Unlocking the Enigma: Imagery and Meaning in Chinese Characters

Unlocking the Enigma: Imagery and Meaning in Chinese Characters | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Unlocking the Enigma: Imagery and Meaning in Chinese Characters lang feng This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3930477/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Phonetic characters neatly tie letters to pronunciation for recording speech sounds. Conversely, Chinese characters deviate from this phonetic simplicity, as their meanings veiled behind a mysterious ideological mechanism. Our analysis, spanning 9,000 regular script Chinese characters, unravels this enigma, revealing a rich tapestry of imagery encapsulating experiential events. Unlike their phonetic counterparts, Chinese characters refrain from direct sound representation. Instead, our findings illuminate a fascinating revelation—these characters employ imagery as metaphors to convey meanings. In essence, the structures themselves craft mental representations of experiences tied to word meanings. This intricate dance between structure and meaning forms a powerful ideological connection, facilitating our comprehension of word meanings. To systematically explore these visual metaphors, we establish four necessary conditions, adhering to scientific rigor and steering clear of unwarranted speculation. By collecting and analysing the meanings of characters sharing identical structures, we distill structural imagery that meets our stringent criteria. In conclusion, we identify the structural imagery underpinning 9,000 regular script Chinese characters and their intricate formations. Additionally, we outline five cognitive patterns governing their interactions. These revelations reveal the mechanism of ideogram formation in the Chinese language, offering a guiding theory for the nuanced study of Chinese word formation. Beyond theoretical significance, our research has practical implications, as it could enhance the efficiency of Chinese word acquisition. Cultural Studies Linguistics words (字詞) imagery cultural knowledge word formation cognition Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 1. Introduction In the realm of language studies worldwide, three distinct traditions have emerged—the Greek-Roman, the Indian, and the Chinese minorities—all of which have centred their inquiries around written language. Despite their focus, examination of morphology has perennially remained limited. Despite historical disparities, Chinese and Western traditions have followed disparate paths in linguistic studies, yet both have tended to overlook the exploration of morphology. [1] Reflecting on modern times, "馬氏文通" (Ma’s Wen Tong 1898) stands out as the initial grammatical work in Chinese history introducing modern linguistics to the country. Zhang Shijian (章士釗 1907) was the first individual in Chinese history to scientifically propose the concept of a "word." [2] Additionally, Lai Jinxi (黎錦熙 1922) was a trailblazer in advancing a scientific and grammatical structure for lexemes in his Table of Composition of Polyphonic Lexemes. [3] In the 1940s, Chen Wangdao (陳望道 1940) was described for the first time in his Answers to Questions on Grammatical Innovation using the term "morpheme". Cao Bohan (曹伯韓 1952) delved into exploring the boundaries between words and characters and between words and morphemes. Luk Chi-wai (陸志韋 1956) proposed the enduring "homomorphic substitution method" to isolate morphemes in his work titled The Object and Procedure of Lexical Composition (1956). This method is still in use today. Along with others, Luk Chi-wai compiled a series of books on the structure of words and phrases, a method that persists. Lu Zhiwei and colleagues edited The Composition of Chinese Words (1957), the inaugural monograph devoted to word composition. In the 1980s, Zhang Shoukang (張壽康 1981) differentiated between the composition of words and the composition of word classes (nouns, verbs, adjectives, numerals, quantifiers, pronouns, etc.) in The Composition of Words and the Composition of Words. Pan Wenguo (潘文國) et al. (2004), in "A Study of the Structural Methods of the Chinese Language", systematically organized and summarized the literature on structural methods from 1898 to 1990. As we enter the 21st century, scholars have conducted in-depth studies from various theoretical perspectives, presenting a multifaceted and diversified landscape. Despite more than a century of development in the study of Chinese word formation, these endeavors have not yet attained a satisfactory level of accurate elucidation of the rules governing word formation. To address this shortfall, we propose the need for some conceptual amendments. Primarily, since the introduction of Western linguistics to China more than a century ago, the Chinese people have engaged in profound reflections and modifications of the Chinese language. This evolution spans the promotion of the vernacular language and its alignment with Putonghua, the consolidation of dialects through pinyin symbols, and even the simplification of Chinese character structures. These transformations constitute the primary catalysts for the advancement of modern Chinese word formation studies. Consequently, they delineated the research focus of modern Chinese lexicography, wherein the Chinese language ultimately embraced the concept corresponding to the modern linguistic notion of "words": 字詞 (words). Chinese lexicography, therefore, represents the meticulous examination of the internal structure, function, and laws governing words. Second, a Chinese word can be either monosyllabic or multisyllabic. However, most lexical composition researchers have consistently treated Chinese words as lexemes or morphemes. They have transformed the study of lexical composition into an exploration of multicharacter words, often applying syntactic concepts from Western linguistics. This perspective overlooks the fact that Chinese characters are predominantly composed of other Chinese characters. In ancient Chinese, a single Chinese character was frequently used as a single-character word. There is no inherent distinction between multicharacter words and single-character words formed from their internal components. Even within Chinese characters, there exist smaller semantic units. Therefore, the focus of word formation studies should be on the rules and principles of single-character words, i.e., the Chinese character itself, as multicharacter words are simply an extension of the internal combinations of single-character words. Furthermore, global writing systems can be broadly categorized into alphabetic and ideographic systems. [4] Alphabetic systems rely on the correspondence between letters and their pronunciations to record speech sounds. However, for Chinese characters, there is no such direct correspondence between characters and speech sounds. [5] Chinese characters do not inherently express sound, and there is no sound-related