The Six Principles of Chinese Characters (六書): Character Formation, Usage, and Semantic Development

Abstract

The Six Principles of Chinese Characters (六書, liùshū) constitute a traditional framework for explaining the formation, structure, and use of Chinese characters. The system comprises six categories: Pictographs (象形), Indicatives (指事), Associative Compounds (會意), Phono-semantic Compounds (形聲), Derivative Cognates or Reciprocal Explanation (轉注), and Phonetic Loans (假借).

In a widely adopted pedagogical classification, the first four categories primarily concern character formation, while the remaining two concern relationships among written forms, pronunciation, and meaning. Nevertheless, this division represents a later interpretation of the traditional framework rather than a universally accepted account of its historical origin.

This article examines the textual origins of the Six Principles, reviews the definitions presented by Xu Shen (許慎) in Shuowen Jiezi (說文解字), and discusses subsequent interpretations, particularly those associated with Zhu Junsheng (朱駿聲) and Wang Li (王力). Each principle is illustrated through selected Chinese characters, with attention to character structure, phonetic relationships, semantic development, and historical usage.

Special consideration is given to contested classifications involving 長 (cháng/zhǎng), 樂 (yuè/lè), 被 (bèi), and 沒 (méi/mò). The article also introduces phonetic substitution (通假) and semantic extension (引申義) as supplementary concepts essential to understanding historical Chinese writing.

Keywords: Six Principles; Liushu; Chinese characters; Chinese palaeography; Shuowen Jiezi; zhuanzhu; jiajie; phonetic loans; semantic extension.

---

1. Introduction

Chinese characters constitute a writing system with a long history of structural and functional development. Relationships among graphic forms, pronunciation, and meaning have changed over time, reflecting developments in both the Chinese language and the conventions used to represent it.

Chinese characters were not formed exclusively through the graphic representation of physical objects. Their development also involved the combination of meaningful components, the incorporation of phonetic indicators, and the borrowing of existing characters to represent additional words.

Traditional Chinese philology developed the Six Principles, or Liushu (六書), as a framework for explaining these phenomena.

However, the Six Principles should not be understood as a set of immutable rules. Their definitions and applications have been interpreted differently across historical periods, particularly in relation to Derivative Cognates (轉注) and Phonetic Loans (假借).

A systematic investigation therefore requires consideration of three related dimensions:

1. Graphic structure: How a character is constructed and how its components function.
2. Phonological relationships: How pronunciation contributes to character formation, borrowing, and differentiation.
3. Semantic relationships: How original meanings, extended meanings, and borrowed meanings are historically connected.

Accordingly, modern character forms and Mandarin pronunciations alone are insufficient for establishing the origins of Chinese characters. Historical scripts, textual evidence, and phonological research must also be considered.

2. Historical Origins and Development of the Six Principles

2.1. The term Liushu in the Zhouli

The term 六書 appears in the Zhouli (周禮, Rites of Zhou), specifically in the section Diguan Situ · Baoshi (地官司徒·保氏).

Original text:

乃教之六藝：一曰五禮，二曰六樂，三曰五射，四曰五馭，五曰六書，六曰九數。

(Translation: Six subjects were taught: the Five Rites, the Six Musical Arts, the Five Forms of Archery, the Five Forms of Charioteering, the Six Writings, and the Nine Methods of Calculation.)

Source: Zhouli, Diguan Situ, section Baoshi.^[1]

This passage identifies 六書 as an educational subject. However, the text does not explain what the six categories were or whether they corresponded to the principles subsequently described by Han-dynasty scholars.

Consequently, the occurrence of the term 六書 in the Zhouli does not establish that the fully developed Six Principles theory already existed in the form later associated with Xu Shen.

2.2. Systematization during the Han dynasty

In the Hanshu · Yiwenzhi (漢書·藝文志, Book of Han, Treatise on Literature), Ban Gu (班固) provides a more explicit classification.

Original text:

謂象形、象事、象意、象聲、轉注、假借，造字之本也。

(Translation: These are pictorial representation, representation of concepts, combination of meanings, representation through sound, derivative relationships, and phonetic borrowing; they constitute the foundations of character formation.)

Source: Hanshu, Yiwenzhi.^[2]

Xu Shen subsequently provided definitions and examples for the six categories in the postface to Shuowen Jiezi.

