THE ANALECTS OF CONFUCIUS
THE ANALECTS
OF CONFUCIUS
A Rectification of Names 《論語正名》
In regards to the title of the book, the Lunyu 論語, we must begin our studies in accordance with Confucian philosophy itself, namely, through a “rectification of names” (zhengming 正名). If names are not correct, meaning cannot be understood.
The Lunyu is a collection of fragmented dialogues preserved from around 500 BC, transmitted generationally and eventually compiled into an anthology by the descendants of the Ru School 儒家 (“Confucian School”). This book was most likely assembled sometime before 200 BC by pupils of Zengzi 曾子 and Youzi 有子, who were disciples of Kongzi 孔子 (“Confucius”). These three historical figures, along with so many others, appear in these discourses.
It is helpful for Western readers to set aside their misconceptions and recognize that this text is not a monologue. In its substance, the Lunyu is not a series of pithy “Confucius said” wisdoms, but rather comprises the philosophical discourses and dialogues among early thinkers of the Confucian school, embodying their passed-down traditions (i.e. actual practices). Admittedly, the text reads rather disjointedly, reflecting its nature as a compilation of pieced-together ancient conversations.
As for the English title which has become standard, James Legge was the one who translated this text as the “Confucian Analects” in 1861. However as we shall see, Confucian “Discourses" or "Dialogues" would be a more literal and descriptive translation of the text’s content. Ironically, even Legge himself gave “discourses and dialogues” as the most literal translation in his introduction to the book.
The issue for many English readers, exacerbated by the modern evolution of the title to “The Analects of Confucius,” is the mistaken perception that it is a monologue by Confucius himself. The Ru School has always been about collective discourse, learners and teachers, and the relationships that form society. Misrepresenting the text in the title only misleads readers, leading to confusion when they open the book and find something quite different.
⚬ ⚬ ⚬
EVIDENCE FROM CHINESE DICTIONARIES
From the Shuowen 說文, dictionary from the Han Dynasty and the closest contemporary reference to the time our text was completed, we can check the meanings. The first character lun 論 means “discourses; discussions” (議) and is composed of “words” (言) and “to arrange” (侖). The second character yu 語 means “to tell; to inform” (論) and is composed of “words” (言) and “I” (吾). This dictionary makes it clear that the term could mean something akin to “discourses spoken.” Although, it is not uncommon for a pair of characters with similar meanings to function as a compound (a ‘binome’), especially in titles, as a single character would appear rather lonely—therefore, the term could simply be “discourses.”
Lùn 論：議也。从言侖聲。
Lun means “discourses,” from “words” and “to arrange” sound component.
Yǔ 語：論也。从言吾聲。
Yu means “to tell,” from “words” and “I” sound component.
From the Guangyun 廣韻, a dictionary from the Song Dynasty at the time when the commentary on this book was written, the meaning of the first character is “words having reason, to explain, to discuss.” The meaning of the second character is “to speak, to tell.” Again, the definitions are somewhat similar and circular.
Lùn 論1：言有理出字書。又盧昆切。
Words with reason, derived from written texts.
Lùn 論2：說也，議也，思也，盧昆切又力旬盧。鈍二切，四。
To explain, to discuss, to think.
Yǔ 語：說也，告也。又魚巨切。
To speak, to tell.
From the modern Chinese-to-English dictionary Pleco, the definition of the first character, lun 論, is “to discuss; exchange views on; talk over” as a verb, and refers to “opinions; views” as a noun. This closely describes the nature of the book in question. The current definition of the second character, yu 語, remains “to speak” as a verb and “language” as a noun, with the added meanings of “sayings; proverbs.”
⚬ ⚬ ⚬
EVIDENCE FROM THE TEXT ITSELF
While the title, Lunyu 論語, is not explicitly explained in the text itself, the usage of individual characters provides noteworthy evidence. The character lun 論 appears twice, and both occurrences clearly denote “discussion.” Similarly, yi 議 (the definition provided by the Han Dynasty dictionary for lun 論) appears twice and also signifies “discussion.” The character yu 語 is used 16 times, predominantly meaning “to speak; oral language” and occasionally “to tell.” Below are four examples of these usages with translations by Legge:
11.21 The Master said, “If, because a man’s discourse (lun 論) appears solid and sincere, we allow him to be a good man, is he really a superior man? Or is his gravity only in appearance?” [tr. Legge]
14.8 The Master said, “In preparing the governmental notifications, Pi Shen first made the rough draft; Shi Shu examined and discussed (lun 論) its contents…” [tr. Legge]
4.9 The Master said, “A scholar, whose mind is set on truth, and who is ashamed of bad clothes and bad food, is not fit to be discoursed (yi 議) with.” [tr. Legge]
7.21 The subjects on which the Master did not talk (yu 語), were: extraordinary things, feats of strength, disorder, and spiritual beings. [tr. Legge]
It is worth noting that when Legge translated lun 論 in the actual text, he preferred “discourses” or “discussions.” And the word “discourses,” in particular, sets a noble tone for this style of formal writing.