representation within the character's structure. [6] Despite this, the concept of pictophonetic characters (形聲字) has been widely accepted since ancient times, during which most structures in Chinese characters are considered sound symbols. This categorization limits ideograms to 540 radicals. [7] However, the ideographic nature of Chinese characters, or pictophonetic characters, is not exhaustive, and the character structure lacks sufficient justification to represent the meaning of characters or words. In other words, the structure with the original complete ideograms is incomplete in providing adequate justification. To preserve the ideological integrity of the Han character structure, it is imperative to exclude cognitive interference from phonemes. Finally, as Chinese characters have evolved from oracle bones, jinwen (金文), and Tuan styles (彖體) to contemporary Chinese characters in regular script (楷書), different calligraphic styles of the same character exhibit distinct structures, reflecting varying cognitive thinking in different historical periods. Consequently, structures from different calligraphic styles cannot be mutually interpreted, despite the inherent relationships among them. The study of the composition of various calligraphic styles is deemed more insightful than a study focused solely on dynamic evolution over time. In terms of research sequence, a static diachronic study of calligraphic forms from near to far should precede dynamic chronological studies. This involves a "reverse engineering" approach, progressing from present-day Chinese characters to ancient ones. Closer calligraphic forms provide more certain explanations. This thesis exclusively refers to regular script Chinese characters, with discussions centred on static diachronic studies. Moving on, given that ideographs are unrelated to their sounds, special attention will be directed toward understanding their construction and how they represent meanings, including multiple meanings. We contend that these ideographs are not arbitrarily coded but rather adhere to their own rules and functions, enabling comprehensive explanations of word meanings. Historical references, such as Xu Shen's "Shuowen Jiezi" (許慎的《說文解字》), suggest an inherent relationship between ideograms and word meanings, distinct from the conventional and arbitrary connections in phonetic scripts. Therefore, a re-examination of the ideological relationship between structures and meanings is warranted from a modern scientific perspective, considering the principles of structure combination and joint ideology mechanisms. For millennia, the challenge of Chinese word formation has persisted, with traditional theories such as the six books proving incompatible with modern scientific requirements. The difficulty of learning Chinese persists, prompting a reliance on rote memorization. Contemporary developments in linguistics, cognitive linguistics, cognitive psychology, symbolism, linguistic symbolism, and cultural symbolism offer theoretical groundwork and perspectives for the study of Chinese word formation. Today, Chinese characters are recognized not only as linguistic phenomena but also as manifestations of human social behavior, overall cultural phenomena, and sociopsychological cognitive phenomena. Ideology, in this context, encompasses human understanding and cognition of the entire world. Therefore, the study of Chinese characters and lexicons should encompass a comprehensive examination of language, cognition, culture, and their intricate interrelationships. 2. Basic principle: imagery word formation Cang Jie (倉頡) 8 holds the distinction of being the pioneer in the art of writing, a period when written language had yet to be established but spoken language already existed. While spoken language naturally evolves, writing emerges as a cultural invention, signifying that speech and meaning can be conveyed through written words. Facing the challenge of inventing writing, Cang Jie grappled with the question of what elements to encode to represent the sounds or meanings of speech. Given that Chinese characters are not phonetic, it became evident that a phonetic representation was impractical. This prompted us to explore the rationale behind the construction of Chinese single-character words (Hanzi漢字), aiming to decipher the ideograms' principles of morphology and their relationship with multiple meanings. To delve into these questions, we revisit the early days of writing's inception. In both Eastern and Western history, the origin of writing began with painting—an attempt to depict external objects by tracing their shapes. However, as cognitive understanding deepens, this method becomes inadequate for representing abstract concepts or meanings. Most languages then adopt phonological coding, encoding symbols about phonemes or syllables to represent concepts or meanings. Phonetic scripts directly record speech sounds according to pinyin rules, establishing a conventional relationship between speech sounds and semantics (word meanings) and thus addressing the challenge of representing abstract concepts indirectly through speech sounds. An intriguing question arises: how did the Chinese script diverge onto the ideographic path instead of the phonetic path? The answer lies at the root of Chinese civilization in Ba Gua (八卦 Eight Trigrams). This three-layered combination of a small number of symbols (yin and yang 陰、陽) (乾、兌、離、震、坤、艮、坎、巽) represents various natural phenomena (天、澤、火、雷、地、山、水、風) and serves as a metaphor for comprehending abstract concepts or meanings (trigrams). Through the Ba Gua pattern, the Chinese character structure can be composed of a limited set of symbols combined, imbuing these combinations with experiential imagery and making them effective metaphors for understanding word meanings. Table 1 was created to illustrate the similarities between Ba Gua and Chinese characters: Table 1 Correspondence between Bagua and Chinese Characters Symbol Element Combination Quantity Representation Imagery meaning 八卦 (陰陽)爻(2) 3層(卦) 卦爻 卦爻象 卦辭 漢字 形素(84) 10層(字形) 構形 字意 字義 “易傳༎系辭上” said: 書不盡言, 言不盡意。然則聖人之意, 其不可見乎༟子曰: 聖人立象 以盡意, 設卦以盡情偽, 繫辭焉以盡其言。 9 Ancient people grappled with a profound dilemma: written words proved inadequate at fully expressing language, and spoken words fell short of capturing the essence of meaning. How could the wisdom of sages be conveyed? Confucius said that the sages employed a method akin to the Eight Trigrams, namely, "立象" (establishing imagery), to articulate meaning. A pivotal inquiry arises: what does "象" (imagery) signify, and how does "象" effectively convey meaning? The relation between "discern of words and meanings 言意之辨" is further elucidated in Wang Bi's "Zhouyi Liaozhi. Mingxiang" (王弼的”周易略例༎明象”). Wang Bi eloquently highlights the symbiotic relationship between words, images, and meanings, propelling us to a deeper exploration of this linguistic conundrum: 夫象者, 出意者也。言者, 明象者也。盡意莫若象, 盡象莫若言。言 生於象, 固可尋言以觀象;象生於意, 固可尋象以觀意。意以象盡, 象以言著。 