His sequence is:

1. 指事 — Indicatives
2. 象形 — Pictographs
3. 形聲 — Phono-semantic Compounds
4. 會意 — Associative Compounds
5. 轉注 — Derivative Cognates / Reciprocal Explanation
6. 假借 — Phonetic Loans

In Gudai Hanyu (古代漢語, Ancient Chinese), Wang Li discusses the historical development of this framework and the different terminology and ordering found in early sources.^[3]

For instructional clarity, this article follows the commonly used sequence: 象形, 指事, 會意, 形聲, 轉注, and 假借.

2.3. Classification of the Six Principles

A frequently used pedagogical approach divides the Six Principles into two groups.

This division is useful for teaching and analysis, but it should not be treated as the only historically valid interpretation. In particular, the status and scope of 轉注 remain subjects of scholarly debate.

3. Four Principles of Character Formation

3.1. Pictographs (象形)

3.1.1. Definition

Pictographs (xiàngxíng) are characters formed by representing the visible shapes of objects or entities.

Xu Shen defines the principle as follows:

象形者，畫成其物，隨體詰詘，日月是也。

(Translation: Pictographs are formed by drawing the objects themselves, with strokes following their physical contours, as in 日 and 月.)

Source: Shuowen Jiezi, postface.^[4]

3.1.2. Examples

Example 1: 日 — Sun

Early forms of 日 commonly resemble a circular or oval shape, sometimes containing an internal mark.

Through the development of the writing system, its pictorial structure became increasingly standardized, eventually producing the modern form 日.

Example 2: 木 — Tree

Early forms of 木 represent the basic structure of a tree, including the trunk, branches, and roots.

Its graphic origin is therefore closely associated with the physical object it represents.

Example 3: 馬 — Horse

Oracle-bone forms of 馬 exhibit recognizable features of a horse, including its head, body, legs, and tail.

Subsequent developments transformed these pictorial features into conventional strokes.

3.1.3. Characteristics

Pictographs possess an inherently visual basis. However, many pictographic characters have undergone substantial graphic transformation.

Consequently, their origins may no longer be recognizable from modern forms.

Reliable classification requires examination of early character forms, including oracle-bone inscriptions, bronze inscriptions, and seal-script variants.

3.2. Indicatives (指事)

3.2.1. Definition

Indicatives (zhǐshì) express concepts through abstract symbols or through additional marks placed on existing graphic forms.

Xu Shen states:

指事者，視而可識，察而見意，上下是也。

(Translation: Indicatives are recognizable upon observation, and their meaning becomes apparent through examination, as in 上 and 下.)

Source: Shuowen Jiezi, postface.^[4]

3.2.2. Examples

Example 1: 本 — Root

The character 本 can be analyzed as the form 木 with an additional mark identifying its root.

The added mark serves to identify a particular part of an existing object rather than depict a separate object.

Example 2: 末 — Tip

The character 末 similarly uses the structure of 木, with emphasis placed on the upper part.

The contrast between 本 and 末 illustrates how different concepts can be represented by marking different regions of the same graphic base.

Example 3: 刃 — Blade edge

The character 刃 is conventionally explained through the addition of an indicative mark to 刀, specifying the sharp edge of the blade.

3.2.3. Characteristics

Both Pictographs and Indicatives may employ simple graphic elements, but their principles differ.

Pictographs primarily reproduce object shapes, whereas Indicatives use graphic signs to identify positions, relationships, or abstract concepts.

3.3. Associative Compounds (會意)

3.3.1. Definition

Associative Compounds (huìyì) are formed by combining components whose meanings contribute to the interpretation of the resulting character.

Xu Shen defines the principle as follows:

會意者，比類合誼，以見指撝，武信是也。

(Translation: Associative compounds combine meaningful elements to express a particular concept, as illustrated by 武 and 信.)

Source: Shuowen Jiezi, postface.^[4]

3.3.2. Examples

Example 1: 明 — Brightness

A familiar analysis explains 明 as the combination of 日 $sun$ and 月 $moon$, representing brightness.

However, early forms of 明 and related variants exhibit more than one graphic structure.

