Dexian Sun1, Zhihao Song2,*
1, School of Literature and Communication, Hubei University of Arts
and Science, XiangYang, 441053, China.
2, The National University of Malaysia, Negeri Perak, Malaysia.
Acknowledgement
This research was supported by the “2024 Key Later-Stage Project of the National Social Science foundation of China: ‘The Reception and Dissemination of Pre-Qin Masters’ Thought by Ming Dynasty Scholars'”, “2022 General Project of Youth foundation for Humanities and Social Sciences: ‘Compilation and Comprehensive Study of Yang Shen’s Philosophical Works'” and “2025 Open foundation of the School of Literature and Media, Hubei University of Arts and Science”.
This study investigates the strategies used by Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) scholars to reconstruct Pre-Qin dialectical thought linguistically through commentary discourse, representing a pivotal turn in Chinese intellectual history. Drawing on trans-temporal discourse analysis, cognitive linguistics, and digital humanities approaches, this project develops a three-dimensional analytical framework integrating linguistic, cognitive, and cultural dimensions to examine the reconstruction of philosophical discourse. With a mixed-methods analysis of a 500,000-character corpus of 37 authoritative editions of commentary across three temporally distinct phases, the study identifies six basic strategies of linguistic reconstruction, namely conceptual redefinition, metaphorical innovation, neologism creation, semantic extension, syntactic reconstruction, and discourse reorganization, and three distinctive patterns of discourse alignment with the Mind School, Neo-Confucian Rationalism, and Qi School traditions. Quantitative analysis shows significant variation in the reconstruction strategies, with the Mind School showing the highest subjectivization (4.2) and practical orientation (4.5) values, whereas Neo-Confucian Rationalism peaked in systematization (4.6), and the Qi School took on intermediary positions. This study provides a solid quantitative basis for the study of linguistic reconstruction in intellectual history contexts, showing how Ming commentators transformed static Pre-Qin concepts into dynamic, process-oriented systems through systematic linguistic innovations. These findings shed light on the modern development of Chinese philosophical traditions, demonstrating how historical linguistic strategies enable conceptual progress in linking traditional insights with contemporary theoretical paradigms.
Keywords: Commentary discourse; Pre-Qin dialectical thinking; Linguistic reconstruction; Ming scholarship; Discourse analysis; Cognitive linguistics
1. Introduction
The Ming Dynasty era (1368-1644) is a foundational era in Chinese intellectual history, an era characterized by the prevalence of commentary traditions that exerted a ubiquitous influence on the interpretation and transmission of the classical texts. In this era, Confucian thinkers were engaged in the project of working out ideas presented in the classical writings of record into more systematic theoretical frameworks, interpreting what they perceived as metaphysical and moral psychological notions in the classical texts. Ming-era philosophical commentary was not limited to literal exegesis, presupposing a full model of intellectual inquiry in which scholars could participate in new philosophical revision in deference to established principles and values. Contemporary scholarship recognizes the value of these commentary traditions as a means of philosophical inquiry peculiar to Chinese intellectual history that brings consonant interpretive hermeneutics to bear on systematic advancement [1]. Linguistic aspects of the commentary tradition, most particularly Ming thinkers’ re-interpretation and re-casting strategies of previous thought, remain under-theorized, despite being of paramount importance to Chinese philosophical thought development [2].
PPre-Qin dialectical thinking, as exemplified in early classics like the Laozi, Zhuangzi, and Yijing, posed both hermeneutic difficulties and possibilities for philosophical creativity for Ming dynasty philosophers. The dialectic thinking, with emphasis on change, contradiction, and wholeness, was a fundamental cognitive model in Chinese intellectual tradition that required sophisticated linguistic tactics toward expression and communication across temporal and conceptual distances [3]. Ming thinkers had to recontextualize the classical dialectical notions in a way that would be applicable to their own intellectual context, something that required not just translation but deep-seated underlying reconceptualization on a linguistic level [4]. The reconceptualization entailed grasping the power of contradiction, change, and synthesis and creating new conceptual frameworks that would serve as mediators between ancient wisdom and modern knowledge [5]. The linguistic strategies employed by Ming thinkers in accomplishing this intellectual endeavor—from terminological innovation and syntactic reform to discursive reconfiguration—are a rich area for exploring the interaction of language, ideas, and philosophical change within Chinese tradition [6].
This research investigates how Ming Dynasty thinkers reconstructed Pre-Qin dialectical thinking linguistically in the form of writing commentaries. It addresses three interconnected research questions: typology and frequency of linguistic reconstruction approaches taken by Ming Dynasty philosophical commentaries, diversity of reconstruction models among schools of thought, and the mutual dependence between linguistic development and philosophical innovation. The theoretical contributions of this research go beyond historical linguistics, thus broadening contemporary knowledge of trans-temporal discourse analysis by offering novel methodological frameworks for exploring the development of philosophical concepts through linguistic mediation [7, 8]. The methodological innovation lies within the systematic use of quantitative, corpora-based methods to the analysis of classical Chinese philosophical works, thus creating strong analysis frameworks that blend digital humanities practices with traditional philological researches [9]. The practical implications of this work provide excellent insights towards existing projects to construct Chinese philosophical discourse frameworks, and they demonstrate how to use historical cases of linguistic innovation to inform current projects to articulate Chinese philosophical concepts within the context of international intellectual communities.
2. Literature Review and Theoretical Framework
Recent scholarly studies of Pre-Qin dialectical thinking have seen significant development with the integration of cognitive linguistic and neuroscientific approaches, thus moving beyond typical philosophical interpretations and into interdisciplinary frameworks that explicate the cognitive mechanisms involved in ancient Chinese intellectual discourse. Dialectical thinking is described as a cognitive mode that emphasizes transformation, contradiction, and integration, which can be linked to particular neural correlates detectable through contemporary neuroscientific methods, coupled with post-modern psychological theories that emphasize the importance of contradiction, change, and integration. The epistemological aspects of Pre-Qin thought have been reinterpreted through contemporary theoretical models, as evident in recent studies showing that ancient Chinese concepts of knowledge and action preceded modern cognitive theories [10, 11]. Such progress shows that Pre-Qin dialectical thinking is not simply an artifact of the past but forms a lively intellectual heritage of significant value for understanding cognition, language, and philosophical discourse in different temporal and spatial contexts [12].