10 Wang Bi's exposition elucidates the primary function of Chinese character structures, emphasizing their role in constructing imagery. He asserts that only after obtaining the imagery can one comprehend the meaning associated with it. Wang Bi's articulation clarifies the progressive relationship between words, images, and meaning. The significance of Wang Bi's "discernment of words and meanings" lies in his exploration of the representation of abstract concepts. These abstractions, derived from concrete or figurative phenomena, result from the extraction of "imagery." Consequently, abstract concepts can be comprehended through their corresponding "imagery." There is a certain commonality between abstract concepts and their "imagery," manifested through similarity and relatedness. The former indicates shared characteristics, while the latter implies a connection in terms of shape, color, space, time, and nature. Once society establishes an associative relationship between the two, analogies can be drawn from imagery or objects. This relationship between "imagery" and "meaning" forms the foundation for the composition of Chinese characters. For instance, the character "象" (xiàng) comprises the upper part of "兔" (tù), representing a rabbit's head, and the upper and lower parts of "豕" (shǐ), forming a "fat animal like a rabbit's head and a pig's body." This construction not only creates imagery but also employs direct metaphors. The imagery crafted by the character structure serves as a metaphor or example for the character's meaning, illustrating that Chinese character structures represent imagery, which, in turn, functions as metaphors for the meanings of words or concepts. The relationship between "imagery" and "meaning" in Chinese characters is inherently metaphorical, constituting a form of cognition or understanding. Wang Bi's "discern of words and meanings" can be seen, in modern terms, as a solution to the challenge of meaning and representation in Chinese characters. While Wang Bi's work stems from a fusion of visions based on Zhouyi (周易༎繫辭), he holds the distinction of being the first in Chinese history to systematically discuss the meaning and representation of Chinese characters. 11 If we employ modern cognitive science to delve into the relationship between the form and meaning of Chinese characters, a fundamental question arises: where do human concepts or meanings originate? In cognitive linguistics, human experience is considered pivotal in shaping conceptual systems and forms of reasoning. 12 Edmund Gustav Albrecht Husserl 13 posited that primitive action is the origin of all cognition, emphasizing the intricate interplay between the body, the brain, and the situation in the formation of cognition. 14 、 15 Numerous psychological experiments have demonstrated the close connection between language comprehension and bodily behavior. The Nobel Prize-winning neuroscientist Edelman debunked the notion of meaning as an abstract symbol, deeming it one of the greatest fallacies in the history of science. These experiential theories of cognition provide a robust foundation for the concept of meaning. Substantial evidence indicates that individuals frequently engage in off-site, nonimmediate simulations of external situations, such as mental imagery, involving the mental simulation of external events. In cognitive psychology, cognition is perceived as a process unfolding from experience to knowledge, highlighting the role of sensation, perception, and experience in the formation of concepts or meanings. Two pivotal questions arise in the formation of meanings or concepts: first, how are these meanings or concepts represented in our minds? Second, how do these meanings or concepts transition from direct experience to complex abstraction and contribute to the entire conceptual system? Regarding the first question, cognitive psychologists widely concur that knowledge is represented in three coded forms: imagery, words (or other symbols), and propositions. 16 Given that the Cang Jie (倉頡) era marked the creation of written symbols, the primary forms of coding knowledge were imagery and propositions. The propositional form emerged as a product of advanced logic at later times. Consequently, the predominant form of coding in the ancient creation of words was imagery. It is crucial to underscore Shepard's (1971) and other researchers' proposal of a functional equivalence hypothesis between external representations of images, 17 such as those found in books and photographs, and the internal mental representations known as imagery. This hypothesis posits that the representational forms of imagery are functionally equivalent to the perceptual experiences induced by visual stimuli, even if they are not entirely equivalent in reality. Although it is a specialized concept in cognitive psychology, imagery has long been prevalent in the literature and in the arts. Termed "imagery" or "the image in the mind," it denotes the reproduction of an external scene within the mind, distinct from objective existence. Addressing the second question of how meanings or concepts extend from direct experience to complex abstraction and contribute to the entire conceptual system, the "conceptual metaphor theory" in cognitive linguistics offers a comprehensive explanation. In "Metaphors We Live By," George Lakoff and Mark Johnson assert that everyday conceptual systems are inherently metaphorical. 18 They analyse embodied metaphors, tracing the transition from direct emergent concepts to metaphorical emergent concepts. The primary function of metaphor, they emphasize, is to facilitate understanding by envisioning something through something else. This process involves metaphorically extending familiar concepts to more abstract and complex concepts, leading to the deepening, expanding, and accumulating of meanings or concepts into a system. Returning to the question of how Cang Jie coded words, he had to encode known meanings or concepts into tangible forms. This led him to consider the experiential scene underlying the formation of a particular meaning or concept. By reflecting on the event associated with the meaning or concept, mental imagery of the scene emerged in his mind. Cang Jie then encoded this imagery, as it served as a metaphor for the concept or meaning. This metaphor, fundamentally a form of understanding, allowed the imagery to characterize the concept or meaning. For instance, to represent the concept of "tree," Cang Jie could draw an imaginary tree (木); for the concept of "man," he could sketch an imaginary man walking sideways (人). These are direct emergence imageries, constituting direct emergent concepts. The key to comprehending the ideological construct of Chinese characters lies in identifying the word's structural imagery. This structural imagery is not only linked to the meaning of the word but also connected to the context of experience, establishing a metaphorical relationship that is fundamentally a form of understanding. The