Shuowen Jiezi records:

朙，照也。从月从囧。明，古文朙。

(Translation: 朙 means illumination. It is composed of 月 and 囧. 明 is an ancient form of 朙.)

Source: Shuowen Jiezi, entry 朙; see also the Multi-function Chinese Character Database of the Chinese University of Hong Kong.^[5]

Thus, the explanation 日 + 月 is appropriate for discussing a traditional associative analysis, but it should not be presented as the only historical configuration of the character.

Example 2: 休 — Rest

The character 休 combines a human figure with the representation of a tree.

Traditionally, this arrangement is understood as depicting a person resting beside a tree.

Example 3: 林 and 森

The repetition of 木 produces compounds representing concentrations of trees.

• 木: tree.
• 林: grove or forest.
• 森: dense forest.

These examples illustrate the use of semantically related components to express a broader or intensified concept.

3.3.3. Characteristics

The defining feature of Associative Compounds is the semantic contribution of their components.

Nevertheless, the mere presence of multiple components does not establish that a character belongs to this category.

If one component primarily indicates pronunciation, the character may instead be phono-semantic.

3.4. Phono-semantic Compounds (形聲)

3.4.1. Definition

Phono-semantic Compounds (xíngshēng) combine a component associated with meaning and another associated with pronunciation.

Xu Shen states:

形聲者，以事為名，取譬相成，江河是也。

(Translation: Phono-semantic characters are formed by selecting a component related to the meaning of the word and combining it with a component that suggests pronunciation, as in 江 and 河.)

Source: Shuowen Jiezi, postface.^[4]

The two principal components are commonly called:

• Semantic component (形符): Indicates a broad semantic category.
• Phonetic component (聲符): Provides information about pronunciation or historical phonological affiliation.

3.4.2. Examples

Example 1: 媽 — Mother

The character 媽 consists of 女 and 馬.

女 contributes the semantic association with women and motherhood, while 馬 functions as the phonetic component.

In modern Mandarin:

• 馬: mǎ.
• 媽: mā.

The syllables share their consonant and vowel structure but differ in tone.

This illustrates that phonetic components do not necessarily preserve identical modern pronunciations.

Example 2: 清, 晴, and 請

These characters share 青 as their phonetic component.

Their phonological similarities illustrate the contribution of 青, while their semantic components help identify their respective meanings.

Example 3: 銅 — Copper

銅 comprises 金, associated with metals, and 同, which suggests the pronunciation tóng.

3.4.3. Characteristics

The combination of phonetic and semantic components provides a productive mechanism for character formation.

However, phonological changes over time may obscure relationships between a character and its phonetic component.

Historical phonology is therefore important when studying phono-semantic structures.

4. Two Principles of Character Usage

4.1. Derivative Cognates and Reciprocal Explanation (轉注)

4.1.1. Traditional definition

The interpretation of 轉注 (zhuǎnzhù) remains one of the most debated questions in traditional Chinese character theory.

Xu Shen defines it as follows:

轉注者，建類一首，同意相受，考老是也。

(Translation: Zhuanzhu concerns characters grouped within a common category whose meanings are mutually related or can explain one another, as in 考 and 老.)

Source: Shuowen Jiezi, postface.^[4]

The expressions 建類一首 and 同意相受 have been interpreted in different ways.

Consequently, the category cannot be reduced to a single universally accepted definition.

4.1.2. Major interpretations

Wang Li discusses three influential explanations in the section on character structure in Gudai Hanyu.^[3]

Zhu Junsheng proposes in Shuowen Tongxun Dingsheng (說文通訓定聲):

轉注者，體不改造，引意相受，令長是也。

(Translation: Zhuanzhu occurs when a character's graphic form is not newly constructed, while related meanings develop and are transmitted through semantic extension, as in 令 and 長.)

Wang Li discusses this position and regards it as having a defensible theoretical basis.^[3]

Zhu Junsheng's interpretation broadens the scope of Zhuanzhu beyond relationships between two separate character forms.

It also allows scholars to examine semantic developments within a single graphic form.

4.1.3. Type I: A shared graphic form with related pronunciations and meanings

Under the semantic-extension interpretation, an existing character may develop additional meanings without requiring a new graphic form.

In certain cases, these developments are associated with different pronunciations.