The commentary practices of the Ming Dynasty have attracted increased attention among researchers, especially in the fields of discourse analysis and hermeneutic theory. This study sheds light on the complex linguistic strategies adopted by Ming thinkers in mediating textual authority and philosophical innovation. Recent studies have found the development of new exegetical practices in the Ming era, particularly the special practice of pingdian (punctuation and annotation), initially applied to the critical evaluation of fictional texts but later used for classical commentary [13]. Recent historical studies have clarified the intellectual and cultural context of Ming philosophical discourse by situating commentary practices against the wider social changes and intellectual interactions. This scholarship shows how the unconventional methods proposed by Wang Yangming allowed for more sophisticated interpretations of traditional doctrines while also allowing for philosophical innovation [14]. These studies present Ming commentary as an active intellectual process that goes beyond textual analysis, as a vehicle for philosophical innovation and cultural evolution [15].
The theory of linguistic reconstruction evolved to integrate aspects of critical discourse analysis, cognitive linguistics, and Chinese intellectual thought traditions based on the principles of hermeneutics to provide advanced modes of understanding philosophically reconstructed thought mediated by language. Using Fairclough’s tripartite model to study Chinese discourse, recent studies indicate linguistic features like the construction of agents, pronoun use, and intertextual processes are capable of reconstructing conceptual patterns and ideological positions [16]. Convergence of conceptual metaphor theory and discourse analysis, as exemplified among the works of Peng and Li [17], indicates how metaphorical discourse acts on linguistic, cognitive, and social functional levels to drive interpretations of abstract thought. The formulation of ecological cognitive models related to Chinese harmonious discourse that integrate quantum holistic views and classical philosophical concepts of wholeness based on Chinese philosophy reflects a turning point toward a deeper understanding of the process of discourse creation as a synergistic amalgamation of linguistic and cognitive processes. This theoretical breakthrough is corroborated by Xiao and Tsung’s [18] empirically-grounded discourse analysis, which employs a diversity of methodologies such as narrative analysis, corpus linguistics, and sociolinguistic approaches, to examine the process of language evolution and discourse construction in Chinese contexts. Furthermore, Semenov and Tsvyk [19] demonstrate that Chinese discourse is a multilevel complex with figurative semantics, cognitive multidimensionality, and communicative adaptability, thus calling for interactive analytic methods that integrate linguistic, philosophical, and cultural aspects.
This research sets up a general three-dimensional model of analytical linguistics, cognition, and culture specifics to examine the complex process of reconstructing philosophical discourse in the Ming Dynasty commentary traditions. Based on Fairclough’s (1995) tripartite three-component model of textual analysis, practice of discourse, and socio-cultural practice, this model further incorporates Chinese philosophical discourse’s characteristic features as well as its diachronic evolution. At the micro level, a detailed linguistic analysis is made, which examines innovations in vocabulary, changes in syntax, and textual organization patterns, demonstrating how Ming Dynasty commentators skillfully used linguistic forms to reinterpret ancient concepts. The meso level studies cognitive processes involving conceptualization, metaphorical mapping, and schematic reorganization that mediate the link between linguistic expression and philosophical understanding. The macro-dimension situates these linguistic and cognitive processes within broader cultural contexts, analyzing how different philosophical schools, temporal periods, and intertextual networks shape reconstruction strategies. Recent applications of multimodal discourse analysis frameworks demonstrate that such integrated approaches enable researchers to capture both explicit thematic dimensions and implicit meaning-making processes [20], providing methodological rigor for analyzing the multilayered nature of philosophical commentary discourse. As illustrated in Figure 1, these three dimensions operate in hierarchical integration, with each level informing and being informed by the others, collectively constituting the theoretical architecture for understanding linguistic reconstruction phenomena.
Figure 1. Three-Dimensional Analytical Framework for Linguistic Reconstruction
3. Methodology
3.1 Research Design
This study employs a mixed-methods research design integrating quantitative corpus analysis (60%) with qualitative hermeneutical interpretation (40%) to systematically examine linguistic reconstruction phenomena in Ming Dynasty philosophical commentaries. The methodological architecture encompasses four interconnected phases operating in iterative cycles: comprehensive corpus collection from authenticated Ming commentary editions, systematic linguistic annotation employing both manual coding and computational tools, multi-dimensional data analysis utilizing statistical modeling and discourse analytical frameworks, and theoretical construction through abductive reasoning processes that synthesize empirical findings with existing philosophical and linguistic theories. This integrative approach enables the investigation to capture both the quantifiable patterns of linguistic innovation and the nuanced interpretive dimensions of philosophical creativity, addressing the complex interplay between linguistic form and conceptual transformation that characterizes Ming commentary discourse. The research design prioritizes methodological rigor while maintaining sensitivity to the hermeneutical complexity inherent in cross-temporal philosophical analysis, as illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Mixed-Methods Research Design
3.2 Corpus Construction
The corpus construction employs systematic selection criteria encompassing temporal stratification across Early Ming (1368-1450), Middle Ming (1450-1550), and Late Ming (1550-1644) periods to capture diachronic variations in commentary discourse. The comprehensive collection comprises thirty-seven authoritative commentary editions representing diverse philosophical schools: fifteen Laozi commentaries including works by Wang Yangming, Jiao Hong, and Hanshan Deqing; twelve Zhuangzi commentaries featuring Luo Jinxi, Fang Yizhi, and Shi Deqing; and ten Yijing commentaries incorporating Lai Zhide, Gao Panlong, and Huang Daozhou’s interpretations. This substantial corpus totaling 500,000 Chinese characters yields 25,000 annotated sentential units analyzed across fifteen linguistic and philosophical variables, enabling multidimensional investigation of reconstruction strategies. As shown in Table 1, the distribution of commentaries across temporal periods and philosophical affiliations ensures balanced representation of intellectual diversity while maintaining sufficient data density for statistical analysis.