ideographic nature of Chinese characters primarily involves completing structural coding through the mental representation of the cognitive environment, i.e., imagery. However, only a few simple things can be directly depicted and modelled, whereas most concepts or meanings are more abstract and complex. The following question then arises: How should these abstract concepts be represented? Consider the concept of "many," for instance. Although "many" does not refer to specific things, it is a generalization, an abstract phenomenon derived from specific instances. Cang Jie, in pondering this, recalled a common image representing the concept of "many": late at night, everything is hidden, but the stars are shining in the sky. This gave rise to the directly emergent concept of "月moon," symbolizing night. Its variant "夕eve," which is slightly less than "月moon," represents the shallow moon, signifying the early night of dusk. The overlapping combination of two "夕eve" symbols symbolizes the intensified shallow moon, representing the late night. Consequently, the character "多" was created. The ideographic development of Chinese characters can be delineated into three stages. The first stage involved the emergence of a small number of direct ideographic characters, depicting the appearance of specific objects and representing direct emergence-type concepts. The second stage involves a combination of characters from the previous stage, including multilevel combinations. Complex and abstract conceptual imagery could be achieved through simple and even multilevel combinations, giving rise to metaphorical concepts. The third stage involved the emergence of multiple character words, avoiding the constant construction of new characters due to stroke complexity and meeting the demand for more words and phrases. This stage led to the creation of a generative word system that combines simplicity with complexity, maintaining the use of Chinese characters within a certain limit. 19 In the West, Aristotle proposed a theory of knowledge more than 500 years before 王弼. He identified four modes of understanding external things: source of production, compositional material, distinguishing qualities, and purposeful function. His categorization based on cognition signifies the systematic process of knowledge organization. The relationship between knowledge and its source, or the relationship between abstract concepts and their derivation source, aligns with the relationship between "meaning" and "imagery." The imagery of the Chinese character captures the visible image as the source of meaning, extending from the visible to the invisible. The structure of a Chinese character is intricately linked to the cognition of its meaning, expanding synchronously with the cognitive expansion of its meaning. It is a writing system rooted in cognition. For those familiar with a character, suggesting this perceptible source can aid in understanding the abstract meaning of the character, akin to a teacher's example in a classroom. The content of imagery can be embedded in any cognitive experience, including common sense or knowledge of cultural and natural phenomena. Zhou and Huang's study of ideograms in Chinese characters reveals a robust knowledge representation system that aligns with Aristotle's empirical framework of knowledge sources. 20 This type of word formation, which represents imagery through constructions to convey the meaning of the word, is referred to as the "imagery word formation" method. 3. Structures and combinations We meticulously selected and dissected 9,000 Chinese characters, 21 revealing that the composition of Chinese characters follows a hierarchical structure. Behind this composition lies a hierarchical process of constructing imagery, representing a mental representation of the experiential context in which the character's meaning is formed. In essence, ideograms are constructed through a specific kind of experiential imagery associated with the word's meaning to achieve effective representation. Therefore, the theory of "imagery word formation" encompasses three major tasks: 1. describing the internal structural arrangement of Chinese characters, 2. identifying the cognitive patterns involved in combining structural imagery, and 3. exploring the imagery embedded in the 9,000 Chinese character structures, encompassing both the imagery of various internal components and that of the smallest components. 3.1 Terminology and Structure With the introduction of the "imagery" concept to Chinese character composition, a fundamental shift in perspective has occurred. Chinese character composition is now viewed as a medium and representation of its imagery service. Consequently, traditional concepts such as strokes and parts are no longer sufficient for describing structures because they lack the essence of imagery. The new inquiry focuses on the imagery associated with a specific form and how different combinations of imagery correspond to structural combinations. This finding underscores the binary relationship between structure and imagery, emphasizing the interplay between the signifier and the signified, with imagery being the core of Chinese character composition. Based on the findings from our analysis of 9,000 Chinese characters, we propose a dual-track structure with three levels: upper, middle, and lower. Structurally, these levels are defined as "glyph-component-icon", and in terms of imagery, they correspond to "imagery glyph-imagery component-imagery icon". This results in a three-level structure in the vertical direction and a dual-orbital relationship in the horizontal direction. Table 2 and Fig. 1 provide schematic diagrams illustrating this three-level dual-orbital structure. Table 2 Three-layer double-rail structure 3 level Configuration Imagery i 字形 glyph 字意 imagery glyph ii 構件 component 構意 imagery component iii 形素 icon 意素 imagery icon A glyph, in the context of Chinese characters, refers to the structure or shape represented by a material-based writing stroke. In writing, it manifests as a square block character. The glyph corresponds to its imagery glyph, wherein the imagery glyph represents the essence of the Chinese character. Glyphs are carriers, and imagery glyphs are important, constituting the upper level or glyph class of the Chinese character structure. It is crucial to note that character meaning and imagery glyphs are distinct concepts. The imagery glyph is the empirical imagery associated with the meaning of a character, serving as the foundation for the construction of the glyph. However, character definitions pertain to the meaning of a Chinese character or a single-character word. Characters across the world are constructed through combinations of limited elements, often with multiple layers. The same holds for Han character structures. Logically, there must be basic elements or minimal elements in this combination relationship, forming the foundation for the entire word system. These basic