Example 1: 長 — cháng and zhǎng

The meanings of 長 can be examined in relation to spatial extent, temporal duration, age, maturity, and seniority.

A simplified semantic relationship may be represented as:

Length or duration → growth and age → seniority or leadership.

This represents an interpretive relationship among meanings, not a fully established chronological sequence.

The theoretical classification of 長 differs among scholars.

Xu Shen and the phonetic-loan interpretation

Xu Shen lists 長 alongside 令 as an example of 假借.

Duan Yucai (段玉裁), in his commentary on Shuowen Jiezi, discusses the original meanings of these characters and their application to administrative titles.

Under this interpretation, the use of 長 for an official title can be explained through character borrowing.

Zhu Junsheng and the semantic-extension interpretation

Zhu Junsheng instead emphasizes the semantic relationship among meanings associated with 長.

He consequently treats 長 as an example appropriate for Zhuanzhu rather than limiting it to the phonetic-loan category.

Wang Li's discussion

Wang Li presents the competing interpretations and recognizes that Zhu Junsheng's explanation is not without justification.

Therefore, 長 cannot be classified solely by observing that modern Mandarin has the readings cháng and zhǎng.

The classification depends on the historical relationship between the meanings, the status of the recorded words, and the theoretical framework applied.

The fact that Xu Shen cited 考 and 老 as examples of Zhuanzhu does not imply that all other examples must be excluded.

Example 2: 樂 — yuè and lè

Early forms of 樂 are associated with musical instruments.

The character subsequently came to be used with meanings connected to music and enjoyment.

The semantic relationship can be summarized as:

Musical instruments → music → enjoyment or pleasure.

The Multi-function Chinese Character Database documents the early forms and related meanings of 樂.^[6]

Under a semantic-extension approach, 樂 can illustrate the development of related meanings within the same graphic form.

However, this is an application of a later interpretive theory. It should not be attributed to Xu Shen as one of his explicit Zhuanzhu examples.

Moreover, historical relationships between yuè and lè require phonological evidence; the simplified semantic sequence alone does not establish the complete history of the two readings.

4.1.4. Type II: Related meanings expressed by different characters

Example: 老 and 考

Shuowen Jiezi records:

老，考也。

(Translation: 老 may be explained through 考.)

考，老也。

(Translation: 考 may be explained through 老.)

Source: Shuowen Jiezi, entries 老 and 考.^[7]

The reciprocal explanations demonstrate a relationship of semantic correspondence.

This example forms the traditional basis for the reciprocal-glossing interpretation of Zhuanzhu.

The modern use of 考 in words such as 考試 (kǎoshì, examination) should not be substituted for its historical meaning when analyzing this relationship.

4.1.5. Assessment

Zhuanzhu has been explained through graphic classification, reciprocal semantic relationships, and semantic extension.

The choice of examples must therefore be consistent with the theory being applied.

Multiple pronunciations and meanings can provide useful evidence, but they are not sufficient on their own to establish Zhuanzhu.

4.2. Phonetic Loans (假借)

4.2.1. Definition

Phonetic borrowing (jiǎjiè) involves the use of an existing written character to represent another word on the basis of phonological similarity.

One textual version of Xu Shen's definition reads:

假借者，本無其事，依聲託事，令長是也。

(Translation: Jiajie involves using an existing character to represent an expression through its sound when no corresponding written representation is available, as illustrated by 令 and 長.)

Source: Shuowen Jiezi, postface.^[4]

A related textual form reads:

假借者，本無其字，依聲託事，令長是也。

(Translation: Jiajie occurs when a word originally lacks a dedicated written character and an existing character is borrowed on phonetic grounds.)

The difference between 本無其事 and 本無其字 is a textual matter requiring attention to the edition cited. Neither wording should be silently substituted for the other.

The central mechanism is the phonetic relationship between the word originally associated with the written form and the word subsequently recorded using that form.

4.2.2. Examples

These examples do not all demonstrate the same historical mechanism with equal certainty.

The first three are especially useful in discussions of phonetic borrowing. The cases of 被 and 沒 require additional consideration of semantic change and grammaticalization.

4.2.3. 萬 — From scorpion imagery to a numeral

Early forms of 萬 are associated with the image of a scorpion.

