Chinese and Sumerian

INITIAL AND FINAL SOUNDS, ETC. 5

Take another instance, )¥ ho, fire, was formerly ka, as we learn again from the Japanese pronunciation; and the Mongol gal, fire, again suggests the loss of a final dental (Mongol 1 = Chinese t), Thus kat, or gat, emerges as the oldest form of the Chinese word for fire. But instead of a guttural initial, the dialects present a labial sound; Cantonese and Hakka fo, Wenchow fu, implying an earlier pa, ba: others exhibit transitional sounds, Mandarin hwo, Fuchau hwi; cf Korean and Annamite hwa (ga = gwa = wa). The Chinese sounds, therefore, appear to suggest gat (gal) and bat (bal) as their biform original. Now the Sumerian character for fire was read IZ (from GIZ, GAZ; GUZ, cf USSI), IZI, fire; and BI, to kindle, to flare up; and PIL (from BIL, BAL), te burn. We find also the compounds GI.BIL, burning, light; and GISH.BAR, dialectic MU.BAR, fire. The Fire-god was called BIL.GI (from BAL.GI), later GI.BIL; and GISH.BAR. BAR and BAL in this sense are evidently related to each other, and to BAR, dialectic MASH, to shine; while GAZ is akin to GAR, light. And it is equally clear that the old Chinese sounds gat, bat, closely correspond to the Sumerian (G)IZ (GAZ), GAR, and BIL (BAL), BAR. With BI, to kindle, cf the Japanese hi, fire, from bi, pi, and with BAR, Jap. abure, to roast. As regards the interchange of sounds, the transition from a guttural to a labial initial is a common feature of both languages. A good example may be seen in the Sumerian USH (from GUSH), blood, and what we may call its M-form, MUD, blood; a pair of words which are perfectly represented by, or preserved in, the Chinese hiieh and mieh, blood. That the older sound of htieh was kut, is inferred from the Jap. ket-si, compared with Cantonese hiit and Hakka het (see G. 4847) ; and kut = GUD, GUSH. As for mieh (G. 7880), it is surely enough to adduce the Cantonese myt, Hakka met, Jap. bet-si or me-chi, Annamite miet, to confirm the suggestion of its close kindred with the Sumerian MUD, blood.

There can be little doubt, one would think, that the Sumerian (G)USH and MUD, on the one hand, and their Chinese equivalents hiieh-hiit and mieh-myt, on the other, although given in the dictionaries as mutually independent words, are really related to each other in much the same way as GISH and MESH, GU and MU, tree, wood, are related in Sumerian, or as ho and fo, fire, or ngo and wo, I, in Chinese. One is simply a labialized form of the other.

The Chinese Phonetics have preserved many vestiges of such philological counterparts. Thus in Sumerian, <3, the character denoting black and night, had the sounds GA, GE, GIG, and MI (from MIG, MUG). Accordingly, we find that the Chinese #4 (P. 862) has the Phonetic values kek and mek. By itself, the character is read hei or hé or ho, C. hak, H. het, W. he, hah, hek, K. hik, J. koku, black (see G. 3899); and with the Radical or Determinative + earth, it is as mo, mek, met, meik, mai, me, muk, me, K. mik, J. boku and moku, A. mak, ink ; black ; obscure (G. 8022). It will be noticed that the vowel-variation resembles that of the values of the Sumerian prototype, GA, GE, GIG, MI, KUKKU. Of course, the sound