The Chinese Folk Model of the Mental Concept of “Soul”: A Linguistic Perspective

Keywords: Chinese language; folk intuitions; mental concepts; soul; mind; mind–body holist position; weak mind–body dualism

Abstract

The paper focuses on specific intuitions associated with mental concepts—especially with the concept of the soul in Mandarin. The main objective is to seek the basic linguistic meanings that shape folk intuitions about the mental space in Chinese culture through a linguistic analysis performed on the selected data from modern Chinese language dictionaries, authentic language corpora, and literary works. First, we briefly describe the phenomenon of high-level synonymy in Chinese language, including terms for describing mental concepts. Next, we discuss the linguistic realizations of the concept of the mind as it is presumed to be interrelated with the concept of the soul. Then, we present a linguistic analysis of terms used to talk about the soul in Mandarin to show how the concept of the soul is reflected in this language. The analysis allowed us to demarcate the semantic boundaries of the “soul.” We found that the Chinese folk model of this concept distinguishes between two main conceptualizations: (1) the “soul” as an invisible and immaterial part of living creatures, which is not bound permanently to the body, and as a seat of emotions and thoughts, and (2) the “soul” as a quasi-independent spiritual being that shows much creative potential and is able to persist after the physical death of a person or animal. Although we found a tendency to separate the “soul” from the “body”, the “soul” is still functionally conceptualized in relation to the “body.” Accordingly, we provided linguistic evidence supporting the arguments against the radical mind–body dualist position and for the sake of the weak mind–body holism.

References

BFSU-C. Chinese language corpus of Beijing Foreign Studies University. Accessed April 6, 2018. http://www.bfsu-corpus.org/channels/corpus.

BLCU-C. Chinese language corpus of Beijing Language and Culture University. Accessed August 14, 2018. http://bcc. blcu.edu.cn/.

Bloom, Paul, & Frank C. Keil. 2001. “Thinking through language.” Mind and Language, 16 (4): 351–367. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0017.00175.

Brashier, Kenneth E. 1996. “Han thanatology and the division of ‘souls’.” Early China 21: 125–158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0362502800003424.

Cao, Wei (ed.). 2004. 现代汉语词汇研究 Xiandai Hanyu cihui yanjiu [A study on modern Chinese lexicon]. Beijing: Beijing Daxue Chubanshe.

Carruthers, Peter. 1996. Language, Thought and Consciousness: An Essay in Philosophical Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Casasanto, Daniel, Lera Boroditsky, Webb Phillips, Jesse Greene, Shima Goswami, Simon Bocanegra-Thiel, Ilia Santiago-Diaz, Olga Fotokopoulu, Ria Pita, David Gil. (2005). “How deep are effects of language on thought? Time estimation in speakers of English, Indonesian, Greek, and Spanish.” In Kenneth Forbus, Dedre Gentner, & Terry Regier (eds.). Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 186–191. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retrieved from http://csjarchive.cogsci.rpi.edu/proceedings/2004/cogsci04.pdf

Chen, Qi, & Hongfu Li (eds.). 2010. 康熙字典 Kangxi zidian [Kangxi Dictionary]. Shanghai: Shanghai Cishu Chubanshe.

Cohen, Emma, Emily R.R. Burdett, Nicola Knight, & Justin Barrett. 2011. “Cross-cultural similarities and differences in person-body reasoning: Experimental evidence from the United Kingdom and Brazilian Amazon.” Cognitive Science 35 (7), 1282–1304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01172.x

Dummett, Michael. 1993. The Seas of Language. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Flusberg, Stephen, & Helen Tager-Flusberg. 2006. “Autism, language, and the folk psychology of souls.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29 (5), 472–475. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1017/S0140525X06339106.

Gut, Arkadiusz. 2009. O relacji między myślą a językiem. Studium krytyczne stanowisk utożsamiających myśl z językiem [On the Relation between Thought and Language: A Critical Study of Approaches that Identify Thought and Language]. Umysł: Prace z Filozofii i Kognitywistyki. Lublin: TN KUL.