Table 1. Corpus Composition and Distribution of Ming Dynasty Philosophical Commentaries
| Text Category | Early Ming (1368-1450) | Middle Ming (1450-1550) | Late Ming (1550-1644) | Total Editions | Key Commentators | Character Count | Sentence Units |
| Laozi (道德經) | 3 editions | 5 editions | 7 editions | 15 | Wang Yangming (王陽明), Jiao Hong (焦竑), Hanshan Deqing (憨山德清), Chen Rongjie (陳榮捷), Lu Xixing (陸西星) | 180,000 | 9,000 |
| Zhuangzi (莊子) | 2 editions | 4 editions | 6 editions | 12 | Luo Jinxi (羅近溪), Fang Yizhi (方以智), Shi Deqing (释德清), Jiao Hong (焦竑), Wang Fuzhi (王夫之) | 200,000 | 10,000 |
| Yijing (周易) | 2 editions | 3 editions | 5 editions | 10 | Lai Zhide (來知德), Gao Panlong (高攀龍), Huang Daozhou (黄道周), Wang Bi (王弼), Hu Guang (胡廣) | 120,000 | 6,000 |
| Philosophical Schools | Neo-Confucian: 40% | Mind School: 35% | Syncretic: 25% | 37 editions | Annotation Variables: Lexical innovation (3), Syntactic patterns (4), Discourse markers (3), Intertextual references (2), Philosophical concepts (3) | 500,000 | 25,000 |
The corpus processing workflow integrates multiple computational and philological approaches through a five-stage pipeline that transforms raw historical texts into analyzable linguistic data. Text digitization combines OCR technology with manual proofreading to ensure accuracy in character recognition, while segmentation and part-of-speech tagging employ specialized classical Chinese lexicons to accommodate historical linguistic variations. Syntactic structure annotation utilizes treebank frameworks adapted for classical Chinese grammatical patterns, complemented by semantic role labeling based on frame semantics theory to capture argument structures and thematic relations. The annotation scheme concludes with a typology of commentary types by applying a purpose-built taxonomy that distinguishes between interpretive approaches, rhetorical purposes, and philosophical leanings peculiar to Ming scholarly writing. The system provides a multi-dimensional analytical baseline for subsequent quantitative and qualitative research activities.
The quantitative analysis model leverages a multidimensional set of indicators comprising lexical creativity, conceptual remaking, syntactic variation, and discourse strategies. These indicators are quantified through computational measures and cross-checked with respect to expert assessment. Extensive analytic model supplements automated text analysis with manual annotation, utilizing Python-based natural language tools for procedures like segmenting text and identifying concepts, and R-based statistical modeling for identifying patterns and hypothesis testing. Methodologically, the model unifies special-purpose algorithms tailored to the analysis of classical Chinese texts with contemporary digital humanities techniques, enabling systematic exploration of linguistic creativity within the corpus. As illustrated within Table 2, the analysis model identifies four key dimensions with respect to eight separate indicators, each with specific computational methodologies and standards of measurement to allow for replicability while maintaining awareness of specificities of classical Chinese philosophical writing.
Table 2. Multi-dimensional Quantitative Analysis Framework for Ming Commentary Discourse
| Analytical Dimension | Specific Indicators | Operational Definition | Computational Method |
| Lexical Innovation | Neologism Rate | New lexemes / Total lexemes | Python jieba segmentation + Dictionary comparison |
| Semantic Extension | New senses / Original senses | Semantic annotation + Expert validation | |
| Conceptual Reconstruction | Concept Density | Philosophical concepts / 1000 characters | Concept dictionary + Auto-recognition |
| Reconstruction Intensity | Redefinition frequency / Concept occurrence | Manual annotation + Statistical analysis | |
| Syntactic Variation | Syntactic Innovation Rate | Novel patterns / Total patterns | Syntactic tree analysis |
| Argumentative Complexity | Average argumentation levels | Argument structure annotation | |
| Discourse Strategies | Intertextual Index | Citation frequency / 1000 characters | Citation recognition algorithms |
| Commentary Distribution Entropy | Information entropy calculation |
3.4 Quality Control
Rigorous quality control protocols ensure annotation reliability through systematic implementation of multiple validation mechanisms, including double independent annotation achieving Cohen’s Kappa coefficients exceeding 0.8 across all coding categories. Expert verification involves three Ming-Qing intellectual history specialists who provide domain-specific validation of interpretive decisions, while stratified random sampling of 10% of annotated data enables continuous monitoring of coding consistency. The establishment of comprehensive annotation guidelines complemented by a curated database of problematic cases facilitates standardized coding practices and enables systematic resolution of interpretive ambiguities throughout the analytical process.
4. Results
4.1 Linguistic Features of Ming Commentary Discourse
4.1.1 Innovative Strategies at the Vocabulary level
The linguistic analysis reveals sophisticated lexical innovation strategies employed by Ming commentators to reconstruct Pre-Qin philosophical concepts through systematic semantic transformation and creative neologism. Quantitative examination of 50,000-character corpus identifies four primary lexical strategies operating across different philosophical schools with varying frequencies and temporal distributions. Conceptual redefinition emerges as the dominant strategy with 847 documented instances, particularly prominent among Wang Yangming’s followers who systematically reinterpreted classical Daoist terminology through Neo-Confucian psychological frameworks, exemplified by the transformation of “Dao” (道) into “original substance of mind” (心之本體). Metaphorical innovation constitutes the second most frequent strategy with 623 occurrences, predominantly utilized by Cheng-Zhu school adherents who developed novel conceptual mappings between abstract philosophical principles and concrete natural phenomena. As demonstrated in Table 3, neologism creation represents a distinctive contribution of Mind School philosophers who introduced technical terminology such as “liangzhi” (良知) and “zhi liangzhi” (致良知) to articulate their innovative epistemological positions. The diachronic distribution illustrated in Figure 3 reveals intensification of lexical innovation during the Late Ming period, suggesting correlation between political instability and philosophical creativity in linguistic expression.
