Implication and Presentation of Verbs in Character Component “Horse” from “Gallop”

: From ancient times to medieval ages, Chinese vocabulary has experienced a process from “conceptual implication” to “conceptual presentation”, behind which are many details of evolution worth exploring. “ 马 ” (Horse) is an important ideographic component of Chinese characters. Many verbs with “ 马 ” as their components are closely related to horses at the beginning of their use. However, with the expansion of their use, these verbs begin to combine with other names, which changes the existing state of “horse”. This paper selects “ 驰 ” (gallop), a verb of “ 马 ” with both intransitive and transitive usages to restore the process of “implication-presentation” more concretely. Through the diachronic description and analysis of the state for the specific semantic “ 马 ” of “ 驰 ” from ancient times to the medieval ages, this paper not only confirms the law of “implication-presentation”, but also discovers the transitional “implicit or explicit” stage in the evolution process. Moreover, a related detailed analysis is made, which holds that this stage is an important link to show the specificity of different words’ evolution.


Introduction
From ancient times to the medieval ages, a large number of Chinese words have experienced the change from monosyllable to polysyllable. Corresponding to this trend, many concepts implied in words begin to "present" gradually. According to Hu Chirui (2005), one of the phenomena of "implication-presentation" of words is that objects are presented from actions (or actions are presented from objects). For one thing, the subject or object implied in the action is known because it has a specific connection with the action. For another, the clues of the implied object or subject can be found through glyphs, that is, mainly through the ideographic character component. Mr. Hu has comprehensively summed up the overall situation of Chinese vocabulary from "conceptual implication" to "conceptual presentation", but this process of "implication-presentation" which is not accomplished overnight is influenced by many situations, with a potential to go through a long-term "implication-presentation" transition. Therefore, only through a specific diachronic investigation of certain words can we clearly understand the "implication-presentation" process of words.
The purpose of this paper is to refine the law of "implication-presentation" and discuss the actual changes of names and objects related to glyphs in concrete actions. In order to observe the evolution more fully, we need to sort out and analyze it through specific verbs. "马" (Horse) can pull a cart and carry people as an indispensable means of transportation in ancient times, which is common in ancient literature with its importance reflected in the configuration of Chinese characters. There are many words from "马" in Chinese Etymology, such as "驻", "驯", "驱", "骚", "驰", and "骑". By tracing back the rules of creating these examples, we can find that the verbs represented by these words have a strong correlation in semantics, that is, they are all related to horses or imply the agent or patient "horse". The above verbs have been widely used since their emergence and their meanings are relatively stable, so we can see the changing existence of the specific semantic role "马". This paper will trace the "implication-presentation" process of the famous object "马" (horse) from ancient times to the medieval ages through "驰" (gallop) and related discussions. There are two reasons why "驰" is chosen as an example. First of all, "驰" has both intransitive and transitive usages, which can cover all kinds of situations comprehensively in grammar. "驰" is interpreted as a big drive based on the phonic configuration of "马" and "也" in Shuowen Jiezi. Duan noted that "'驰' and '驱' are always simultaneously mentioned in the poem, Mrs. Xu Mu firstly used the phrase '载驰载驱' (drive quickly), and the folk used ' 驱 马 悠 悠 ' (drive the horse leisurely). Therefore, ' 驰 ' is synonymous with '驱', while '驰' means a gallop." Xu Shen and Duan Yucai both think that "驰" and "驱" are synonymous with only differences in degree. Chinese Etymology holds that the original meaning of "驰" is "horse galloping, generally referring to a quick move." For example, The Commentary of Zuo 17th Years of Zhaogong's Ruling mentioned "the rich galloped and the poor walked." Du Yu noted : "moving by horses is galloping ("驰"), and going on foot means walking ("步")." Another example is Liuxiang's Nine Sighs and Dispute Encountering in Han dynasty, "drive my carriage to Xuanshi Mountain and let my horses wander in Dongting Mountain." To sum up, the original meaning of "驰" from "马" should be related to "马". Shuowen and Chinese Etymology have reached a consensus on this point. However, they have different interpretations of the original meaning of "驰". According to Shuowen, "驰" is a transitive verb and its patient should be "马". According to Chinese Etymology, "驰" is an intransitive word and the main body of action is "马". However, "驰" in its two quotations is used as a transitive verb and the related patient is a carriage or a horse. It can be seen that "驰" should have both the meanings of "driving" and "galloping." Correspondingly, it has two usages: transitive and intransitive usages. Secondly, with the development of language, "驰" can not only be used as a monosyllabic word, but also form a compound word with other related morphemes or words. Therefore, we can not only discuss the existing state of related semantic roles through "驰" itself, but also further compare its usages of these series of words through the compound words containing "驰" to explore more problems worthy of discussion. These two aspects will be further discussed in following chapters.