elements are components that cannot be further divided. In the context of the Chinese character structure, the basic element is the structure that cannot be subdivided into different images or the structure with the smallest imagery. We refer to this basic element as an icon (形素), with the smallest imagery called an imagery icon (意素). Icons correspond to imagery icons and function as capable of signingifiers and warning signs, constituting the lower level or icon level of the structure of Chinese characters. These terms are the basis of the entire word system. Icons are loaded with imagery icons, collectively termed morphemes or form-imagery icons (形意素). The morphemes include similar symbols or hieroglyphic characters, also known as "文" in traditional primary schools, while imagery icons directly represent emergent concepts, such as "人、木、日、and 月," among others. These morphemes and their imagery icons combine like Lego blocks do to form a complete character system. Intermediate structures with their imagery are situated between glyphs and icons. These images represent the imagery of the component and are referred to as the imagery component. The components correspond to the imagery components and serve as carriers and bodies. Together, they constitute the intermediate or structural levels of the Chinese character structure, forming the form-imagery component (形意構). Components are constructed from elements, other components, or other Chinese characters and combine at various levels until they form a component. Similarly, imagery components are constructed by combining imagery icons, imagery components, or other imagery glyphs at multiple levels until they form an imagery component. The transition from an icon to a glyph involves multiple combinations, each termed a level or plane. Each level or plane of combination is referred to as a form knot, and the corresponding combination of imagery at the imagery level is called an imagery knot. Collectively, form knots and imagery knots are referred to as form-imagery knots (形意結) or words-knot. Some icons are Chinese characters, and most of the components are also Chinese characters. A Chinese character can function as an icon or a component of another Chinese character. For instance, the structure of "構" is illustrated in Fig. 2 . The character "構" is composed of five morphemes (十、一、冂、井、木), combined at five levels, forming word-knots (土、冉、再、冓、構) to create the character. Apart from "構" and its components "十、一、冂、井、木," everything else can be considered a component. The imagery glyph "構" depicts "like a truss of wooden poles above a wellhead," using the imagery of a truss of wooden poles above a wellhead as a metaphor for the meaning of "構," encompassing its multiple meanings. Understanding the meaning of "構" becomes more accessible for people familiar with traditional well-digging and well usage, such as the salt wells in Zigong (自貢). It is crucial to recognize that glyphs, components, and icons are observable, while imagery glyphs, imagery components, and imagery icons are implicit according to our experience. Amalgamation between landforms and imagery is evident. The lowest level of morphemes (icons and imagery icons) within single-character words (漢字) served as the smallest semantic unit of the entire word system, representing the lexemes of the Hanyu word formation. The intermediate form-imagery knots or form-imagery glyphs (形意字) within single-character words or multicharacter words are known as word-knots. For example, if "語" is a single-character word and "吾" is a "五口", "吾" is one of the word-knots of "語". If "語言" is a multicharacter word, "語" remains one of the word-knots. 3.2 Combination mode Moving on to the combination mode, the following question arises: How can these limited imagery icons be combined to generate a diverse array of imagery? This question delves into the issue of combining patterns, exploring how complex and varied imagery can be constructed through the multilayered combination of simple images. From the perspective of glyphs, Chinese characters are formed by combining icons to construct imagery. However, the combination of two or more imagery icons or imagery compositions in any plane raises questions about their relationship, the creation of new imagery after combination, and the cognitive mechanism behind their combination. The analysis of 9,000 Chinese characters revealed that ancient Han people used different images to construct new images, often by combining icons or components to form new components or glyphs. Five modes of combination emerge from this research: conceptual mode, metaphorical mode, gestalt mode, schema (script) model mode, and declension mode. The first four modes are cognitive modes based on the principle of cognition, while the last one relies on the principle of glyph transformation. These five modes of combination are considered the mechanism for constructing imagery in Chinese characters, metaphorically representing the characters' meanings. Collectively, these modes are known as the five rules of ideogram construction, and the theory is referred to as the theory of "imagery word formation." 3.2.1 Conceptual Model Human beings engage with their environment, leading to cognitive processes. Language serves as the analog of this cognition, projecting the empirical world into speech by replicating sensory experiences. This cognitive process involves the classification of the world, where the notion of characteristic generalization of categories forms concepts, and vocabulary assigns linguistic labels to these concepts. Concepts are fundamental units of symbolic knowledge and are tools for comprehending the world. Civilization's evolution, viewed from this perspective, corresponds to the evolution of a classification system in which humans organize numerous concepts through classification. Categories form hierarchies of concepts, and a category is a concept encompassing its members. Hence, a concept inherently exhibits a hierarchical structure, aligning conceptual systems with vocabulary systems through consistent isomorphism. This categorization aids humans in processing their experiences. Among the various categorization theories, recent emphasis has been on archetype theory, emphasizing feature identity as the key to archetypes. In exploring word meanings and compositions, it becomes evident that ancient civilizations already grasped the principles of categorization and concepts. Specifically, when two images are combined to form new images, numerous patterns follow the conceptual relationship of [category + feature]. This pattern is termed a conceptual pattern. For instance, characters such as "桃, 柚, 梅, 棠, 梨, and 楓" (peach, pomelo, prune, plum, pear, maple) are commonly referred to as "pictophonetic characters" (形聲字). While they are acknowledged as "sound symbols" for distinguishing the names of fruits and trees based on similar sounds, we also consider the symbolic imagery of these "sound symbols". According to our