit adultery, 調戱成姦. (Morrison 1822: 381)
connexion.
5 目無法紀 Eye no law; 目[/]𥃦 7803. Originally intended to resemble the eye; the eye;
completely regardless of all that which directs; […]. 丨無法紀 to pay no regard to the laws.
law. (Section I) […]. (Morrison 1819: 600–601)
EYEBROWS, 眉; 目眉; 眼眉. […] No fear of the law before his
eyes, 目無法紀. […]. (Morrison 1822: 158)
LAWLESS banditti, 不法之徒. Viewing the law with disregard,
目無法紀. (Morrison 1822: 249)
6 鴆酒止渴 With poisoned 䧵[/]鴆 990. A certain bird said to eat serpents, which renders it
wine to quench one’s thirst; poisonous; its feathers steeped in any liquor are said to form a
To gratify avarice or strong poison. 䧵[鴆]酒止渴 to drink poison to quench one’s
passion with what is thirst; is applied to those who borrow money at exorbitant
wicked or illegal. (Section interest in order to supply temporary necessities. 丨毒 a deadly
I) poison. (Morrison 1819: 66)
7 勿以善小而不爲勿以惡小 LITTLE, small in extent, 小; […] Little virtues or vices, not to be
而爲之 Do not esteem any despised, 勿以善小而不爲. Don’t reckon any virtue little and
virtue small and neglect it; neglect to perform it, 勿以惡小而爲之. Don’t reckon any vice
nor any vice small and do small, and presume to do it. This sentence was first uttered by 昭
it. 烈帝 the emperor Chaou-lëě, A. D. 226. (Morrison
1822: 258–259)
8 同流合污 Go in the same 流 7189. From water and streamer, […] 同丨合汚, to join in in
stream and unite with the courses of the vicious, and to unite in their filthy practices.
filth; – one who has no […]. (Morrison 1819: 545)
[24] Rui Li

decision of character but
joins companions in vice,
in whatever they suggest.
9 謀事在人成事在天 To HEAVEN, 天. Heaven and earth, […] To plan is man’s, to effect is
plan rests with man; to heaven’s, 謀事在人成事在天. […]. (Morrison 1822: 204–205)
effect rests with heaven.

10 習慣自然 Custom 習 8971. From wings and white. […] 習丨自然, custom becomes
becomes nature; custom or nature.
habit being formed, 慣 6672. A heart or mind which has passed through affairs.
whether of virtue or vice Accustomed; having had experience of; practiced in. Formerly
makes it seem natural.
written with hand, as the following; now written with heart. 習丨
自然 custom becomes second nature. […]. (Morrison 1819: 498)
HABIT of doing, inveterate use. Habit becomes second nature,
習慣自然. […]. (Morrison 1822: 197)
* The transliterations are all omitted in this table.

** The overlaps of Chinese characters are marked in highlight.
Firstly, we have selected some entries from the first ten pages of “Section I”,
where most of the headwords are idioms (68 entries in total), and we have com-
pared them with the corresponding entries in the three parts of Morrison’s Dic-
tionary of the Chinese Language (1815–1823). We found that 10 out of the 68
entries in Part III (1828) overlapped with Part II (Wǔchē yùnfǔ 1819) and Part
III (English and Chinese, 1822) of the Dictionary of the Chinese Language, as
shown in Table 6. Not only do the Chinese idioms in Table 6 overlap, but some-
times the English translations of the same idiom resemble each other. It should
be noted, however, that the idioms in this part, especially those belonging to spo-
ken Cantonese, were collected by Morrison from other sources during his stay in
Guangzhou and Macao. Secondly, we have selected 50 entries from the first three
pages of “Section XXIII”. For these entries, most of the headwords were words. A
comparison with the corresponding entries in Zìdiǎn, Wǔchē yùnfǔ, English and
Chinese (1822), Part I (1828), and Part II (1828) allows us to identify some over-
laps, as shown in Table 7.
By comparison, 32 out of 50 entries in Part III (1828) overlap with the above
five sources, namely Zìdiǎn, Wǔchē yùnfǔ, English and Chinese (1822), Part I
(1828), and Part II (1828), among which 11 entries overlap with only one of them,
and 21 entries overlap with more than one of the sources. However, the sources
of 18 entries have not been identified. Unlike the first two parts of the Vocabu-
Table 7. Overlap between Part III (1828) and the sources