Research Methods and Corpus Description
This paper combines synchronic description with diachronic comparison. First of all, the verb "驰" is placed in four periods, including early ancient times, middle ancient times, late ancient times, and medieval times. Meanwhile, the related semantic roles are described with examples and analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively according to the two verb types such as intransitive and transitive verbs. "驰" has both transitive and intransitive usages. Its corresponding syntactic structure can be expressed as "subject + 驰 + object (horse or non-horse)" and "subject (horse or non-horse) + 驰" respectively. The following case descriptions of "驰" will also start from these two structures.
In view of the fact that "马" is the specific semantic role of "驰" and the focus of this analysis. Therefore, on the one hand, we should pay attention to judging the explicit and implicit state of "马". On the other hand, we should focus on whether the semantic role matched with verbs is "马" and its existing state, because the collocation between verbs and non-horse objects may affect the existing state of "马" as a specific role. In view of the former, our judgment criterion is whether "马" appears next to verbs in sentences, such as "Yuan Ang rides and stops the horse by pulling up the bridle" ("袁 盎骑, 并车擥辔") in Biography of Yuan Ang and Chao Cuo in Historical Records. In this sentence, there is no "马" before and after "驰", which is in an "implying" state. Another example is "the horse gallops and people go forward tirelessly to the mountain" ("马驰人趋, 不待倦而至梁") in Intrigues of the Warring States. In view of the latter, the author divides semantic roles into "horse" and "nonhorse" in the following analysis, and makes statistics and analysis respectively. Secondly, it summarizes the existence state of related famous objects in each period based on the previous work and further outlines its diachronic development from implication to presentation.
The corpus selected in this paper mainly includes: The above corpus selection is mainly based on three considerations. First of all, whether the corpus can truly reflect the language status quo of the book era is the most important consideration. That's why this paper does not choose the history books of medieval times due to the antique tendency. Secondly, whether the corpus reflects the social and cultural information of the times involved in it comprehensively, which is related to the semantic role of collocation with "驰". Finally, in the aspect of language style, we should have both written style and spoken style to reflect the language facts comprehensively.

From "驰" (Gallop) to "驰马" (Galloping Horse)
This section mainly analyzes the related semantic roles of transitive verbs "驰". In the other usage of "驰", "马" exists as the patient of "驰", so the core syntactic structure used in this section is "subject + 驰 + object (horse or non-horse)". Through the analysis of the examples, in the stage from ancient times to the medieval Ages, "马", as a specific semantic role of "驰", showed a certain "presenting" trend. However, due to the limitation of the types and quantities of other famous objects matched with "驰", the combination of "驰" and "马" still has relative stability. "马" is still in an "implying" state in most cases. In addition, "马" is basically not "presenting" in the compound words composed of "驰". The following are specific cases and related explanations.  (1), it's noted that "the king is driving on the carriage of the four horses that do not stumble and move stably, and the horse driver is good at controlling this carriage and let it gallop at will... It's this skillful driving method that wins the praises of the king." For example (2), it's noted that "moving by horses is galloping ("驰"), and going on foot means walking ("步")." Horses can't move independently, but need people to drive.