⚬ ⚬ ⚬
EVIDENCE FROM ENGLISH SCHOLARS THEMSELVES
James Legge himself, who derived the title “Confucian Analects,” actually arrived at the following literal meaning of title:
Title of the work: Lunyu 論語, “Discourses and Dialogues,” that is, the discourses or discussions of Confucius, with his disciples and others on various topics, and his replies to their inquiries. Many chapters, however, and one whole book, are the sayings, not of the sage himself, but of some of his disciples. The characters may also be rendered “Digested Conversations,” and this appears to be the more ancient signification attached to them, the account being that, after the death of Confucius, his disciples collected together and compared the memoranda of his conversations which they had severally preserved, digesting them into the twenty books which compose the work. Hence the title: Lunyu 論語, “Discussed Sayings,” or “Digested Conversations.” I have styled the work “Confucian Analects,” as being more descriptive of its character than any other name I could think of.
– James Legge, introduction to Confucian Analects (1861)
As usual, Legge knows what he is talking about, making it hard to disagree with him—until he reaches his final choice. Actually, it would seem there is a title both more literal and descriptive of its character—namely, “Discourses.” William Soothill also conducted excellent research on the meaning of the Chinese title, however he then went on to choose an even more distant choice than Legge for his English title:
Lun 論 is from 言 (“words”) and 侖 (“arrange, collect”), i.e. discourses, discussions. Yu 語 is from 言 (“words”) and 吾 (“I”), i.e. to tell, inform.
The Sishu tongzhi 四書通旨 says: “Lun is to deliberate upon and discuss. Yu is to narrate by way of reply.” It goes on to say: “This book records the dialogues which took place between Confucius and his disciples concerting education and government.”
“The Dialogues of Confucius” suggests itself as a more suitable title than Analects, but through Dr. Legge’s influence the latter term has become technical, and is therefore adopted as the title of the present version.
– William Soothill, Analects of Confucius (1910)
While Legge’s title, “Confucian Analects,” acknowledged that it refers to a group, subsequent translations over the decades have spun out even further. This evolution of the title into “The Analects of Confucius” (i.e. the short sayings of an individual) further distanced it from the literal translation, and obliterated the link to the content of the text: discourses between members of the early Ruist school. Additionally, note that there is a consistent effort to force Confucius’ name into the title for name recognition, despite its absence in the Chinese title. Furthermore, when has anyone ever posted on the internet a quote from Youzi or Zengzi? This reflects a clear cultural preference for an individualistic “sole messiah” type figure that has been imposed on the text from more directions than just the title.
Finally, the always sensible scholar Wing-tsit Chan also agrees with the literal translation of “Discourses” in his A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. A few years later he also translated it as “Conversations,” saying:
Called Lunyu 論語 (“Conversations”) in Chinese, it is a collection of sayings by Confucius and his pupils pertaining to his teachings and deeds. It was probably put together by some of his pupils and their pupils.
– Wing-tsit Chan, Reflections on Things at Hand (1967)
⚬ ⚬ ⚬
A BETTER TITLE
Given all the evidence, “Discourses” emerges as the most literal translation, supported by ancient definitions and usages, and even favored by the very English scholars who ultimately opted for “Analects” in some form. While “discussions” could also be considered, “discourses” is the optimal choice as it encompasses both philosophical discourse by an individual and dialogues between individuals, both of which are present in the text. If we were to translate each character in the binome, we could opt for “Discussion (on) Sayings (of Kongzi),” or “Discourses Spoken (by Ru School).” Titles like these provide direct, literal translations that are descriptive of the text and its historical context. However, since pairs of characters in Classical Chinese often function as a single compound term, a binome—we might simply call it “Discourses.”