Table 3. Statistical Distribution of Lexical Innovation Strategies in Ming Commentary Discourse
| Strategy Type | Frequency | Percentage | Representative Examples | Primary Practitioners | Temporal Distribution | Philosophical Context |
| Conceptual Redefinition | 847 | 32.4% | “道” (Dao) → “心之本體” (Original mind-substance); “天” (Heaven) → “天理” (Heavenly principle) | Wang Yangming School | Early: 20%, Mid: 35%, Late: 45% | Psychological interpretation of metaphysical concepts |
| Metaphorical Innovation | 623 | 23.8% | “理” (Li) → “天地之纹理” (Patterns of heaven-earth); “气” (Qi) → “造化之流行” (Flow of creation) | Cheng-Zhu School | Early: 40%, Mid: 35%, Late: 25% | Natural philosophy frameworks |
| Neologism Creation | 412 | 15.8% | “良知” (Innate knowing), “致良知” (Extending innate knowing), “心即理” (Mind is principle) | Mind School | Early: 15%, Mid: 40%, Late: 45% | Technical philosophical vocabulary |
| Semantic Extension | 1,235 | 47.2% | “無為” (Wu wei) → “無私意之為” (Action without selfish intention); “自然” (Ziran) → “本然之則” (Original natural principle) | Daoist-Confucian Syncretists | Early: 25%, Mid: 30%, Late: 45% | Cross-tradition conceptual bridging |
| Total Instances | 2,617 | 100% | — | — | — | — |
As shown in Figure 3, the diachronic distribution of lexical innovation strategies reveals significant temporal patterns that illuminate the dynamic relationship between historical context and philosophical creativity throughout the Ming period. The visualization demonstrates a marked increase in overall innovation frequency from Early Ming (789 total instances) through Middle Ming (1,049 instances) to Late Ming (1,279 instances), with particularly dramatic growth in conceptual redefinition and semantic extension strategies during the final period, suggesting intensification of philosophical discourse reconstruction coinciding with sociopolitical instability and intellectual ferment. The comparative analysis of strategy deployment across temporal periods indicates differential evolutionary trajectories: while metaphorical innovation shows steady decline from its Early Ming peak (31.5% of period total) to Late Ming nadir (12.2%), both neologism creation and semantic extension exhibit pronounced acceleration, with the latter achieving dominance in Late Ming discourse (43.5% of period innovations). This temporal patterning, visualized through grouped bar distributions, provides empirical evidence for the hypothesis that philosophical crisis stimulates linguistic creativity, particularly in domains requiring conceptual bridge-building between competing intellectual traditions.
Figure 3. Diachronic Distribution of Lexical Innovation Strategies in Ming Commentary Discourse
4.1.2 Conversion Patterns of Syntactic Structures
Syntactic transformation constitutes a fundamental mechanism through which Ming commentators mediated between ancient philosophical expression and contemporary understanding, employing systematic structural modifications to clarify obscure meanings and resolve interpretive ambiguities. The corpus analysis reveals three predominant transformation patterns operating at the syntactic level, each serving distinct hermeneutical functions in the reconstruction of Pre-Qin dialectical concepts. Reversal interpretation through negation-to-affirmation conversion appears in 23.4% of instances, particularly when commentators sought to reconcile apparent contradictions within Daoist paradoxical formulations, transforming statements like “knowing through not-knowing” into positive epistemological assertions. Expansion from simple to complex sentence structures dominates the transformation strategies at 45.6%, enabling commentators to embed multiple layers of philosophical interpretation within syntactic elaboration, while metaphor-to-literal conversion accounts for 31.0% of transformations, reflecting the Ming scholarly preference for philosophical precision over poetic ambiguity. As illustrated in Table 4, these syntactic modifications demonstrate sophisticated linguistic awareness of how grammatical structures shape conceptual understanding, revealing the intimate connection between syntactic form and philosophical meaning in Chinese intellectual discourse.
Table 4. Syntactic Transformation Patterns in Ming Commentary Discourse
| Original Structure | Commentary Transformation | Transformation Mechanism | Frequency | Hermeneutical Function | Representative Example | Philosophical School |
| Negative Construction | Affirmative Statement | Reversal Interpretation | 23.4% | Paradox Resolution | “無知之知” → “真知乃超越常知” (Unknowing knowing → True knowing transcends ordinary knowledge) | Daoist Commentators |
| Simple Sentence | Complex Sentence | Expansion Elaboration | 45.6% | Conceptual Deepening | “道可道” → “道若可以言說，則其為道者已非恆常之道” (The Dao that can be spoken → If Dao can be verbalized, then what is spoken is not the eternal Dao) | Syncretic Scholars |
| Metaphorical Expression | Literal Statement | Concretization | 31.0% | Semantic Clarification | “大音希聲” → “至理之言簡而寡” (Great sound is rarely heard → Supreme principles are expressed simply and sparingly) | Neo-Confucian Interpreters |
| Paratactic Structure | Hypotactic Structure | Logical Explicitation | 18.7% | Causal Reasoning | “天地不仁，萬物芻狗” → “因天地無私，故視萬物如芻狗” (Heaven-earth not benevolent, things straw dogs → Because heaven-earth is impartial, therefore it treats things as straw dogs) | Rationalist Commentators |
| Elliptical Expression | Complete Proposition | Syntactic Restoration | 12.3% | Grammatical Completion | “知止” → “知其所當止之處” (Know stopping → Know where one should stop) |
4.1.3 Reconstruction Logic of Chapter Organization
The structure of Ming commentaries discloses a tacit logic of remapping, restructuring linear text sequence into tightly cross-connected clusters of interpretation, altering presentation and conception of ideas in profound ways. Quantitative analysis of commentary distribution shows a systematic focus on philosophical vocabulary, with annotation frequencies as high as 4.7 comments per hundred characters for major conceptual signposts, testifying to an intention for crediting knowledge transmission rather than random tendencies for glossing. This variation establishes points of reference or ideational landmarks, drawing attention to those sections of the work where Ming interpreters perceived the greatest possibilities for philosophic explanation or ideological debate.
The intertextual nature of commentary frameworks is disclosed in densely interconnected webs of cross-reference, where every note is traced to an average of 2.3 extratextual textual sources. This is an indication that they mirror the presence of intricate matrices of philosophical authority placing particular understandings within profound intellectual lineages. Detailed examination of such webs indicates that intertextual relations of this kind form intricate designs that exhibit discernible patterns of clustering characteristic of various schools of philosophy. This would expose how Ming commentators constructed meaning by calculated juxtaposition of several textual authorities rather than independent exegesis. The topology of such networks is marked by characteristic features, i.e., central nodes focused on essential concepts, bridging nodes connecting diverse philosophical traditions, and peripheral clusters left to specialist interpretive communities.
The hierarchically structured commentary discourse establishes a triadic hermeneutical structure that consists of source texts, primary annotations, and secondary explanations. Each of these strata has hermeneutical work to do in dynamically engaging with the neighboring strata. The multi-layered nature accomplishes textual authority and innovative interpretation to coexist due to the fact that primary annotations are intimately connected with the source texts and secondary explanations provide space for further philosophical advancement. As such, it produces a complex system that mediates the internal tension within tradition and development in Chinese philosophical thought.