Early Ancient Times
In addition, "驰" has a special usage in the early ancient times, such as (4)栾枝使舆曳柴而僞遁, 楚师驰之, 原轸、郤溱以中军公族横击之.(<左 僖公28年>) (5)与士鞅驰秦师, 死焉.(<左 襄公14年>) Wang Li holds in Ancient Chinese that "驰" can specifically refer to driving horses to pursue enemy troops. That is to say, "驰" in the above three cases can be decomposed into two simultaneous actions, one is "riding a horse" and the other is "chasing". The object "horse" of the former action is omitted, while the object of the latter is presented, such as "秦师" in Example (5). Examples ② and ③ show the combination of "驰骋". Shuowen interprets "骋" as "forward galloping based on the configuration of "马" and "甹". Besides, "驰" refers to "a big move" as a transitive verb and the patient is "马". The Eighth Year Ruled by Lu Dinggong in the Commentary BCP Social Sciences & Humanities

ECSS 2022
Volume 19 (2022) 711 of Zuo mentions "Lin Chu reined his lively horse to gallop in the wide road." Du Yu explained "骋" as "galloping". It can be seen that "骋" and "驰" should be synonyms. In Example 2, "云梦" in Chinese Dictionary is generally referred to the hunting areas of the King of Chu during the Spring and Autumn Period as well as the Warring States Period. In example ③, "罼弋" in Chinese Dictionary is interpreted as "hunting". From this analysis, the patient who "gallops" should be "马". "驰" is often used with other verbs here to form a predicate phrase, such as "驰入" (galloping into) in Examples ① and ②, "驰语" (driving the carriage to inform a message) in Example ③, "驰奏" (driving the carriage to advise to the empire) in Example ④, etc. According to different contexts, "驰 走" in Examples ⑤ and ⑥ can refer to driving horses to run fast or driving horses to escape. "驰" also forms a fixed collocation with some verbs. In Examples 7 and 8, the usage of "驰骋" is similar to that in the middle ancient times, and its patient is still "马", which is related to hunting.

Subject + 驰 + Object (Non-horse)
①于是彊国务攻, 弱国备守, 合从连横, 驰车击毂, 介胄生虮虱, 民无所告愬.(<史 平津侯 主父列传>) In addition, "驰" can also make a fixed usage with ""驱". For example, ②令范阳令乘朱轮华毂, 使驱驰燕、赵郊.(<史 张耳陈余列传>) ③壁门士吏谓从属车骑曰："将军约, 军中不得驱驰."(<史 绛侯周勃世家>) According to "朱轮华毂" in Example 2, the object of "驱驰" (driving and galloping) is implicit "车" ("carriage"). "车骑" in Example ③ also makes the object of "驱驰" unclear. Generally speaking, it can be determined that "驱驰" is still a transitive verb here, but it is unclear whether the object is a carriage or a horse. This issue will be discussed later.  According to Table 1, the specific object "马" of "驰" is in an implying state as a whole in the corpus used in this paper but does not appear. Although the cases with objects of non-horses appeared in the middle and late ancient times, they did not affect the collocation of "驰" and specific objects "马". We think there are two reasons. On the one hand, the frequency of "non-horse" is much lower than that of specific object "horse", so "horse" will not be confused even if it is not presented. On the other hand, there are 6 cases whose object is not "horse", of which 4 cases are "carriages". Wang Li (1962) said "before the Warring States Period, horses and carriages were connected. Generally speaking, there are no carriages without horses (of course, there are ox carts besides carriages, etc.), and there are no horses without carriages. Therefore, the so-called royal carriage in the ancient times is also the royal horse." The annotations of ancient books often put carriages and horses together. For example, Du Yu's annotation of "啬夫驰" (The Commentary of Zuo 17th Years of Zhaogong's Ruling) said "carriages and horses are called '驰'". It can be seen that even if the action "驰" is matched with "车" (carriage), its direct-action object is still "马". On the contrary, if "驰" is matched with the object "马", it may include two servitude modes, which can refer to driving ("驰") the horse sitting astride the horse. The connections between "骑射" and "驰射" can be exemplified and can also refer to the horse sitting on the carriage and "driving" the carriage. It can be said that the meaning of "驰车" is included in "驰马", which is more economical to use. Therefore, the combination of "驰" and "马" is relatively stable, and "马" can always be in an implying state. At the same time, "驰", by virtue of its stable combination with the object "马", also forms a fixed collocation with some verbs, such as "驱驰" and "驰骋", so as to express the sentence meaning more economically and accurately.