Entries
in Part
Source III
type (1828) Corresponding entries in source dictionaries
Singular 11 Only overlap with Part I (1828) 2
source Only overlap with Part II (1828) 3
Only overlap with Wǔchē yùnfǔ (1819) 2

Only overlap with English and Chinese (1822) 4
Multiple 21 Overlap with two or more sources (among Zìdiǎn [1815, 1822, 1823],
sources Wǔchē yùnfǔ [1819, 1820], English and Chinese [1822], Part I: English and
Chinese [1828], Part II: Chinese and English [1828])
Unknown 18 Unknown
sources
lary, the sources of most entries in this part are unknown. Most entries in the first
part (1828) had genealogical connections with English and Chinese (1822), and
more than half of the entries in the second part (1828) were derived from the first
part. Although the diverse sources of a portion of entries in Part III (1828) are
identified, the sources of the remaining entries are unknown and call for further
research.
Although Morrison compiled this Cantonese dictionary in a very short time,
the Vocabulary in three parts is undoubtedly not a copy of the Dictionary of
the Chinese Language (1815–1823). It contains a large amount of new material,
from phonetic transcription to entry selection, from the establishment of equiva-
lents to definitions. His entries were not only taken from his Mandarin dictionary
but also from other unknown sources. He may have collected them from some
locally written works, or from daily conversations and communications with his
servants17 or others. Morrison also ensured that the dictionary could meet the
various needs of users: the English-Chinese dictionary was intended mainly as
a collection of common words, which could meet the requirements of a basic
search; the Chinese-English dictionary aimed at collecting a large number of gen-
eral or mostly business-related words, instead of merely serving as an index of
the first part; finally, the fact of devoting the third part to idioms to some extent
created the precedent of the Chinese-English idiom dictionary. The compilation
17. Such as, “PRICE, for what, will you sell them to my Master, 妳買過我家主愛幾多價錢. I
want too [two] mace [= a monetary unit] each, 我愛二錢銀一隻.” (Morrison 1828, Part I, no
page numbering).
[26] Rui Li
process of the three parts reflected Morrison’s understanding of Cantonese lex-

icography, and consisted in designing a new Cantonese dictionary of a western
language by relying on the Mandarin dictionary, in arranging the Chinese entries
with Cantonese pronunciations by the reversal of an English-Chinese dictionary,
and in developing a system of romanized Cantonese derived from romanized
Mandarin.
4. Conclusions
Unlike most Catholic missionaries, who focused on Mandarin dictionaries
in diverse Western languages, Protestant missionaries paid more attention to the
compilation of dialect dictionaries in the English language. Since Morrison first
published a Cantonese-English dictionary, the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect,
several bilingual dictionaries in the English language have been published, includ-
ing not only Cantonese, but also Chinese dialects of Fujian, Shanghai, Ningbo,
Sichuan, and so on. As “the first bilingual Chinese dialect [Cantonese] dictionary
in a Western language” (Chien & Creamer 1986: 42), Morrison set an example
and reached the status of a reference work for later dictionaries in Western lan-
guages.
Little research has been conducted on how Morrison completed his first,
ground-breaking Cantonese dictionary. This article focuses on a rarely discussed
topic in Chinese lexicography in the nineteenth century, the genealogical relations
of the Vocabulary. The present research enriches the studies on the Vocabulary by
examining the sources Morrison drew on for his Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect,
the world’s first English-Cantonese/Cantonese-English bilingual dictionary. Our
study thus consitutes an exercise in Lexicographic Archaeology.
Concerning the Ěryǎ, which Morrison may have accessed and used, we con-
clude that he did not directly exploit it when he compiled the Vocabulary. On the
other hand, light can be shed on the compilation of the Vocabulary by comparing
the latter with Morrison’s Mandarin dictionary, as well as by comparing the three
parts of the Vocabulary.
The first questions we answer in this article are the following: (1) whether
Morrison compiled the first Cantonese dictionary by drawing on existing sources;
(2) what source(s) influenced his compilation; and (3) how the source(s) affected
his compilation of the Cantonese dictionary. After comparing Morrison’s system
of Cantonese romanization applied in the Vocabulary with the system of roman-
ized Mandarin he used in his Dictionary of the Chinese Language, we can con-
clude that the former was greatly inspired by the latter. His romanized Cantonese
was largely influenced by his Mandarin romanization, as testified by his selection
of the romanized phonetic letters, the non-distinction of aspirates for shēng 聲