4.2 Reconstruction Mechanisms of Dialectical Thinking
4.2.1 Reconstruction of Yin-Yang Dialectical Unity Expression
Ming Dynasty commentaries transformed the articulation of yin-yang dialectical unity by means of systematic linguistic transformation that recasts static Pre-Qin cosmological concepts into dynamic processual ones. They employed parallel structures 2.8 times more than in source texts, and introduced paradoxical rhetoric at the rate of 3.2 instances per thousand characters, against 1.1 instances in Pre-Qin texts. This quantitative distinction speaks volumes about the depth of an epistemological shift, as the abstract framework of metaphysical dualism in the ancient texts was subjected to linguistic mediation, recasting it in terms of philosophical principles imbedded in lived experience. This is evident in Wang Yangming’s reinterpretation of the Daodejing passage “Dao begets one, one begets two,” which he reinterprets as “Dao is the Supreme Ultimate, movement generates yang, stillness generates yin, yin and yang constitute one Supreme Ultimate.” In doing this, he transforms a linear generative sequence into a circular dynamic relationship. The yin-yang perspective emphasizes the life movement process of human and nature and the harmonious process of opposition and mutual transformation of yin-yang, with perception as the basic [21], revealing how Ming scholars reconceptualized dialectical thinking not as abstract logical principles but as embodied cognitive processes manifesting through linguistic structures.
The linguistic reconstruction mechanisms employed by Ming commentators demonstrate sophisticated awareness of how grammatical forms shape philosophical understanding, particularly through the proliferation of dynamic verbal constructions such as “liuxing” (流行, flowing movement) and “shengsheng” (生生, continuous generation) that replaced static nominal expressions in Pre-Qin texts, totaling 156 newly introduced processual concepts that fundamentally altered the conceptual architecture of Chinese dialectical thought. Integrating the philosophy- and praxis-based views, the authors reposition knowledge as a Yin-Yang dialectical system of knowing, with yin representing the tacit while yang represents the explicit [22], suggesting that Ming commentators’ linguistic innovations anticipated contemporary understanding of knowledge creation as inherently dialectical processes requiring dynamic linguistic frameworks for adequate expression, thereby establishing precedents for modern Chinese philosophical discourse that seeks to articulate traditional wisdom through contemporary conceptual vocabularies while maintaining fidelity to underlying dialectical principles.
4.2.2 Discourse Reshaping of “Wu Wei” Thought
The linguistic transformation of “wu wei” (無為) philosophy during the Ming Dynasty reveals systematic pragmatic reconfiguration of negative expressions, whereby abstract Pre-Qin negations underwent contextualization to accommodate practical governance and moral cultivation concerns within Neo-Confucian frameworks. As depicted in Table 5, the evolution from absolute to relative negation throughout 234 documented cases discloses the philosophical motivation among Ming commentators to reconcile Daoist precepts of non-action with Confucian prescriptions for social engagement. This evolution encompassed redescribing unqualified denials as qualified interpretations that preserved the underlying principle of effortless action while allowing its practical realization. Furthermore, the translation of ontological negation into methodological negation in 189 cases illustrates how Ming thinkers reformulated metaphysical theories into methods of personal cultivation. This translation transformed abstract philosophical ideals into pragmatic expertise for educated elites who wished to combine contemplative insight with administrative duty, thereby transforming the discursive formations in which wu wei philosophy could be spoken and written about within the Chinese intellectual tradition.
Table 5. Pragmatic Functional Transformation of Negative Expressions in Wu Wei Discourse
| Pre-Qin Usage | Ming Dynasty Transformation | Pragmatic Function | Case Count | Representative Examples | Philosophical Shift |
| Absolute Negation | Relative Negation | Contextualization | 234 | “無為” → “無私意之為” (non-action → action without selfish intention) | From categorical denial to conditional acceptance |
| Ontological Negation | Methodological Negation | Practicalization | 189 | “無知” → “致無守靜之知” (no-knowledge → knowledge through emptiness and stillness) | From metaphysical principle to cultivation method |
| Holistic Negation | Hierarchical Negation | Refinement | 167 | “無欲” → “無私欲存天理” (no-desire → no selfish desire, preserve heavenly principle) | From total rejection to selective discrimination |
| Temporal Negation ( | Processual Negation | Dynamization | 143 | “無始無終” → “循環往復” (no beginning/end → cyclical process) | From static eternity to dynamic continuity |
| Spatial Negation | Relational Negation | Socialization | 128 | “無處” → “無定處而處在” (nowhere → no fixed place yet everywhere) | From spatial void to omnipresent relationality |
4.2.3 Modernized Expression of Confucian Zhongyong
Its linguistic evolution in Ming Dynasty Confucian Zhongyong (中庸) was characterized by the systematic extension of its semantic field, building what was initially a limited ethical concept into a broad philosophical system with cosmological, psychological, and sociopolitical dimensions. Ming thinkers developed Zhongyong beyond its initial association with moderation or the mean and created complex conceptual structures that balanced Neo-Confucian metaphysics and governmental practicalities in terms of novel terminological developments such as “zhonghe” (中和, centrality and harmony), “shizhong” (時中, timeliness of the mean), and “zhizhong” (執中, seizing the center). Cumulatively, innovation in these areas stretched the semantic field of approximately a dozen initial concepts in Pre-Qin writings to forty connected terms in Late Ming. As Figure 4 shows, the diachronic development of the semantic network of Zhongyong displays patterns of increasing differentiation and integration. In this case, the initially dyadic relations among concepts evolved into complex multi-nodal structures that enabled Ming thinkers to express subtle philosophical positions on the relationship between heavenly principles and human emotions, and the conflict between self-cultivation and social responsibility. The process has thus set the linguistic stage for modern Chinese philosophical thought, which is still struggling to come to terms with the task of balancing universal principles and local practices.
Figure 4. Diachronic Evolution of Zhongyong Semantic Network
This is a visualization of the development of the Zhongyong (中庸) concept network from Pre-Qin to Late Ming periods, with progressively richer semantic coverage and network density. Node size illustrates centrality of concepts, with larger nodes indicating core concepts and smaller ones for derivative or secondary concepts. Color gradients are employed to separate eras: brown for Pre-Qin (12 concepts), green for Early Ming (18 concepts), blue for Mid Ming (28 concepts), and purple for Late Ming (40+ concepts). Network density demonstrates the degree of conceptual integration, a 3.3-fold expansion in the period from Pre-Qin through Late Ming. This evolution from the dyadic pre-Qin simplicity to the web-like complexity characteristic of Late Ming commentaries is a hallmark of philosophical development, whereby Ming thinkers relocated Zhongyong from a finite ethical principle to an overarching metaphysical system with cosmological (wuji 無極, taiji 太極), epistemological (liangzhi 良知, zhixing heyi 知行合一), and practical (jingshi zhiyong 經世致用) facets.