interpretation, "兆" in the character "桃" represents one of the characteristics of peach trees. The imagery associated with "兆" is "burning tortoise for divination, signs like water splashing all over," derived from divination, symbolizing "徵候." Therefore, "桃" is considered "a fruit tree that brings the sign of spring," with "木" representing the type and "兆" representing the characteristic of the tree. This interpretation aligns with numerous literary works in which, for instance, in Chinese culture, peach blossoms symbolize love affairs between men and women, signifying the arrival of spring. The pronunciation of the "pictophonetic characters" has the same or similar sound as its sound symbols; 22 we explain that some of the sound symbols are Chinese characters, which are pronounced according to the conventions of the local language, and this leads to the phenomenon that some pictophonetic characters have the same or similar pronunciation as their phonetic symbols, but this is only an epiphenomenon. Here, the interpretation of epiphenomena is detached from the structure so that this part of the structure loses its role in ideographic function. In other words, the notion of "pictophonetic characters" obscures the ideological integrity of the Chinese character. In propositional representation, the conceptual model is expressed as follows: Chinese characters = C (class, characteristic) Here, C represents the conceptual model, indicating the conceptual relationship between categories and features. Consequently, the proposed expression for "桃" can be written as follows: 桃=C(木, 兆) 3.2.2 Metaphorical Model Language serves as a means of recreating sensory experiences, presenting a conceptual world that has been reassembled and reinterpreted. This process of reassembling experiences is termed metaphor. In ancient China, metaphors found their place in literary works, as seen in the Classic of Poetry. However, since the proposal of the Conceptual Metaphor Theory by George Lakoff & Mark Johnson, our understanding of metaphors has increased to a cognitive level, revealing their ubiquitous nature. Theory posits that metaphors are cognitive phenomena expressed in language and grounded in cognition. Conceptual metaphors establish links between two conceptual domains: the source domain and the target domain. A conceptual domain encompasses semantically relevant properties, characteristics, and functions. The source domain typically involves concrete concepts, such as cash, while the target domain incorporates abstract concepts, such as time. Theory suggests that we use the source domain to understand the target domain. For instance, the expression "time is money" employs money as the source domain to describe time. Similarly, when we use "花時間或金錢 (spending time or money)" to discuss time or money, we understand that "花flower" symbolizes a phenomenon that fades quickly, using "花" as the source domain to convey the rapid depletion of time or money. In this context, "花" transitions from a noun to a verb, indicating an action such as "花." Metonymy theory further delves into the reasons for the associations and relationships between source and target domains. However, within Chinese characters, this metaphorical relationship between source and target domains often appears when two images are combined to construct new imagery. We refer to the pattern of this metaphorical relationship (target domain + source domain) in the composition of imagery glyphs or imagery components as a metaphorical pattern. For example, in the character "坡," "皮" serves as the source domain to metaphorically represent the target domain "土," suggesting that the ground is curved and sloping like the skin. The metaphor involves a combination of conceptual patterns with the word “土,” constituting a composite pattern. This metaphorical pattern can be expressed through the propositional formula: Chinese characters = M (target domain, source domain) Here, M represents the Metaphorical model, signifying a metaphorical relationship between the target domain and the source domain. Therefore, the propositional representation of "坡" can be articulated as follows: 坡=CM(土, 皮) 3.2.3 Gestalt Model Gestalt theory originated in 20th-century Germany. The central tenet of Gestalt psychology is that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, emphasizing that understanding a psychological phenomenon is best achieved by viewing it as an organized and structured whole. According to this perspective, breaking down phenomena into small, fragmented parts offers an incomplete understanding of behavior. In language, where many linguistic messages are inherently incomplete, the human capacity for completeness plays a crucial role. When humans observe and perceive the objective world, their subjective experiences involuntarily contribute to their understanding, linking seemingly unrelated features to achieve a comprehensive grasp of the objective. Similarly, the acceptance of language is an active process for humans, as readers unconsciously connect words to their past experiences and organize the relationship between words and phrases according to their understanding, enabling a holistic grasp of semantic connotations. Likewise, when observing the composition of imagery glyphs with the holistic nature of perfect form, numerous Chinese characters are found to be combined based on the principles of gestalt cognition. In other words, they consist of two or more imagery icons, imagery compositions, or imagery glyphs that collectively represent the overall imagery of a certain thing, showcasing the pattern of [feature + feature]. This pattern is referred to as the Gestalt pattern. For instance, the character "火" is formed by combining "人" and "冫," portraying the imagery of "the light and flame that makes people sweat profusely." Here, people sweating is the feature, and it points to the concept of "火fire" outside the structure. Another example is "畐" (畐, a noncharacter component), which represents a square container (basket) from ancient times used to store millet and grain. It comprises "一", "口" and "田," all of which are characteristics of "畐." "一" symbolizes the top and bottom of the lid, "口" symbolizes the mouth of the container, and "田" symbolizes the container used to hold food. In propositional representations, this Gestalt pattern can be expressed as follows: Chinese characters = G (character, feature) Here, G represents the Gestalt model, which indicates a Gestalt relationship between features and characteristics. Therefore, the propositional representation of "火" is written as follows: 火=G(人, 冫) What distinguishes the conceptual model from the Gestalt model, both of which have imaging features? In the conceptual mode, imagery glyphs are similar to the members of the category, while in the Gestalt mode, imagery glyphs are not related to the members of the category but only to their features. For example, the concept of the "身body" is unrelated to its characteristic components "自" and "才," whereas "桃" is similar to its component "木." 3.2.4 Schemas Model In their exploration of how the human mind organizes concepts to form knowledge, cognitive psychologists have uncovered the representation of schemas. Essentially, considering the relational information embedded in concepts and reflecting on how a concept relates to others, as well as how the attributes of that concept interconnect, can enhance our understanding of how meaning is extracted from concepts. Therefore, the schema model is a mental structure employed to organize knowledge, establishing a meaningful structure organized by interconnected concepts. 