From "驰" to "马驰"
This section mainly analyzes the related semantic roles of the intransitive word "驰". In the intransitive usage of "驰", "马" exists as the subject of "驰", so the core syntactic structure used in this section is "subject (horse or non-horse) + 驰". Through combing the examples from ancient times to medieval times, the situation that "人" (man) used as the subject of "驰" gradually increased, which not only affected the existing state of its specific subject "马", but also affected the use of transitive verbs "驰", further influencing the usage changes of compound words composed of "驰". The following are specific cases and related explanations.

①君子之车, 既庶且多；君子之马, 既闲且驰.矢诗不多, 维以遂歌.(<诗 大雅 卷阿>)
Example ① is noted that "the galloper is the man who drives the horse. The horse can walk, and now it's described as galloping, which is in line with the law."  In medieval times, the combination of the intransitive word "驰" with the subject "人" was closer than that with its specific subject "马", which also changed the emphasis of the action of "驰". Specifically, "驰" mostly means "people driving horses" in the initial usage, emphasizing the action of "driving horses." Then it is mostly used to mean "people driving horses fast", emphasizing the result of "driving horses". Different emphases make the specific object "马" of transitive verbs "驰" gradually "ignored". In medieval times, "驰" formed a linking structure with some verbs, which meant that "people do something quickly". At this time, "驰" focused on "speed" and its connection with the specific object "马" was further weakened. That is to say, from ancient times to the Middle Ages, when the subject was "人", the object "马" of "驰" gradually retired and experienced a process of "from presentation to implication". At the same time, "人" began to become the subject of the intransitive word, rather than the agent of "驰".

Late Ancient Times
On this basis, "驰" also developed a series of compound words containing the morpheme "驰" to indicate people's actions, and the original meanings of these words are almost all related to "running BCP Social Sciences & Humanities

ECSS 2022
Volume 19 (2022) 714 quickly". For example, "奔驰" in Example ② is interpreted as "fast running" in the Chinese Dictionary. In Example ③, "驰骛" is interpreted as "running" in the Chinese Dictionary. The words "驰走", "驰骋", and "驱驰" in Examples ④ to ⑥ used to be transitive verbs with "马" as the object, which appeared in the late ancient times. In medieval times, it also experienced a similar change process with the monosyllabic word "驰". The original object "马" gradually retired and is changed to emphasize the rapid action of the subject "人", so these words were used more as intransitive words, and their meanings were extended to more accurately express the state or purpose of the action of the subject "人". Compared with the "驰走" in "直夜溃围南出,驰走", Example ④ is not only transformed into an intransitive word with "人" as the main body, but also the relationship between "驰" and "走" is closer, showing a state of transition from phrase to word. "驰骋" in "不喜 弋猎狗马驰骋" is a transitive verb with "马" as the object, while "驰骋" in Example ⑤ is an intransitive word with "人" as the main body. According to the Chinese Dictionary, its meaning is also extended to "wandering and scattered" based on "running fast". The transitive verb "驱驰" in "军中不得驱驰" has developed into an intransitive word with "人" as the main body in Example ⑥, its meaning has also been extended. According to the Chinese Dictionary, it can be interpreted as "running to serve others".
Based on the above analysis, the main body statistics of the verb "驰" from ancient times to middle ancient times are as follows. According to the corpus used in this paper, the intransitive word "驰" appears 50 times, and its overall frequency is far lower than that of the transitive verbs "驰". Thus, it does not occupy the mainstream position in the diachronic use of the verb "驰". According to use cases, we can see that the collocation frequency of "驰" and specific subject "horse" is not as good as that of "驰" and nonhorse subject. In medieval times, a series of compound words containing the morpheme "驰 " appeared, such as "驰鹜" and "奔驰", which were used to express the actions of the subject "人". Another batch of transitive verbs such as "驰骋" and "驱驰", which appeared before the medieval times, became intransitive words with "人" as the main body. From the above two points, we can see the high collocation frequency between "驰" and non-horse subjects.
Why is the combination of "驰" and the specific subject "马" not close? By searching the corpus, we can see that many words except "驰" can express the marching movements of horses. Such as It can be seen from the examples that apart from "驰", intransitive words such as "逸", "走", "行", "奔", and "骋" can describe the horse's marching movements, but the degree is slightly different.
To sum up, in terms of subject, there are many famous objects that are not "马" and "驰". In terms of verbs, "驰" is not the only word that can express the marching movements of horses. These two factors may produce synergy, which leads to the loss of specificity of the subject "马" of the intransitive word "驰" and the expansion of the meaning of the intransitive word "驰".