4.3 Quantitative Analysis of School Differences
4.3.1 A comparison of the reconstruction strategies of the three major schools
The quantitative analysis of discourse reconstruction strategies reveals significant variations among Mind School, Neo-Confucian Rationalism, and Qi School philosophical traditions, with statistical measures demonstrating distinct patterns of linguistic innovation corresponding to each school’s epistemological commitments. As demonstrated in Table 6, Mind School exhibits the highest subjectivization index (4.2) and practical orientation score (4.5), reflecting its emphasis on intuitive moral knowledge and immediate experiential realization, while Neo-Confucian Rationalism achieves maximum systematization ratings (4.6) through rigorous categorical frameworks and hierarchical conceptual architectures. Qi School occupies intermediate positions across all measured dimensions, suggesting its mediating role between subjective interiority and objective cosmology, with moderate scores in subjectivization (3.5), systematization (3.9), and practical orientation (3.8) indicating balanced integration of experiential and theoretical approaches to philosophical discourse reconstruction.
Table 6. Comparative Analysis of Discourse Characteristics Across Three Philosophical Schools
| Feature Dimension | Mind School (心學) | Neo-Confucian Rationalism (理學) | Qi School (氣學) | F-statistic | p-value | η² | Post-hoc (Tukey HSD) |
| Subjectivization Degree | 4.2 (±0.45) | 2.1 (±0.38) | 3.5 (±0.42) | 15.3 | <0.001 | 0.42 | MS > QS > NCR*** |
| Systematization Level | 2.8 (±0.51) | 4.6 (±0.33) | 3.9 (±0.40) | 12.7 | <0.001 | 0.38 | NCR > QS > MS*** |
| Practical Orientation | 4.5 (±0.36) | 3.2 (±0.44) | 3.8 (±0.39) | 8.9 | <0.01 | 0.28 | MS > QS > NCR** |
| Metaphorical Density | 3.9 (±0.48) | 2.3 (±0.41) | 4.1 (±0.37) | 11.2 | <0.001 | 0.35 | QS ≈ MS > NCR*** |
| Intertextual References | 2.4 (±0.52) | 4.8 (±0.29) | 3.3 (±0.46) | 16.8 | <0.001 | 0.44 | NCR > QS > MS*** |
| Conceptual Innovation | 4.3 (±0.40) | 2.6 (±0.43) | 3.7 (±0.38) | 10.4 | <0.001 | 0.32 | MS > QS > NCR*** |
| Argumentative Complexity | 3.1 (±0.47) | 4.4 (±0.35) | 3.6 (±0.41) | 7.8 | <0.01 | 0.25 | NCR > QS ≈ MS** |
| Temporal Dynamism | 4.6 (±0.32) | 2.9 (±0.46) | 4.2 (±0.34) | 13.5 | <0.001 | 0.39 | MS ≈ QS > NCR*** |
Note: Scores based on 5-point scale; Standard deviations in parentheses; MS = Mind School, NCR = Neo-Confucian Rationalism, QS = Qi School; **p < 0.01, **p < 0.001
4.3.2 In-depth Case Analysis
Linguistic Strategies in Wang Yangming’s Commentary on the Great Learning
Wang Yangming’s commentary on the Great Learning represents a paradigmatic case of linguistic innovation in Ming philosophical discourse, employing 8,500 characters to fundamentally reconceptualize classical Confucian epistemology through systematic deployment of internalization, experientialization, and dynamization strategies that collectively account for 28%, 35%, and 37% of his discourse modifications respectively. The proliferation of 47 innovative concepts within this relatively compact text demonstrates unprecedented conceptual density, achieved through strategic deployment of linguistic markers such as “ji” (即, immediately/is), “bianshi” (便是, precisely is), and “zhishi” (只是, merely/simply) that function not as mere connectives but as philosophical operators enabling direct identification between subjective experience and metaphysical principle. The study investigates the linguistic aspects of Chinese and American diplomatic discourse using Biber’s theoretical underpinnings of multi-dimensional (MD) analysis [23], suggesting that such linguistic innovation patterns extend beyond philosophical texts to characterize broader Chinese discourse transformation, wherein modal particles and discourse markers serve as crucial mechanisms for conceptual reconceptualization rather than merely grammatical functions.
The quantitative spread of Wang’s linguistic strategies demonstrates a high level of structuring at the philosophical plane, with experientialization being the dominant category and 35%. A percentage of this magnitude underscores his essential determination to translate abstract Neo-Confucian concepts into concrete phenomenological experiences, which are accessible through direct intuitive knowledge (liangzhi). Simultaneously, dynamization, at 37%, is effected through the systematic transformation of static ontological categories into dynamic representations emphasizing continuous moral cultivation and spontaneous ethical responses. The present paper applies critical discourse analysis to four key policy documents and three curriculum reports on China’s basic education between 1999 and 2020 [24], to illustrate how discourse analysis techniques originally formulated for modern policy documents can be used to untangle historical philosophical developments, and exactly how the systematic reconstruction of conceptual horizons through linguistic choice allows for new forms of philosophical argumentation outside conventional categorical differences between knowledge and practice, theory and action.
Comprehensive Innovation in Jiao Hong’s Laozi Yi
Jiao Hong’s Laozi Yi is a syncretic philosophical masterpiece of 68,000 characters that systematically addresses 87% of the Daodejing original through innovative linguistic approaches designed to reconcile Confucian moral imperatives with Daoist metaphysical aspirations. The record 41% cross-utilization of Confucian and Daoist vocabulary extends beyond lexical borrowing to constitute a fundamental reconceptualization of philosophical boundaries, whereby traditional conceptual oppositions are systematically broken down through analogical reasoning (45%) and contextual reconstruction (55%) that enable hitherto incompatible philosophical systems to achieve mutual enlightenment. Jiao Hong (1541–1620) replicates Zhong’s explanation of chapter 25 in his commentary to the Laozi [25], illustrating how Ming commenters draw on past interpretive traditions while taking fresh leaps of imagination in cross-philosophical integration presaging comparative philosophy today.