and the unmarked diào 調.
Second, the article maps the entries in the Vocabulary to those in the Dictio-
nary of the Chinese Language, and identifies the genealogical links between them
through three case studies. Thanks to this analysis, we can establish that, there
being no Cantonese dictionary in Western languages available, Morrison made
repeated use of the second and third parts of his Mandarin dictionary, Wǔchē
yùnfǔ (1819) and English and Chinese (1822). Besides the romanization systems,
from a microstructure perspective, we can see that in elaborating his Vocabulary
of the Canton Dialect Morrison relied on his Mandarin dictionary, whether in the
choice of the entries, the selection of the equivalents/definitions, or the examples
and the translations.
Third, this article answers the question of whether Morrison compiled the
three parts of the dictionary simultaneously. Our case studies show that Morrison
did not compile the three parts concurrently. He first compiled English and Chi-
nese, Part I (1828) of the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect, primarily on the basis
of the third part of his Mandarin dictionary, English and Chinese (1822), partic-
ularly when it came to selecting entries. Then, he reversed the first part of the
Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect. He also drew on Wǔchē yùnfǔ (1819), Eng-
lish and Chinese (1822), and other sources for completing the second part of the
Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect. The first case study shows how Morrison began
his work on this Cantonese dictionary by using other source materials. This study
enabled us to establish genealogical links between the Dictionary of the Chinese
Language in Three Parts (1815–1823) and the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect
(1828). The second case study illustrates how he completed his bi-directional
vocabularies, namely, by the inversion of entries. The third case study shows his
great efforts in collecting idioms and providing translations for them. Thus, Mor-
rison used the Dictionary of the Chinese Language in Three Parts, in collecting
English entries, seeking equivalents, definitions, and phrasal examples, as well as
for the romanization of Cantonese. To conclude, what precedes shows that the
Mandarin dictionary played a quite significant role when Morrison undertook his
lexicographical work on Cantonese.
Further, Morrison was able to improve the English definitions and eliminate
the uncommon, literary, archaic expressions, and points related to historical
knowledge. He also simplified the phrasal and especially sentential examples, and
added plenty of Cantonese equivalents, as well as, in Part III, a wealth of Can-
tonese words and idioms. His method of reversing the English-Chinese dictio-
nary to a Chinese-English dictionary served as a model for other missionary
lexicographers, such as Walter Henry Medhurst (1796–1857), who faced a lack of
accessible materials. Lastly, Morrison’s contribution to Cantonese Romanization
[28] Rui Li
inspired current official Romanization. The contribution of Robert Morrison, the