Han, Shaogong. 1996. 马桥词典 Maqiao cidian [A Dictionary of Maqiao]. Beijing: Zuojia Chubanshe. Retrieved from https://www.kanunu8.com/book3/7990/.

Han, Shaogong. 2003. A Dictionary of Maqiao. Translated by Julia Lovell. New York: Columbia University Press.

Jullien, François. 2007. Vital nourishment: Departing from happiness. Translated by Arthur Goldhammer. New York, NY: Zone Books.

Lakoff, George, & Mark Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1994. Writings on China. Translated by Daniel J. Cook & Henry Rosemont, Jr. Chicago: Open Court.

Lewis, Mark Edward. 2006. The construction of space in early China. SUNY Series in Chinese Philosophy and Culture. New York, NY: State University of New York.

Li, Beida (ed.). 2002. 牛津高阶英汉双解词典 Niujin gaojie Ying-Han shuangjie cidian. Oxford advanced learner’s English-Chinese dictionary. Beijing & Hong Kong: Shangwu Yinshuguan, Niujin Daxue Chubanshe (Zhongguo) Youxian Gongsi.

Lu, Xun. 1923. 吶喊 Nahan [Call to arms]. Beijing: Xinchao She. Retrieved from https://baike. baidu.com/item/%E8%8D%AF/2361462.

Lu, Xun. 1972. Selected stories of Lu Hsun. Translated by Gladys Yang & Yang Hsien-yi. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press. Retrieved from http://www.coldbacon.com/writing/ luxun-calltoarms.html#Medicine.

Lucy, John A. 2012. Language diversity and thought. A reformulation of the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mo, Heng (ed.). 2001. 当代汉语词典 Dangdai Hanyu cidian [A dictionary of contemporary Chinese]. Shanghai: Shanghai Cishu Chubanshe.

Mo, Yan. 1987. 红高粱家族 Hong gaoliang jiazu [Red sorghum clan]. Beijing: Jiefangjun Wenyi Chubanshe. Retrieved from http://m.shunong.com/xd/6582/.

Mo, Yan. 1994. Red sorghum. A novel of China. Translated by Howard Goldblatt. New York: Penguin Books.

Oxford English Dictionary. 2017. “Oxford English Dictionary Online.” Accessed August 14, 2018. http://dictionary.oed.com.

Regier, Terry, Paul Kay, Abrey L. Gilbert, A. L., & Richard B. Ivry. 2010. “Language and thought.” In Barbara Malt & Phillip Wolff (eds.). Words and the Mind: How words capture the human experience, 165–182). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195311129.003.0009.

Richert, Rebekah A., & Paul L. Harris. 2008. Dualism revisited: Body vs. mind vs. soul. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 8(1–2), 99–115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/ 156770908X289224

Santangelo, Paolo. 2007. “Emotions and perception of inner reality: Chinese and European.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 34 (2): 289–308. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6253.2007.00414.x.

Slingerland, Edward. 2013. “Body and mind in early China: An integrated humanities-science approach.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 81 (1): 6–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/lfs094.

Slobin, Dan I. 1996. “From ‘thought and language’ to ‘thinking for speaking’.” In John J. Gumperz & Stephen Levinson (eds.). Rethinking linguistic relativity. Studies in the social and cultural foundations of language, 70–96. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Wei, Dongya (ed.). 2003. 汉英词典 Han-Ying cidian. A Chinese-English dictionary. Beijing: Waiyu Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu Chubanshe.

Wierzbicka, Anna. 2006. “On folk conceptions of mind, agency and morality.” Journal of Cognition and Culture 6 (1–2): 165–179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/1568537067769 31286.

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1953. Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.

Wolff, Phillip, & Kevin J. Holmes. 2011. “Linguistic relativity.” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 2 (3), 253–265. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.104.

Yu, Ning. 2004. The eyes for sight and mind. Journal of Pragmatics 36: 663–686. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(03)00053-5.

Yu, Ning. 2009. The Chinese heart in a Cognitive Perspective: Culture, Body, and Language. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Published
2019-10-24
Section
Articles