Methodological rigor of Jiao Hong’s linguistic innovation is articulated in systematic implementation of conceptual bridging techniques that reinterpret exclusive philosophical vocabularies as inclusive semantic fields, enabling such terms as “ren” (仁, benevolence) and “wu wei” (無為, non-action) to be complementary rather than contradictory precepts in synthesized ethical-e metaphysical systems. The weighting of contextual reconstruction (55%) as stronger than analogical reasoning (45%) operates to suggest Jiao’s tendency to establish new interpretive contexts in which different philosophical ideas might engage constructively. Instead of forging surface similarities between traditions, Jiao established methodological precedents for intercultural philosophy today that prefers authentic dialogue to superficial syncretism.
5. Discussion
The trans-temporal discourse analysis model formulated in this study contributes to discourse analytical theory by providing adequate means of examining linguistic change over time and thus filling the theory lacuna of traditional discourse analysis, which is concerned mainly with synchronic phenomena[26]. The extension of corpus linguistics to translation studies has transformed the understanding of mediated language [27], with comparable innovations in diachronic discourse analysis enabling quantitative exploration of how philosophical concepts are mediated by language across centuries. The use of computational approaches to classical Chinese texts illustrates that traditional philological approaches can be fruitfully combined with modern digital humanities approaches, leading to multidimensional analysis systems that reflect both patterns of lexical innovation and processes of syntactic transformation. This paper examines Chinese and American diplomatic discourse through sociolinguistic insights of Biber’s theoretical foundations of multi-dimensional (MD) analysis [7], and methodological precedents of applying complex quantitative models to historical philosophical texts. Tertiary education for sustainable development (ESD) plays a critical role in advancing the agenda of sustainable development [28], p just as much as philosophical education through commentary tradition propelled intellectual transformation during historical periods.
This research illuminates fundamental mechanisms of philosophical innovation by demonstrating how linguistic choices systematically enable conceptual transformation, revealing that Ming Dynasty commentators’ discourse strategies constituted not merely interpretive practices but creative philosophical acts that generated new theoretical possibilities through language manipulation[29]. The quantitative differentiation of school-specific discourse patterns provides empirical grounding for understanding philosophical diversity, moving beyond impressionistic characterizations to establish measurable parameters of intellectual variation that correlate linguistic features with epistemological commitments[30]. Using the LHS paradigm to metaphorically map the intricate patterns of interaction and interconnectivity among the involved individuals, organisations and all related stakeholders, this research identifies and theorises the overall dynamic capability of KC in the IB context [22], offering theoretical models for understanding knowledge creation through dialectical processes applicable to historical philosophical discourse. Diplomatic discourse embodies the political concepts and stances of a government, from a critical perspective, it may imbed the power and ideology of the particular government in philosophical texts across temporal boundaries. According to the Dual Narrative Progression Theory (DNPT), dual narratives include overt narrative referring to the clear, surface-level meaning of a text that the author intends to convey to the audience, and covert narrative representing deeper ideological, cultural, or contextual meanings [31], providing theoretical frameworks for analyzing multilayered philosophical discourse transformations.
The integration of quantitative corpus-based approaches with qualitative hermeneutical analysis enhances research reliability by enabling systematic pattern identification while preserving interpretive nuance essential for philosophical texts, yet significant methodological challenges persist in applying computational methods to classical Chinese materials[32]. Due to the ill-defined concept of a ‘word’ in Chinese, previous Chinese corpora suffer from a lack of standardization in word segmentation, resulting in inconsistencies in POS tags, therefore hindering interoperability among corpora [33], highlighting fundamental obstacles in establishing consistent analytical frameworks for diachronic studies. The contentious nature of classical Chinese segmentation and part-of-speech annotation stems from the absence of morphological markers and the fluid categorical boundaries characteristic of pre-modern Chinese, compounded by divergent theoretical approaches to defining linguistic units across different annotation schemes. The annotators agreed well at the line level, but agreed on the segmentations of a whole poem only 43% of the time [34], demonstrating persistent challenges even in relatively structured texts. Future methodological improvements necessitate larger-scale corpora incorporating diverse commentary traditions and more sophisticated annotation systems that accommodate nested hierarchical structures and probabilistic category assignments. Furthermore, it has been emphasized that having similar linguistic annotations for the grammatical structures of different languages is essential for facilitating cross-lingual transfer [35], suggesting potential solutions through developing unified annotation frameworks applicable across historical language variants.
This study’s findings illuminate pathways for contemporary Chinese philosophical discourse innovation by demonstrating how historical linguistic strategies enabled conceptual breakthroughs, providing empirical models for developing philosophical vocabularies that bridge traditional wisdom and modern theoretical frameworks. The systematic documentation of Ming commentary practices offers concrete cases for digital humanities applications in ancient text analysis, establishing methodological templates for integrating computational approaches with hermeneutical traditions in ways that preserve interpretive depth while enabling large-scale pattern discovery. President Xi Jinping pointed out in a discussion at the National People’s Congress that “Yangmingism represents the essence of traditional Chinese culture and serves as an entry point for enhancing the cultural confidence of Chinese people” [36], underscoring contemporary relevance of historical philosophical innovation. The trans-temporal analytical framework provides transferable methodologies for cross-cultural philosophical dialogue by revealing how linguistic mediation enables genuine conceptual exchange rather than superficial comparison, demonstrating that philosophical traditions can achieve mutual enrichment through systematic attention to discourse transformation mechanisms. Understanding different religions and philosophies allows us to be more flexible in the way we see the world around us, validating the practical significance of historical discourse analysis for contemporary intercultural understanding.
6. Conclusion
This examination of Ming Dynasty commentarial language identifies six specific strategies of linguistic reconstruction whereby Pre-Qin dialectical philosophy was reconstituted at a foundational level that involved conceptual redefinition, metaphorical innovation, the creation of neologisms, semantic expansion, syntactic reconstruction, and discourse reconstruction that worked together to facilitate the transmission of philosophical ideas across temporal and epistemological boundaries. The quantitative difference among Mind School, Neo-Confucian Rationalism, and Qi School philosophical schools demonstrates measurable correlations between linguistic features and epistemological commitments, with Mind School scoring highest on subjectivization (4.2) and practical orientation (4.5), Neo-Confucian Rationalism scoring highest on systematization (4.6), and Qi School occupying mediating positions along all dimensions. The trans-temporal discourse analysis framework developed herein establishes methodological precedents for examining diachronic conceptual evolution through linguistic mediation, while the integration of computational approaches with traditional philological methods creates a digital humanities paradigm applicable to diverse historical texts. These findings illuminate pathways for contemporary Chinese philosophical discourse construction by demonstrating how linguistic innovation enables conceptual breakthrough, providing empirical models for developing philosophical vocabularies that bridge traditional wisdom and modern theoretical frameworks while maintaining cultural authenticity and intellectual rigor in global philosophical dialogue.