compiler of the world’s first English-Chinese/Chinese-English dictionary and of
the first bilingual Cantonese dictionary in a Western language, to Chinese lexi-
cography in the 19th century cannot be overestimated.
FUNDING
This research has been supported by 2022 National Social Science Fund of China (Grant No.
22CYY038).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge my indebtedness to the two anonymous referees for their invalu-
able comments, which greatly help improve the manuscript. I also owe thanks to Hongting
Huang from Guangdong University of Finance & Economics for her assistance with documen-
tation. I am particularly grateful for the helpful comments given by Prof. Otto Zwartjes and
Jean-Michel Fortis from Université Paris Cité & Sorbonne Nouvelle, and James McElvenny
from the University of Siegen. Special thanks also go to the editors for their initial interest in the
article.
REFERENCES
Bigalke, R. Jon, Jr. 2011. “Morrison, Robert (1782–1834)”. The Encyclopedia of Christian
Civilization ed. by George Thomas Kurian. 1–2. New York: Wiley-Blackwell.
Bolton, Kingsley. 2001. “The Life and Lexicography of Robert Morrison (1782–1834)”.
Introduction to a Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect. Macao: East India Company Press.
[originally printed in 1828, London: Ganesha.]
Box, Ernest. 1904. “Morrison, Milne, and Medhurst. Three pioneers of protestant missions to
China”. The Chinese Recorder and Missionary Journal 35:2/3.79–89.
Broomhall, Marshall. 1924. Robert Morrison: A Master-Builder. London: Livingstone Press.
Chén, Kāngníng 陈康宁. 2019. “Mǎ lǐxùn de ‘Guǎngdōngshěng tǔhuà zìhuì’: dìyībù
yuèfāngyán zìdiǎn” 马礼逊的《广东省土话字汇》: 第一部粤方言字典 [Robert
Morrison’s Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect － the Earliest Cantonese Dictionary], Wǔyì
dàxué xuébào (shèhuì kēxué bǎn) 五邑大学学报（社会科学版） [Journal of Wuyi
University (Social Sciences Edition)] 21:3.84–88, 95.
Chén, Kāngníng 陈康宁. 2021. “Mǎ lǐxùn hé yuèfāngyán” 马礼逊和粤方言 [Robert Morrison
and Cantonese Dialect]. Nánfāng yǔyánxué 南方語言學 [South Linguistics] 1.256–263.
Chén, Xiǎomíng 陈小明 & Jìhóng Liú 刘继红. 2009. “‘Guǎngdōngshěng tǔhuà zìhuì’
chēngwèicí xuǎnshōu tèdiǎn duì quèdìng chēngwèi jiāoxué nèiróng de qǐshì” 《广东省土
话字汇》称谓词选收特点对确定称谓教学内容的启示 [Insights on determining
teaching content of appellations from the entry selection principles of appellations in
Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect], 人文叢刊（第四輯） [Humanities Series (dì sì jí)]
4.115–129.
Chén, Xiǎomíng 陈小明. 2017. “Chuánjiàoshì suǒbiān fāngyán cídiǎn de shōucí tèdiǎn yǔ
yuánzé —yǐ mǎ lǐxùn ‘Guǎngdōngshěng tǔhuà zìhuì’ wéilì” 传教士所编方言词典的收词
特点与原则—以马礼逊《广东省土话字汇》为例 [The Characteristics and Principles