23 This model represents a higher level of cognitive mechanism than a prototype and is more extensive and comprehensive. It encompasses concepts across language, bodily perception, the world, literary memory, and more, resembling easily accessible background knowledge and fostering the creation of stereotypes. A script is a specific type of schema model containing information about events occurring in a predefined order. Scripts encompass preset values for actors, props, scenes, and the sequence of expected events, forming a comprehensive overview of the event. 24 The introduction of script and schema model knowledge representation is relevant because the imagery of many Chinese characters reflects specific historical events or cultural situations, particularly those conveyed through actions and states. For instance, the Chinese character "知" embodies the imagery of "Bolden used the whistling arrow to convey military messages." In addition, a Mongol named Bolden invented an arrow capable of making noise in the air, using it to command his cavalry across the wilderness. The cavalry could decipher these airborne sound messages. Another example is "我" and "找", which are mainly composed of "扌" and "戈". How does "手握戈" symbolize the concepts of "我" and "找? While we might not experience face-to-face battles in ancient battlefields, we can relate to distinguishing between one's side and the opponent's side in a modern sports field. Modern pitches use color-coded clothing to distinguish between teams, much like ancient battlefields used markings on uniforms. This marking is represented by the "丿" symbol. Those with the same marking constitute the "我" side, while others continue to search for the enemy side. Hence, this kind of action imagery utilizing specific background knowledge is referred to as the schema model (script) mode. In propositional form, this schema model (script) pattern can be expressed as follows: Chinese character = S(action, background) Here, S represents the schema mode, indicating the schema relationship between the action and background. Therefore, the propositional expressions for "知," "我," and "找" can be written as follows: 知=S(口, 矢) 我=S(找, 丿) 找=S(扌, 戈) 3.2.5 Declension Model The phenomenon of variations in Chinese characters refers to the noncombination of Chinese character structures, wherein Chinese character structures are utilized to change the original imagery by directly altering the structure. Unlike the first four modes of combination, which involve the combination of two or more morphemes or form-imagery components to represent new imagery, the declension mode involves the deletion or displacement of certain components within an existing structure. This change in structure aims to achieve a modification in the imagery glyph or imagery component. For example, "才" is formed by the absence of the right apostrophe "木," symbolizing a tree transformed into a rounded timber after its branches and leaves are removed. Another example is "夬," which was derived from "央" with a missing left shaft. The imagery of "央" is "大人於內中正," while "夬," with a missing right shaft, signifies "incomplete" and "missing." Both examples utilize structural changes to alter the original imagery. Therefore, this phenomenon is termed the declension of the Chinese character structure, and the method of generating new imagery (component or glyph) through variations is labelled the declension pattern. In propositional form, this pattern can be expressed as follows: Chinese character = D (component, deformation) Here, D represents the Declension mode, indicating a declension relationship between the components and deformations. Therefore, the proposed expression for "才" can be written as follows: 才=D(木,−丿) Furthermore, as there are seven types of declensions, the declension components in the propositional expression should be preceded by a declension symbol. Empirical studies reveal that the number of declension Chinese characters is not extensive, numbering less than a hundred, but that they still play a role in imagery generation. The five combination patterns mentioned above occur in every combination plane, including their composite patterns. The composition of a Chinese character begins with the combination of icons, progresses to the combination of components, and concludes with the glyph. Each new glyph and its imagery are constructed through the combination of existing forms and their imagery. Consequently, Chinese characters (single-character words) are continually created and expanded. However, due to the limited space within the box of Chinese characters, the incessant combination of new characters can lead to an overcrowded Chinese character structure. This would be inconvenient for writing and memorization. Hence, people conceived the idea of combining characters in a horizontal direction, resulting in multicharacter horizontal combinations or the emergence of multicharacter words. While most Chinese characters are formed by combinations, multicharacter combinations are a natural extension of such combinations. The advent of multicharacter words enriched single-character words and curbed the invention of more Chinese characters, thus maintaining a stable range of character usage. This development from single-character words to multicharacter words still adheres to the same combination mechanism, i.e., the combination modes of multicharacter words follow the four abovementioned methods (excluding the declension mode). Nevertheless, word combinations of multicharacter words are not combinations of imagery but combinations of word meanings. This combination of word meanings is still constructed imagery, and it allows us to predict the meaning of multicharacter words from the meanings of single-character words. For instance, “車頭 (car head), 車頂 (car roof), 車門 (car door), 車椅 (car seat), 車窗 (car window), 車燈 (car light), 車尾 (car tail), 車身 (car body), 車胎 (car tire), 車輪 (car wheel)” still exhibit a conceptual pattern. "火箭 (rocket)" remains a Gestalt metaphorical pattern, “革命 (revolution)” is a schema (script) model, and “字詞 (words)” adheres to a Gestalt pattern. For lianmian words (聯綿詞), such as “葡萄grapes, 蜻蜓dragonflies, 蝌蚪tadpoles, 蚯蚓earthworms", while the individual characters in these multicharacter words have no meaning as single-character words, they still possess imagery, as they have forms that must have imagery components. This imagery is still ideographic for the meanings of multiple character words. The characters in this kind of multicharacter word are all word knots. 