The lexicology of fei ้
For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, says the Lord. (Isa 55:8)
In modern Mandarin, itโs (ironically) quite common to hear something is feichang ้ๅธธ. This is the go-to intensifier in vernacular Chinese, and it very literally means something is โuncommon(ly)โ. So, one will often hear things like: wo feichang ke ๆ้ๅธธๆธด โI am incredibly thirstyโ; or nage meinรผ feichang piaoliang ้ฃไธช็พๅฅณ้ๅธธๆผไบฎ โthat girl is remarkably prettyโ. But in this instance, the lexeme fei ้ is modifying and negating chang ๅธธ โcommon, constant, frequent, oftenโ.
This is the most common usage of fei ้ in modern Mandarin: as an adverb of negation. When it comes to the law, for example, something is either hefa ๅๆณ โlegalโ, or feifa ้ๆณ โillegalโ. When it comes to meetings or events or dress codes, it can be either zhengshi ๆญฃๅผ โformalโ, or feizhengshi ้ๆญฃๅผ โinformalโ. When it comes to oneโs public behaviour and comportment, one can either be duoli ๅค็คผ โpoliteโ or feili ้็คผ โimpolite, rudeโ.
The lexeme fei ้, the 283rd most-common in modern written Chinese, originated as a pictograph (xiangxing ่ฑกๅฝข) displaying two opposite wings. In the Shuowen jiezi, Xu Shen posits this character as a synonym for wei ้ โto disobey, to run contrary to, opposition, defiance, to stand apartโ. Yet even in Xu Shenโs time, this character had been adapted to a vast plethora of different functionsโnot only adverbial, but also verbal and nominal!โusually relating to negation or opposition. So, the function that Xu Shen ascribes as primary, is certainly attested in the Classics. We see it being used to mean โto violateโ or โto run contrary toโ, as here:
ๅพ่ไธไพ๏ผ้็ฆฎไน๏ผไพ่ไธๅพ๏ผไบฆ้็ฆฎไนใ
If I give a gift and nothing comes in return, that is contrary to propriety; if the thing comes to me, and I give nothing in return, that also is contrary to propriety.
Book of Rites ใ็ฆฎ่จใ 1.10
Note that the compound feili ้็คผ here in the Book of Rites has been carried forward into modern parlance to mean โrudeโ or โimpoliteโ. However, the same lexeme can also be used to mean โwrongโ or โevilโ, as an antonym to yi ไน, as here in the Book of Odes:
ไน็ๅฅณๅญใ่ผๅฏขไนๅฐใ่ผ่กฃไน่ฃผใ ่ผๅผไน็ฆใ
็ก้็กๅใๅฏ้ ้ฃๆฏ่ญฐใ็ก็ถๆฏ่ฉ็ฝนใDaughters shall be born to him:
They will be put to sleep on the ground;
They will be clothed with wrappers;
They will have tiles to play with.
It will be theirs neither to do wrong nor to do good.
Only about the spirits and the food will they have to think,
And to cause no sorrow to their parents.Book of Odes ใ่ฉฉ็ถใ, Decade of Qi Fu ็ฅ็ถไนไป, โThese Banksโ ๆฏๅนฒ 9
We also see fei ้ being used as โ(it is) untrueโ, or โ(it is) not the case (that)โ, particularly in the famous speech of King Tang of Shang: ใ้ๅฐๅฐๅญ๏ผๆข่ก็จฑไบ๏ผใ โIt is not I, the little child, who dare to undertake a rebellious enterprise!โ (Book of Documents ใๅฐๆธใ, Speech of Tang ๆนฏ่ช 1) There are other cases of it being used in a double negative construction: for example the use of mofei ่ซ้, literally โnot noโ, to mean โallโ or โeverywhereโ. This is similar to the modern Mandarin usage of feideiโฆ buke ้ๅพโฆไธๅฏ, literally meaning โcanโt not (do something)โ, functioning as โmustโ or โhave toโ.
ๆบฅๅคฉไนไธใ่ซ้็ๅใ
็ๅไนๆฟฑใ่ซ้็่ฃใ
ๅคงๅคซไธๅใๆๅพไบ็จ่ณขใUnder the wide heaven,
All is the kingโs land.
Within the sea-boundaries of the land,
All are the kingโs servants.
His great officers are unfair,โ
Making me serve thus as if I alone were worthy.Book of Odes ใ่ฉฉ็ถใ, Decade of Bei Shan ๅๅฑฑไนไป, โBei Shanโ ๅๅฑฑ 2
We also see fei ้ being used to function as a verb, โto oppose, to condemn, to censureโ: ๅญๅคๆฐ๏ผใ้้ฉไนไบ็ก่พไน่ ๏ผ้่๏ผใ Zi-xia asked, โIs then not declining military service (during mourning) to be condemned?โ (Book of Rites ใ็ฆฎ่จใ 7.43) Or: ใๅ ๅ ถๆ้่้ไน๏ผๅ่ฌ็ฉ่ซไธ้ใใ โAnd if we condemn what they condemn, there is no one who may not be condemned.โ (Zhuangzi ใ่ๅญใ 17.5)
Alternatively, the lexeme fei ้ could function as โwithoutโ, โlackingโ or โunlessโ:
ไบๅๅง่กฐ๏ผๅ ญๅ้่ไธ้ฃฝ๏ผไธๅ้ๅธไธๆ๏ผๅ ซๅ้ไบบไธๆ๏ผไนๅ๏ผ้ๅพไบบไธๆ็ฃใ
At fifty, one begins to decay; at sixty, he does not feel satisfied unless he eats flesh; at seventy, he does not feel warm unless he wears silk; at eighty, he does not feel warm unless there be some one (to sleep) with him; and at ninety, he does not feel warm even with that.