of the Entry Selection of the Dialect Dictionary Compiled by the Missionaries: with
Morrison’s Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect as an example], Rénwén cóngkān 人文叢刊
（第十一輯） [Humanities Series (dì shíyī jí)] 11.1–10.
Cheng, Siu-Pong & Sze-Wing Tang. 2016. “3. Cantonese Romanization”. The Routledge
Encyclopedia of the Chinese Language ed. by Chan, Sin-wai. assisted by James Minett &
Florence Li Wing Yee. 73–88. London & New York: Routledge.
Chien, David & Thomas Creamer. 1986. “A Brief History of Chinese Bilingual Lexicography”.
The History of Lexicography ed. by R[einhard] R. K. Hartmann. 35–46. (=Studies in the
History of the Language Sciences, 40). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Coblin, W. South. 2003. “Robert Morrison and the Phonology of Mid-Qīng Mandarin”.
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland 13:3. 339–355.
Couling, Samuel. 1917. The Encyclopaedia Sinica. London: Amen Corner, E.G. Oxford
University Press, Humphrey Milford, Edinburgh, Glasgow, New York, Cape Town,
Toronto, Melbourne, and Bombay.
Daily, Christopher. 2012. “Robert Morrison and the Multicultural Beginning of Chinese
Protestantism”. Social Sciences and Missions 25.9–34.
Daily, Christopher. 2013. Robert Morrison and the Protestant Plan for China. Hong Kong:
Hong Kong University Press.
Dīng, Guówěi 丁國偉. 2007. “1828 nián zhì 1947 nián zhōngwài yuèyǔ biāoyīn wénxiàn
fǎnyìng de yǔyīn xiànxiàng yánjiū” 1828年至1947年中外粤語標音文獻反映的語音現
象研究 [Study on the Cantonese Sound Phenomena as Reflected in Cantonese Phonetic
Transcription Literature Published in Chinese and other Languages from 1828 to 1947].
PhD Dissertation: Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Gù, Chǎngshēng 顧長聲. 1985. Cóng mǎ lǐxùn dào sītú léidēng ──láihuá xīnjiào chuánjiàoshì
píngzhuàn 從馬禮遜到司徒雷登──來華新教傳教士評傳 [From Robert Morrison to
John Leighton Stuart: Critical biographies of Protestant missionaries to China].
Shanghai: Shànghǎi rénmín chūbǎnshè.
Hallihan, C. P. 2008. “Robert Morrison Bible Translator of China, 1782–1834”. Trinitarian
Bible Society Quarterly Record 585.11–28.
Hancock, Christopher. 2008. Robert Morrison and the Birth of Chinese Protestantism. London:
T&T Clark.
Hartmann, R[einhard] R. K. 1992. “Lexicography, with Particular Reference to English
Learners’ Dictionaries”. Language Teaching 25:3.151–159.
Hartmann, R[einhard] R. K. 2001. Teaching and Researching Lexicog-raphy. London:
Routledge.
[30] Rui Li
Hartmann, R[einhard] R. K. ed. 2003. Lexicography: Reference Works across Time, Space and
Languages. Vol. II. London: Taylor & Francis.
Hartmann, R[einhard] R. K. ed. 1986. The History of Lexicography. Papers from the Dictionary
Research Centre Seminar at Exeter, March 1986 (= Studies in the History of the Language
Sciences, 40). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Hayes, Ernest Henry. 1925. Robert Morrison: China’s Pioneer. London: Livingstone Press.
Huáng, Xiǎoyà 黄小娅, Lín Yīng 林英 & Xiǎoyáng Táng 唐晓阳. 2003. “Wǒguó zuìzǎo de
yuèfāngyán cídiǎn shùzìhuà xìtǒng shèjì yánjiū” 我国最早的粤方言词典数字化系统设
计研究 [Research on Designing Electronic Dictionary for the First Canton Dialect
Dictionary in our Country], Túshūguǎn lùntán 图书馆论坛 [Library Tribune] 3.59–61,
53.
Ilson, Robert. 1986. “Lexicographic Archaeology: Comparing Dictionaries of the Same
Family”. The History of Lexicography ed. by R. R. K. Hartmann, 127–136. Amsterdam &
Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Kurpaska, Maria. 2010. “Chapter 4. Chinese Historical Phonetics”. Chinese Language(s): A
Look through the Prism of the Great Dictionary of Modern Chinese Dialects, 15–24. Berlin
& New York: Walter de Gruyter & Mouton.
Lee, Chee Kong [ Lǐ, Zhìgāng] 李志剛. 2007. “Shítóu shuōhuà: mǎ lǐxùn mùshī bēimíng
kǎoshì” 石頭說話: 馬禮遜牧師碑銘考釋 [The Stones as Speaking: An Analytical Study
of the Epitaphs of Rev. Robert Morrison], Zhōngguó shénxué yánjiūyuàn qīkān 中國神
學研究院期刊 [China Graduate School of Theology Journal] 42.53–78.
Li, Rui, Zhang, Chun & Hai Xu. 2022. “A Genealogical Study of Kuang Qizhao’s An English
and Chinese Lexicon (1868)”. International Journal of Lexicography 35:4.491–508.
Li, Rui & Annette Skovested Hansen. 2018. “A Remarkable Compilation Shift: A Genealogical
Study of Medhurst’s Chinese and English Dictionary (1842–1843)”. Historiographia
Linguistica 45:3. 263–288.
Li, Rui & Annette Skovested Hansen. 2022. “Tracing References: Re-dating and Interpreting
Abel-Rémusat’s Chinese-French Dictionary Manuscript Dictionnaire Chinois”.
International Journal of Lexicography 35:3.342–363.
Liáng, Yìyún 梁逸云 & Chūn’ān Qiū 邱春安. 2019. “‘Guǎngdōngshěng tǔhuà zìhuì’ zhōng de
yuèyǔ shúyǔ yánjiū” 《广东省土话字汇》中的粤语熟语研究 [The Study of Idioms in
