In the May-June number of the China Review, J. ©. (the Revd. J. Chalmers, we Delieve) gives a somewhat too hasty review of the dictionaries prepared by order of the Emperor Kang-hi. We say too hasty, Because, although the subject is one with which Mr. Chalmers is intimately acquainted, and although the views put forward are of the highest value, the paper yet bears the marks of crudity in its preparation, Mr. Chalmers' positioning regard tothe proper method of alliterating the Chinese language may be learned from his already published papers in the same periodical, and the present one is intended to lead up to a table of initials and finals which he proposes to substitute for the ordinary phonetic and dialectic rendering made use of in our dictionaries, We have had to speak with so much approval of Mr. Chalmers' former efforts, that we are sorry to have to add that his evident haste has seriously affected the intelligibility of the present review, and that while we are entirely at one with him as to the possibility and advisability of a system such as he suggests, we do not find it so easy to connect his arguments with the review on Kang-hi's dictionaries, Morrison's dictionary, which is still the standby of the Chinese student, is in the main founded on the Tezotien of that monarch, a work valuable in the highest degree for the information it gives as to the meanings of the various words, but lamentably deficient in all philological knowledge. But besides the Tszotien, there is also the Pei-wan-yun-fu, with its supplement compiled by a different set of scholars, and more particularly devoted to an explanation of the sounds of the language. Founded in the main on four of the older rhyming dictionaries, so far as the compilers followed their authori-Mr. Chalmers tells us the Yun-fu or its epitome the Shiyun leaves little to be desired. Sometimes, however, leaving the old dictionaries, the editors ramble off on disquisitions of their own, and it requires little knowledge of what absurdities Chinese commentators can be guilty of, to imagine the result. Mr, Chalmers proposes to take the Pei-wan-yun-fu as a basis, and annotating it carefully from the older dictionaries, he conceives it possible to intro-duco a system of initials and finals applicable to the Chinese language as a whole, in contradistinction to the present system of merely alliterating a dialect, which has reached the height of confusion, and we may add philological inaccuracy, in the Peking Syllabaries of Mr. Wade and his followers. While so far we are entirely at one with Mr. Chalmers, we think system might be so much further simp! fied that the Chinese characters for initials and finals might be suppressed. We ha love for diacritical marks any more than himself, but in the case proposed they would lose many of the objections made against them elsewhere. For vowel sounds we would prefer the ordinary method used in alliterating Sanscrit, using the cireumflex to mark the long sounds, a matter of considerable importance, and only adding a letter to correspond with the French u, the German i High tones, as in Mr. Chalmers' dictionary, might be printed in Roman, low tones in Italics. Dr. Williamson's Tonic Dictionary shows how readily tone marks can be introduced. The juh sheng would in all cases be denoted by its proper letter, as more intelligible to the ordinary student than merely giving the tone class, The initials then alone could remain. Here on account of variations not being constant in the different dialects, number of subsidiary initials are added. Two sounds were given each of chand d? to suit the Fuhkien dialects, where one form assumes t, while the other remains instead as ch, Duplicate forms were given of and 2', but this is mainly to suit the northern dialects, where the k is softened to ch before various vowel sounds, As this change is constant, we think it might with advantage be omitted. The same duplication of h is noted for the same purpose, but the rule being equally constant and depending on the final, and not on the initial, the latter may fairly be left to take care of itself. The main difficulties then will be reduced to the vowel sounds of the guttural k, which, especially in Cantonese, seems to run wild, sometimes becoming an aspirate proper 'h, sometimes f, and even y. 'The lower s sometimes becomes ts' and the lower h and g are often dropped. The introduction above the line in small typo of the letter substituted would in such a case be, we imagine, simpler and equally in a philological point of view correct. We believe that in a few years hence it will seem almost impossible to believe that in the year 1874 Chinese scholars, with the means before them of entering on the study of the language as a whole, should have confined themselves to an imitation of one dialect, and that a dialect in a rapid state of disinte~ gration, Such, however, has unfortunately been the case. Mr. Chalmers as yet stands almost alone as the champion of the more intelligent system of binding all together in one common whole, As Mr, Chalmers' knowledge of Chinese is timate and accurate, we hope he will not confine himself to these papers, but that we may look forward, if not to a dictionary, at least to a word index of the lai guage founded on the principles he has put forth. As the basis of a really good dictionary, from which we seem as far off as ever, unless some students, with the knowledge and perseverance of Morrison, should arise amongst us, such an index would be invaluable, @utports,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.