The character was subsequently used to represent the numeral ten thousand.

Its original animal-related meaning was later represented through other written forms, including 蠆.

This development illustrates how a character's graphic origin may be unrelated to the meaning of the word for which it is subsequently borrowed.

The Multi-function Chinese Character Database discusses 萬 as an example of phonetic borrowing.^[8]

4.2.4. 來 — From a cereal plant to the verb "come"

Early graphic forms of 來 represent a wheat-like cereal plant.

The character later came to represent the word meaning "come" or "arrive."

Its plant-related meaning was subsequently recorded using 麥.

Duan Yucai explains:

本無來往字，取來麥字為之。

(Translation: There was originally no dedicated character for the meaning of coming and going, so the character 來, associated with wheat, was borrowed.)

Source: Shuowen Jiezi Zhu, in the discussion of phonetic borrowing.^[9]

This example demonstrates the distinction between the origin of a graphic form and its later function in writing.

4.2.5. 其 — From a winnowing implement to grammatical functions

Early forms of 其 are associated with an implement used for winnowing grain.

The character was subsequently used to represent pronouns and other grammatical words.

This illustrates how phonetic borrowing enabled existing characters to record abstract grammatical expressions that were difficult to represent pictorially.^[10]

4.2.6. 自 — From nose to self-reference

The ancient graphic form of 自 represents a nose.

The character later came to express meanings such as "oneself" and "self."

The original meaning associated with the nose came to be represented primarily by 鼻.

However, the historical development of 自 also raises questions concerning the boundary between phonetic borrowing and semantic extension.

Its classification should therefore be considered in relation to historical usage and etymological evidence, rather than treating every associated meaning as necessarily arising through borrowing.^[11]

4.2.7. 被 — Lexical meaning and grammaticalization

被 is a phono-semantic character consisting of:

• 衤: A component associated with clothing and covering.
• 皮: A phonetic component.

Its early meanings include quilt, covering, and related objects.

Over time, 被 acquired verbal meanings associated with covering, undergoing, or experiencing an action.

It subsequently developed grammatical functions associated with passive constructions.

A simplified developmental relationship is:

Covering → covering or wearing → undergoing an action → passive marking.

This process is relevant to the historical study of grammaticalization.

Nevertheless, the presence of a semantic relationship between these meanings means that the development cannot automatically be classified in its entirety as phonetic borrowing.

Semantic extension and grammaticalization must also be considered.^[12]

4.2.8. 沒 — From submersion to negation

Modern Mandarin uses two common pronunciations of 沒.

Shuowen Jiezi records:

沒，沈也。从水从𠬸。

(Translation: 沒 means to sink or submerge. Its graphic structure comprises 水 and 𠬸.)

Source: Shuowen Jiezi, entry 沒.^[13]

The development of 沒 as a negative expression involves issues of historical semantics, phonology, and grammatical usage.

The existence of the modern readings méi and mò alone does not establish that the development resulted from phonetic borrowing.

A conclusive analysis requires historical evidence concerning the emergence and spread of the negative construction.

4.2.9. Assessment

Phonetic borrowing allowed existing Chinese characters to record additional words without requiring an entirely new written form in every case.

However, a character's acquisition of new meanings does not necessarily constitute borrowing.

Semantic extension, phonological differentiation, lexical borrowing, and grammaticalization may produce superficially similar outcomes.

These mechanisms must therefore be examined separately.

5. Relationships Among the Six Principles

The principal mechanisms may be summarized as follows.

These principles do not constitute six consecutive stages in the historical development of Chinese writing.

A single character may be relevant to more than one principle when its original formation and later usage are examined separately.

For example, 萬 has a pictorial origin associated with a scorpion but subsequently came to represent a numeral through phonetic borrowing.

Thus, character formation and character usage are related but distinct levels of analysis.

6. Conclusion

The Six Principles constitute an influential framework in the history of Chinese philology and character studies.

They provide a foundation for examining graphic structure, semantic components, phonetic indicators, and relationships among written forms and the words they represent.

Pictographs, Indicatives, Associative Compounds, and Phono-semantic Compounds primarily concern character formation. Zhuanzhu and Jiajie address more complex relationships involving usage, phonology, and semantic development.