the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect], Lóngyán xuéyuàn xuébào 龙岩学院学报 [Journal
of Longyan University] 37:4.37–45.
Mǎ, Jūn 馬軍. 2004. “A Brief Study on the Translation of Western Military Ranks in Late
Qing”. Mapping Meanings: The Field of New Learning in Late Qing China ed. by
Michael Lackner & Natascha Vittinghoff. (= Sinica Leidensia, 64), 143–170. Leiden &
Boston: Brill.
Máo, Fāshēng 毛发生. 2004. “Mǎ lǐxùn yǔ ‘Shèngjīng’ hànyì” 马礼逊与《圣经》汉译
[Morrison and the Bible translation], Zhōngguó fānyì 中国翻译 [Chinese Translators
Journal] 4.50–53.
Morrison, Eliza. 1839. Memoirs of the Life and Labours of Robert Morrison, D.D., Compiled by
His Widow (Vol. I & II). London: Longman, Orme, Brown, Green, and Longmans.
Morrison, Robert. 1815–1823. Dictionary of the Chinese Language in Three Parts. Macau:
Printed at the Honorable East India Company’s Press. Part I, Vol, I. Zìdiǎn 字典 Chinese
and English arranged according to the radicals (1815). Part I, Vol, II. Zìdiǎn 字典 Chinese
and English arranged according to the radicals (1822). Part I, Vol, III. Zìdiǎn 字典 Chinese
and English arranged according to the radicals (1823). Part II, Vol, I. Wǔchē yùnfǔ 五車韻
府 [Erudition Syllabic Dictionary] Chinese and English arranged alphabetically (1819).
Part II, Vol, II. Wǔchē yùnfǔ 五車韻府 [Erudition Syllabic Dictionary] Chinese and
English arranged alphabetically (1820). Part III. English and Chinese (1822).
Morrison, Robert. 1828. A Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect. Macau: Printed at the Honorable
East India Company’s Press. Part I, English and Chinese (1828). Part II, Chinese and
English (1828). Part III. Chinese Words and Phrases (1828).
Ricci, Matteo. 1953 [1615]. China in the Sixteenth Century: The Journals of Matthew Ricci,
1583–1610 [De Christiana expeditione apud Sinas suscepta ab societate Jesu, 1615,
translated from the Latin by Louis J. Gallagher]. New York: Random House.
Ride, Lindsay. 1957. Robert Morrison: The Scholar and the Man. Hong Kong: Hong Kong
University Press.
Rutherford, T. Dixon. 1902. Cleaving the Rock: The Story of Robert Morrison, Christian Pioneer
in China. London: London Missionary Society.
Scott, Dorothea. 1961. “The Morrison Library: An Early Nineteenth Century Collection in the
Library of the University of Hong Kong”. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society Hong Kong
Branch 1.50–67.
Si, Jia. 2011. “Reprinting Robert Morrison’s Dictionary: Producers, Literary Audience, and the
English Language Market in Nineteenth-century Shanghai”. Frontiers of History in China
6.229–242.
Starr, J. Barton. 1998. “The Legacy of Robert Morrison”. International Bulletin for Missionary
Research 22:2.73–76.
Sū, Jīng 蘇精. 2000. Mǎ lǐxùn yǔ zhōngwén yìnshuā chūbǎn 馬禮遜與中文印刷出版 [Robert
Morrison and Chinese Printing and Publication]. Taipei: Táiwān xuéshēng shūjú.
Sū, Jīng 蘇精. 2014. Zhù yǐ dài kè: chuánjiàoshì yǔ zhōngwén yìnshuā biànjú 鑄以代刻: 傳教
士與中文印刷變局 [Replacing Cutting with Casting: The Protestant Christian
Missionary and the Transformation of Chinese Printing in the 19th Century]. Taipei:
Guólì táiwān dàxué chūbǎn zhōngxīn.
Townsend, William John. 1890. Robert Morrison: The Pioneer of Chinese Missions. London: S.
W. Partridge & Co.
Wàn, Bō 萬波 & Wòqí Zhēn 甄沃奇. 2009. “Cóng ‘Guǎngdōngshěng tǔhuà zìhuì’ kàn
èrbǎinián qián yuèyǔ gǔ zhī zhuāng zhāng jīng zǔ shēngmǔ de fēnhé lèixíng” 從《廣東
省土話字彙》看二百年前粵語古知莊章精組聲母的分合類型 [The Types of
Separation and Combination of the Initials ‘Groups Zhi 知, Zhuang 庄, Zhang 章, and
Jing 精’ of Cantonese 200 Years Ago in the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect], Nánfāng
yǔyánxué 南方語言學 [South Linguistics] 12:1.206–215.
West, Andrew C. 1998. Catalogue of the Morrison Collection of Chinese Books. London: School
of Oriental and African Studies.
Wu, Xian & Liren Zheng. 2009. “Robert Morrison and the First Chinese-English Dictionary”.
Journal of East Asian Libraries 147. Article 3. Available at https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu
/jeal/vol2009/iss147/3
[32] Rui Li
Xú, Wénkān 徐文堪. 2009. “Mǎ lǐxùn jí qí hànyǔ yánjiū jiǎnlùn” 马礼逊及其汉语研究简论
[Introduction to Morrison and his Chinese Research], Chuántǒng zhōngguó yánjiū jíkān
(dì liù jí) 传统中国研究集刊（第六辑） [Journal of Ancient China Studies] 6.322–327.
Yang, Huiling. 2014. “The Making of the First Chinese-English Dictionary: Robert Morrison’s
Dictionary of the Chinese Language in Three Parts (1815–1823)”. Historiographia
Linguistica 41:2/3.299–322.
Yeung, Man Shun. 2021. An American Pioneer of Chinese Studies in Cross-Cultural Perspective:
Benjamin Bowen Carter as an Agent of Global Knowledge. (= East and West, 12). Leiden
& Boston: Brill.