Summary
From ancient times to the medieval times, many concepts "implied" in words began to "present" gradually. In order to grasp this evolution more concretely and meticulously, this paper selects the verb "驰" of "马", which has both intransitive and transitive usages, and makes a diachronic analysis of the existing state of its specific semantic role "马" from ancient times to medieval times.
Through the analysis of specific examples, we think that the reason why "马" can gradually be present is due to two reasons. First of all, the reason why "马" can show the law of "implicationpresentation" is that the meanings of the three verbs have been relatively stable with only an expanding trend, which ensures that the expansion of their related semantic roles starts from "马". If the meaning of a word is extended, the name originally indicated by the glyph may no longer be directly related to the extended meaning, so it will no longer have particularity and cannot show the process of "implication-presentation". Secondly, because "驰" has always had a high frequency and a wide range of use from ancient times to medieval times, the semantic roles matched with it are constantly enriched, which makes the specific semantic role "马" lose its uniqueness in combination with action and present out of the need of clear expression.
By analyzing the examples, we find that the specific semantic role "马" of "驰" has indeed experienced a process from "implication-presentation". However, through concrete analysis, it can be seen that the "implication-presentation" of "马" is not a simple linear change, but a transitional stage of "implication or presentation". By combing the examples of "驰" in various periods, we can intuitively see this intermediate process, and this stage is focusing on its uniqueness in the law of "implication-presentation".
First of all, for the emergence of new semantic roles, the meaning of words may show a shift of emphasis based on maintaining stability. For example, the transitive verb "驰" mostly means "people driving horses" in the initial usage, but later it is mostly used to mean "people driving horses fast". From emphasizing the action to the result of "driving a horse", the specific object "马" of transitive verbs "驰" is gradually "ignored". In medieval times, "驰" formed a linking structure with some verbs, which emphasized that "people do something quickly", and its connection with the specific object "马" was further weakened. The change of other usages of "驰" affects the use of its transitive usage. "马" is also the specific subject of the intransitive word "驰", but because the emphasis of "驰" has changed, "人" has gradually replaced "马" as the mainstream collocation of the intransitive word "驰". A series of compound words listed above, such as "驰骋", "奔驰", and "驱驰", further reflect this changing process. Secondly, from the perspective of history and culture, we think that the change of "马" from "implication" to "presentation" reflects the irreplaceable nature of horses in ancient times. As a specific semantic role, "马" can be in the transitional stage of "implication or presentation" for a long time. Because the horse, as an important means of transportation, cannot be easily replaced by other livestock, whether it is used in daily life or military war, or whether it is used for pulling carts or riding. Even if the verb exists in collocation with the semantic role of "non-horse", under the guidance of a specific context, "horse" still has self-evident uniqueness. Compared with "牧", "逐", and "牢", in inscriptions on bones "牧" with "牛" as the ideographic character component and "逐" with "豕" as the ideographic character component can be replaced by livestock such as sheep and deer. We don't have to sort out the examples. From the configuration of Chinese characters alone, we can feel that the famous objects such as cattle and pigs are not closely combined with the actions represented by Chinese characters, and they are replaceable. This paper exhaustively describes and analyzes the existing state of the relevant semantic roles of "驰" from ancient times to medieval times. It not only verifies the law of "implication-presentation" in two aspects, including the presentation of the subject from verbs and the presentation of the object from verbs, but also finds the transitional stage of evolution, focusing on the analysis of the characteristics of this stage. However, there are still many shortcomings in this paper. First of all, the number and types of the corpus used in the diachronic description are limited, which leads to limited problems that can be explored. Secondly, only one verb "驰" in the "马" part is selected, which is relatively small in number, and other words with "牛" and "羊" as ideographic character components are not introduced for comparative analysis, which is relatively not comprehensive. Finally, the specific semantic role of "马" verbs in the process of "implication-presentation", which is different from the semantic roles of transitive verbs, is not deeply analyzed. The above problems in this paper need further consideration and deepening. I appreciate your corrections and suggestions.