The historical interpretation of Zhuanzhu illustrates the continuing development of traditional Chinese character theory beyond Xu Shen.

Scholars such as Dai Zhen and Zhu Junsheng proposed different explanations based on reciprocal glossing and semantic extension.

The case of 長 demonstrates why the interpretation of a character cannot be determined exclusively from a single classical example or from modern pronunciation.

Likewise, the cases of 樂, 被, and 沒 demonstrate the importance of distinguishing phonetic borrowing from semantic extension and grammaticalization.

Xu Shen's contribution should therefore be understood as a foundational systematization of Chinese character theory rather than the final resolution of every question concerning character formation and usage.

Modern investigations benefit from integrating early written forms, historical phonology, semantic analysis, and textual evidence.

---

7. Supplementary Concepts: Phonetic Substitution and Semantic Extension

7.1. Phonetic Substitution (通假)

7.1.1. Definition

Phonetic substitution (tōngjiǎ) refers to the use of one character to represent a word normally associated with another character, generally on the basis of identical or similar pronunciation.

Under a narrow definition, the word already possesses a recognized written form.

The substitute is termed a 通假字 (tōngjiǎzì), while the established written form is called the 本字 (běnzì).

7.1.2. Examples

Example 1: The Analects, Xue Er (論語·學而)

學而時習之，不亦說乎？

(Translation: Is it not a pleasure to study and regularly review what one has learned?)

Here, 說 is understood with a pronunciation and meaning corresponding to 悅 (yuè, pleased or joyful).

Example 2: Book of Rites, Nei Ze (禮記·內則)

孺子蚤寢晏起。

(Translation: Young children go to bed early and rise late.)

Here, 蚤 is used with the value associated with 早, meaning "early."

7.1.3. Relationship between Tongjia and Jiajie

Both phonetic substitution and phonetic borrowing depend on relationships involving sound.

Under a commonly used narrow distinction:

• Jiajie (假借): An existing character is borrowed when a word does not yet have a dedicated written form.
• Tongjia (通假): Another character is used in place of an established character.

However, this distinction depends on the historical availability of the relevant written forms.

Under a broader conception of phonetic borrowing, Tongjia can be treated as a type of Jiajie.^[8]

7.2. Semantic Extension (引申義)

7.2.1. Definition

Semantic extension (yǐnshēnyì) refers to the development of additional meanings from an earlier meaning of a word.

Wang Li explains in Gudai Hanyu, "The Original and Extended Meanings of Words":

所謂引申義，是從本義「引申」出來的，即從本義發展出來的。

(Translation: An extended meaning is a meaning derived from the original meaning; that is, a meaning that develops from it.)

Source: Wang Li, Gudai Hanyu, General Discussion IV.^[14]

Three related concepts should be distinguished:

• Original meaning (本義): An early meaning that can be established from historical evidence.
• Extended meaning (引申義): A meaning that develops through a semantic relationship with an earlier meaning.
• Borrowed meaning (假借義): A meaning associated with a character because that character has been borrowed to represent another word.

7.2.2. Example 1: 向 — Direction

Shuowen Jiezi defines 向 as:

向，北出牖也。

(Translation: 向 refers to a window opening toward the north.)

From this concrete spatial meaning, 向 developed meanings associated with orientation, facing, and direction.

The development illustrates how a word referring to a particular physical feature may acquire a broader spatial meaning.^[14]

7.2.3. Example 2: 道 — Path and principle

道 originally denotes a road or path in one of its principal early uses.

It subsequently acquired broader meanings, including method, principle, doctrine, and the proper way of conducting oneself.

The Book of Songs, Qin Feng, Jian Jia (詩經·秦風·蒹葭):

道阻且長。

(Translation: The road is difficult and long.)

The Analects, Li Ren (論語·里仁):

朝聞道，夕死可矣。

(Translation: If one comes to understand the Way in the morning, one may die in the evening without regret.)

The first passage uses 道 in a concrete spatial sense, while the second employs it in an abstract philosophical sense.

These usages illustrate the development of related meanings within the history of a word.

7.2.4. Relationship between Semantic Extension and Zhuanzhu

In Zhu Junsheng's interpretation of Zhuanzhu, semantic extension plays an important theoretical role.

Related meanings may develop without the creation of a new graphic form.