Yeung, Timothy Yiu-wai [ Yáng, Yàowēi] 楊耀威. 2007. “Mǎ lǐxùn shénxué sīxiǎng shùluè” 馬
禮遜神學思想述略 [An Introduction to the Theology of Robert Morrison], Zhōngguó
shénxué yánjiūyuàn qīkān 中國神學研究院期刊 [China Graduate School of Theology
Journal] 42.81–110.
Ying, Fuk Tsang [ Xíng, Fúzēng] 邢福增. 2007. “Dàménkǒu de chuándàozhě ──mǎ lǐxùn
chuánjiào sīxiǎng tàntǎo” 大門口的傳道者──馬禮遜傳教思想探討 [Evangelist at the
Gate: An Inquiry into Robert Morrison’s Mission Thought], Zhōngguó shénxué
yánjiūyuàn qīkān 中國神學研究院期刊 [China Graduate School of Theology Journal]
42.13–50.
Ying, Fuk-Tsang. 2012. “Evangelist at the Gate: Robert Morrison’s Views on Mission”. The
Journal of Ecclesiastical History 63:2.306–330.
Résumé
Le Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect, compilé par Robert Morrison (1782–1834) et publié à
Macao en 1828, fut le premier dictionnaire bilingue du cantonais dans une langue occidentale.
Cet article retrace la généalogie du Vocabulary en examinant les sources de Morrison. Il est
montré que Morrison a exploité les ressources procurées par les dictionnaires du mandarin et
le travail lexicographique entrepris sur le cantonais dans les années 1820.
Zusammenfassung
Das Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect, zusammengestellt von Robert Morrison (1782–1834)
und 1828 in Macao veröffentlicht, war das erste zweisprachige Wörterbuch des Kantonesischen
in einer westlichen Sprache. Dieser Artikel zeichnet die Genealogie des Vocabulary nach, indem
er die Quellen von Morrison untersucht. Es wird gezeigt, wie Morrison sich der Ressourcen
von Mandarin-Wörterbüchern und der lexikographischen Arbeit am Kantonesischen, die in
den 1820er Jahren durchgeführt wurde, bediente.
Address for correspondence