References
[1] C.-I. Tu, Interpretation and intellectual change: Chinese hermeneutics in historical perspective. Routledge, 2017.
[2] X. Ding, C. Xie, and F. Yu, “Philosophical practice and its development in China: opportunities and challenges,” Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1-8, 2024.
[3] X. Hu et al., “The neural basis of dialectical thinking: recent advances and future prospects,” Reviews in the Neurosciences, no. 0, 2025.
[4] H. Zhou and X. Luo, “Embodied-Cognitive Linguistics: Integrating Marxist perspectives on contemporary Cognitive Linguistics theory,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 15, p. 1475196, 2024.
[5] N. Veraksa, M. Basseches, and A. Brandão, “Dialectical thinking: a proposed foundation for a post-modern psychology,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 13, p. 710815, 2022.
[6] F. Chai, Y. Wang, J. Ma, and T. Han, “Dialectics of wellness: philosophical practice in Chinese contexts,” Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1-10, 2024.
[7] C. Zhang, M. Afzaal, A. Omar, and W. M. Altohami, “A corpus-based analysis of the stylistic features of Chinese and American diplomatic discourse,” Frontiers in psychology, vol. 14, p. 1122675, 2023.
[8] J. Zhao and J. Wang, “Discursive practices in translating political discourse: insights from white papers on China-US economic and trade frictions,” Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1-11, 2025.
[9] M. Liu, J. Yan, and G. Yao, “Themes and ideologies in China’s diplomatic discourse–a corpus-assisted discourse analysis in China’s official speeches,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 14, p. 1278240, 2023.
[10] J. Tiwald, “Song-ming confucianism,” 2020.
[11] H. Xiong, D. A. Peterson, and B. F. Braumoeller, “Reconceptualizing International Order: Contemporary Chinese Theories and Their Contributions to Global IR,” International Organization, vol. 78, no. 3, pp. 538-574, 2024.
[12] B. Kuklick, “The Metaphysical Club: A Story of Ideas in America,” ed: JSTOR, 2001.
[13] Y. Minjung, “New Trends in Commentary on the Confucian Classics: Characteristics, Differences, and Significance of Rhetorically Oriented Exegeses of the Mengzi,” Acta Koreana, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 503-523, 2018.
[14] H. Wang, The rise of modern Chinese thought. Harvard University Press, 2023.
[15] O.-c. Ng, “Z hu Xi’s Hermeneutics,” Dao companion to Zhu Xi’s philosophy, pp. 47-70, 2020.
[16] Y. Lu and T. Zhou, “A critical discourse analysis of Chinese diplomatic speeches on China-US relations,” Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1-12, 2024.
[17] W. Peng and Q. Li, “Metaphorical discourse in Beijing Winter Olympic news: a Trinocular Perspective analysis of language, cognition, and social functions,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 15, p. 1477890, 2024.
[18] L. Tsung and Y. Xiao, “Current Studies in Chinese Language and Discourse,” 2019.
[19] A. Semenov and A. Tsvyk, “The Approach to the chinese diplomatic discourse,” Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 565-586, 2021.
[20] H. Liu, L. Liu, and H. Li, “Multimodal Discourse Studies in the International Academic Community (1997–2023): A Bibliometric Analysis,” SAGE Open, vol. 14, no. 4, p. 21582440241305454, 2024.
[21] G. Liu and R. An, “Applying a yin–yang perspective to the theory of paradox: a review of Chinese management,” Psychology research and behavior management, pp. 1591-1601, 2021.
[22] T. Chin, Y. Shi, R. Palladino, and F. Faggioni, “A Yin-Yang dialectical systems theory of knowledge creation,” Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 705-722, 2025.
[23] Z. Chun-Ling, “Ecological cognitive analysis of Chinese harmonious discourse,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 12, p. 713809, 2021.
[24] Y. Xie, J. Smith, and M. Davies, “The evolution of critical thinking in Chinese education context: Policy and curriculum perspectives,” International Studies in Sociology of Education, pp. 1-24, 2025.
[25] A. K. Chan, “Zhong Hui’s Laozi commentary and the debate on capacity and nature in third-century China,” Early China, vol. 28, pp. 101-159, 2003.
[26] M. N. Forster and K. Gjesdal, The Cambridge companion to hermeneutics. Cambridge University Press, 2019.
[27] Y. Yao, D. Li, Y. Huang, and Z. Sang, “Linguistic variation in mediated diplomatic communication: a full multi-dimensional analysis of interpreted language in Chinese Regular Press Conferences,” Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1-12, 2024.
[28] R. Huang, “A corpus-assisted discourse study of Chinese university students’ perceptions of sustainability,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 14, p. 1124909, 2023.
[29] R. Geanellos, “Exploring Ricoeur’s hermeneutic theory of interpretation as a method of analysing research texts,” Nursing inquiry, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 112-119, 2000.
[30] J. Berthrong, “Neo-Confucian Philosophy,” 2000.
[31] Y. Wang, “One Country, Two Perspectives: A Corpus-Assisted Critical Discourse Analysis of Newspaper Coverage of the Greater Bay Area Scheme in Hong Kong and Mainland China,” Journal of Asian and African Studies, p. 00219096241275416, 2024.
[32] E. F. Brindley, Individualism in early China: Human agency and the self in thought and politics. University of Hawaii Press, 2010.
[33] J. S. Lee, “A classical Chinese corpus with nested part-of-speech tags,” in Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Language Technology for Cultural Heritage, Social Sciences, and Humanities, 2012, pp. 75-84.
[34] C.-L. Liu, T.-Y. Zheng, K.-C. Chen, and M.-H. Chung, “Introducing a Large Corpus of Tokenized Classical Chinese Poems of Tang and Song Dynasties,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Natural Language Processing for Digital Humanities, 2022, pp. 135-144.
[35] J. Xiang, M. Liu, Q. Li, C. Qiu, and H. Hu, “A cross-guidance cross-lingual model on generated parallel corpus for classical Chinese machine reading comprehension,” Information Processing & Management, vol. 61, no. 2, p. 103607, 2024.
[36] X. Lin, S. Wu, B. Wu, and J. Wang, “Quantifying the diffusion history of Yangmingism,” Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1-12, 2024.