Characters such as 長 can therefore be examined from the perspective of semantic extension.

Nevertheless, semantic extension is a general process of language change, whereas Zhuanzhu is a category within a particular traditional writing theory.

The two concepts are closely related in some interpretations but are not universally equivalent.

7.3. Comparison of Supplementary Concepts

These concepts operate at different analytical levels.

Zhuanzhu and Jiajie belong to the traditional Six Principles framework. Tongjia concerns the substitution of written forms, while semantic extension describes the historical development of word meanings.

---

Appendix A. Glossary of Technical Terms

Appendix B. References and Further Reading

B.1. Classical Sources

[1] Zhouli (周禮), Diguan Situ · Baoshi (地官司徒·保氏).

A classical source mentioning 六書 as part of an educational curriculum.

https://zh.wikisource.org/zh-hant/周禮/地官司徒

[2] Ban Gu (班固). Hanshu (漢書), Yiwenzhi (藝文志).

A major Han-dynasty source describing the Six Principles as foundational categories of Chinese writing.

https://ctext.org/han-shu/yi-wen-zhi/zh

[3] Xu Shen (許慎). Shuowen Jiezi (說文解字), Postface (敘), Volume 15.

The principal classical source for the traditional definitions and examples of the Six Principles.

https://zh.wikisource.org/zh-hant/說文解字/15

[4] Duan Yucai (段玉裁). Shuowen Jiezi Zhu (說文解字注).

An influential Qing-dynasty commentary on Shuowen Jiezi, especially relevant to phonetic borrowing, character interpretation, and semantic relationships.

B.2. Philological and Linguistic Studies

[5] Wang Li (王力). Gudai Hanyu (古代漢語, Ancient Chinese).

Relevant sections:

• 古漢語通論（四）：詞的本義和引申義 — Original and Extended Meanings of Words.
• 古漢語通論（五）：漢字的構造 — The Structure of Chinese Characters.

Online references:

https://www.shicihui.com/zh-tw/book/gudaihanyu/239504

https://www.shicihui.com/zh-tw/book/gudaihanyu/239505

[6] Zhu Junsheng (朱駿聲). Shuowen Tongxun Dingsheng (說文通訓定聲).

An influential work relevant to the interpretation of Zhuanzhu through semantic extension and relationships among words and written forms.

[7] Qiu Xigui (裘錫圭). Wenzixue Gaiyao (文字學概要, Outline of Writing Studies). Commercial Press (商務印書館), 1988.

A major modern study of Chinese character structure, historical development, and phonetic borrowing.

[8] Zhang Taiyan (章太炎). Guogu Lunheng (國故論衡), section Zhuanzhu Jiajie Shuo (轉注假借說).

A supplementary historical study of theoretical relationships between Zhuanzhu and Jiajie.

B.3. Character Databases and Research Resources

[9] The Chinese University of Hong Kong. Multi-function Chinese Character Database (漢語多功能字庫).

A reference resource providing early character forms, historical character structures, semantic information, and supporting textual evidence.

https://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-mf/

Selected character entries:

• 明 — Bright
• 來 — Come
• 其 — Pronoun and related usages
• 自 — Self
• 樂 — Music; joy
• 被 — Covering; passive marker
• 沒 — Sink; negation

B.4. Textual Variants and Citation Methodology

The definition of Jiajie is transmitted in textual forms containing either 本無其事 or 本無其字.

The version of the Shuowen Jiezi postface consulted on Wikisource reads:

假借者，本無其事，依聲託事，令長是也。

(Translation: Phonetic borrowing involves using an existing character on the basis of sound when no corresponding written representation is available, as illustrated by 令 and 長.)

The form 本無其字 also appears in textual transmission associated with Shuowen Jiezi Zhu.

The difference should be recorded as a textual variant rather than silently corrected. Establishing priority between the readings requires further comparison of authoritative editions and manuscript or printed witnesses.

For all quotations in this article, Classical Chinese passages are presented in traditional characters, followed immediately by English translations in parentheses.

Where exact page numbers of printed editions have not been established, references identify the relevant chapter, section, or dictionary entry instead.

A publication requiring page-specific academic citations should adopt a fixed edition of each work and complete the corresponding bibliographic information.

---

Notes