Rui Li
School of Foreign Studies
Guangdong University of Finance & Economics
21 Luntou Road
510320 Guangzhou
P. R . C h i n a
ruirui-880721@163.com
Publication history
Date received: 31 December 2022
Date accepted: 6 June 2023
Published online: 25 July 2023

From Mandarin To Cantonese Lexicography

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

From Mandarin To Cantonese Lexicography

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

From Mandarin To Cantonese Lexicography

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

From Mandarin to Cantonese lexicography

A genealogical study of Robert Morrison’s

The Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect, compiled by Robert Morrison

https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.00118.li | Published online: 25 July 2023

great emphasis on the description of major southern dialects in their dictionary-

2. Morrison’s Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect: A study in Lexicographic

彙 [Vocabulary of Guangdong Provincial Dialect]. The dictionary has 670 pages,

3. “The old language–dialect debate is of particular relevance to Cantonese, or Yue” that

in the whole dictionary, based on their Cantonese pronunciations. He devised his

2.2 Lexicographic Archaeology

3. A genealogical study of the Vocabulary of the Canton Dialect

3.2 The first Cantonese romanization system derived from Mandarin

(Morrison 1828: introduction)

eu / As the sound of eu in the French word Peu.

Morrison, in the “[p]owers of the letters” of his Cantonese dictionary, Vocab-

3.3 Identifying the source of Part I of the Vocabulary

betically use different systems of romanizing Cantonese and Mandarin, which

when compiling the Cantonese dictionary (Part II).

1 Quadrangle — QUADRANGLE, or quadrilateral figure,

俘之 wherever our army comes, if any

To become quiet and still, after a storm in

some extent, as highlighted in Table 3. Although many Chinese equivalents in

3.4 Compiling part II by reversing Part I of the Vocabulary

Table 4. Overlap between Part I and II of the Vocabulary

Table 5. Entries with the character chá in Part I & II (1828)

1 茶 CHA, 茶 * Tea. […]. ** TEA, 茶 Cha. […].

13 茶箱 Cha-seong, 茶箱 A tea chest. CHEST, […] Tea chest, 茶箱 Cha-

* The overlaps (in a broad sense) are marked in highlight.

taken as an example, as it contains the largest number of occurrences in Part II.

We conclude that Morrison compiled Part II of his Vocabulary of the Canton

3.5 Compiling part III: Miscellaneous phrases from miscellaneous sources

Entries in Part III (1828) * Corresponding entries in source dictionaries

Entries in Part III (1828) * Corresponding entries in source dictionaries

Entries in Part III (1828) * Corresponding entries in source dictionaries

effect rests with heaven.

* The transliterations are all omitted in this table.

Table 7. Overlap between Part III (1828) and the sources

Only overlap with Wǔchē yùnfǔ (1819) 2

process of the three parts reflected Morrison’s understanding of Cantonese lex-

of the romanized phonetic letters, the non-distinction of aspirates for shēng 聲

inspired current official Romanization. The contribution of Robert Morrison, the

特点与原则—以马礼逊《广东省土话字汇》为例 [The Characteristics and Principles

& Boston: Brill.

Address for correspondence

You might also like