Book of Rites ใ็ฆฎ่จใ 5.58
And, of course, even in Classical texts, fei ้ could simply function as a negating adverb โnotโ, โnon-โ, โun-โ or โin-โ. This was, if not the most common function as in modern Chinese, at the very least far from unheard-of. For example: ไน ้ๅ ถไฝ๏ผๅฎๅพ็ฆฝไนใ (Going) for long to what is not his proper place, how can he get game? (Book of Changes ใๆ็ถใ, Heng ไทๆ 5)
It is tempting to point to the usage of a primitive root functioning as โto opposeโ being transmuted into a negating adverb, as a common feature of early Sinitic and early Afro-Asiatic languages. There is a possible, but at this point purely speculative, functional link between lรดโ ืืื โno, not, noneโ (usually shortened to loโ ืื) and nรดโ ื ืื โto hinder, to restrain, to hold back, to disallowโโbolstered by a cognate usage in Egyptian or Coptic of nj as a negative adverbial modifier. However, such a link is only really indirectly, contextually attested in the Tanakh; as here in the Book of Numbers:
ืืืึพืื ืื ืืืื ืืชืึผ ืึผืืื ืฉืืืขื ืึผืึพื ืืจืื ืืืกืจืื ืืฉืืจึพืืกืจื ืขืึพื ืคืฉืืึผ ืื ืืงืึผื ืืืืื ืืกืืึพืืึผ ืึผืึพืื ืื ืืืื ืืชืึผื
But if her father expresses disapproval to her on the day that he hears of it, no vow of hers, no pledge by which she has bound herself, shall stand; and the Lord will forgive her, because her father opposed her. (Numbers 30:5)
Or in Psalms (very obliquely):
ืืืืื ืึพืฆืึผืืง ืืกื ืืืืืืื ื ืฉืืื ืจืืฉื ืืึพืื ื ืจืืฉืื ืึผืึพืขืื ืึผืชืคืึผืชื ืึผืจืขืืชืืืื
Let a good man strike or rebuke me in kindness, but let the oil of the wicked never anoint my head; for my prayer is continually against their wicked deeds. (Psalm 140:5)
The connexion between the triliterals ื-ื-ื and ื -ื-ื (however temptingly indicated by a.) the flexible grammatical multifunctionality of fei ้ in its Classical setting, which may or may not be coordinate; b.) the consonantal similarity of the two roots; c.) the existence of a possible cognate negating adverb, nj, in ancient Egyptian; and d.) the instances of close co-occurrence and parallel function in Hebrew Scripture) is nonetheless a tentative one that is not backed by any direct evidence. However, these instances in Scripture point us toward an important element in the teaching of the Tanakh. Man is not Godโฆ however much he might believe he is. And when he starts believing a little too hard in his own divinity, God must hinder him.
ืืื ื ืฆื ืืฉืืจืื ืื ืืฉืืงึผืจ ืืื ืื ึผืื ืึผื ืื ืืื ืืึผื ืืื ึผืืื
And also the Glory of Israel will not lie or repent; for he is not a man, that he should repent. (2 Sam 15:29)
And of course:
ืึผื ืื ืืืฉืืืืชื ืืืฉืืืืชืืื ืืื ืืจืืืื ืึผืจืื ื ืื ืืืืื
ืึผืึพืืืืึผ ืฉืืืื ืืืจืฅ ืึผื ืึผืืืึผ ืืจืื ืืึผืจืืืื ืึผืืืฉืืืชื ืืึผืืฉืืืชืืืืFor my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, says the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts. (Isaiah 55:8-9)
As to what happens when people, even the people who are set apart by God, attempt to become like gods themselves, to establish themselves as lords over the land, eternal and self-sufficient? Wellโฆ for that, we have only to appeal to Genesis 6:4-6 and Genesis 11:1-9. And Psalm 81:7. And Isaiah 40:18-25. And Habakkuk 1:4-11. Too many passages in Jeremiah to count. And the entire book of Lamentations. It is a teaching that is found throughout Scriptureโthe Greek Scriptures as well as the Hebrew Tanakh. It is obvious once you see it, and you cannot unsee it. Man cannot become God by any strength or wealth or cleverness he can attain. Those who try, God destroysโor allows to destroy themselves. But we still do not learn from the teaching He has given us, for our benefit.
This is a teaching that also appears in the Book of Odes, though it is less obvious if one approaches the Odes as a compilation of disparate folk songs, shamanic chants and courtly ditties, rather than as a single text. I explicate this in the next entry.