4. Scope, Methodology, and Results The previously proposed hypothesis of "imagery word formation" is more of a descriptive account of the actual structure of Chinese characters than a theoretical framework. In reality, the shapes (glyphs), meanings, and sounds of characters have long been established and used in practice. While the unalterable nature of these elements remains, our objective is to elucidate the relationship between the shapes (glyphs) and meaning. This explanation needs to be applied to each Chinese character individually. Thus, one of our objectives is to uncover the latent imagery or rationalizations behind the compositional justifications and their corresponding structures. This endeavor aimed to transform Chinese characters and the entire word system into genuine ideographs. 4.1 Scope However, these latent images have not been explicitly conveyed throughout history. To explore these images and their corresponding structures within Chinese characters, certain specifications aligned with scientific rigor must be established. Speculations about these images need to be confined within scientifically defined boundaries. To accomplish this, we formulated four essential conditions or principles that must not be violated by speculative imagery. These criteria served as the standards for our exploration. These include consistency, objectivity, interpretability, and adherence to the principles of traditional culture and common sense. Without these constraints, the constructive imagery discussed earlier would lack rationality. If the imagery of 9,000 Chinese characters cannot be reasonably identified, the theory of "imagery word formation" and the entire word system risks being built on shaky grounds. 4.1.1 Principles of Consistency The principle of consistency asserts that any morphemes, form-imagery components, or form-imagery glyphs must maintain uniformity in form and imagery throughout the entire word system. Given that the entire word system is the outcome of repeated combinations of morphemes (imagery icons), this principle demands that morphemes, regardless of how frequently they are repeated, preserve the consistency of their imagery and structures. This consistency extends not only within the entire word system but also among its constituents. Adherence to this consistency of imagery and composition is crucial for tightly linking the entire collection of words and phrases as a system. This approach is a prerequisite for scientific systematicity, preventing the interpretation of individual characters and ensuring efficient learning of Chinese characters. For instance, the character "艮" is formed by the morphemes "日" and "𧘇," representing the sun and walking on both feet, respectively. Together, they symbolize the mythological imagery of "Kuafu夸父 chasing after the sun to the Yungu Valley禺谷 25 ." When combined with other characters, such as "根、即、既、艱、良、垠、很、恨、狠、限、哏、退、茛、痕、眼、硍、裉、跟、銀、簋、齦、誏、琅," it consistently plays a role in interpreting the imagery. 4.1.2 Objectivity principles Our focus of study is the structure of Chinese characters. The term "compositional study" implies an examination of how the structure forms words. Therefore, the object of study should be an objective phenomenon. However, the same Chinese character may appear in different styles, each possessing its own distinct structure and rationale due to evolving historical contexts. These styles represent different objective phenomena, and additional studies are needed. Hence, the study of word formation must differentiate between the examination of contemporary scripts and that of historical periods. The principle of objectivity emphasizes that the research object must be confined to the phenomenon within the same character styles, avoiding the mixing of different styles. For instance, using an earlier script, such as the oracle bone script, to explain a later script, such as the Regular Script, is discouraged. Furthermore, each script has its rationale for formation. The Regular Script, as a standardized style, has specific imagery between dots and strokes. 26 Any alteration in the number of structural strokes in subsequent generations is considered unacceptable, as it signifies a change in the underlying imagery. Any arbitrary modification of the structure in the future, without constructing a new character according to ideograms, risks disrupting the ideographic nature and systematicity of Chinese characters. 4.1.3 Principles of interpretability Interpretability asserts that there exists a metaphorical understanding of the relationship between an imagery glyph and the meaning of words. The imagery glyph must serve as a specific and concrete representation of the concept's meaning. This representation should align with common sense in general culture, enabling literate individuals to easily comprehend the character's meaning. Ideographs achieve interpretability by creating imagery that explains or comprehends the word's meaning, including its multiple meanings. This interpretability is a fundamental characteristic of ideographs. As discussed earlier, concepts or meanings are derived from experiences with external things, and imagery serves as the mental representation of these experiences. An abstract concept can be understood in association with concrete experiences related to the abstract concept, as the abstract concept is generalized from the figurative perspective. Metaphors aid in this process of comprehension, acting as bridges between the concrete and the abstract. This imaginative experience that aids comprehension is the interpretability of ideographs. In contrast, phonetic alphabetic characters are mere symbols for recording speech sounds, and the relationship between speech sounds and meanings is arbitrary and contractual. Ideographs and phonograms are coded on different bases: ideographs are coded based on comprehensible imagery, while phonograms are coded based on phonological rules. Ideographs are concrete, visual, and empirically linked to word meanings, providing a direct representation of experiences. This unique characteristic is exclusive to traditional Chinese culture and enriches empirical knowledge. Ideographs' interpretability is rooted in the direct representation of experience, offering a natural understanding of the meaning of characters for those with corresponding experiential knowledge. For instance, the structural imagery "水" (water) represents "the swaying of a fishhook causing the water to ripple," linking the experience of fishing to the concept of "水." This is more sensual, visual, and accessible than the symbol "water," which records a phonological code. Ideograph interpretability reflects a fundamental principle of the "imagery word formation" theory. 4.1.4 Principles of Cultural Knowledge Cognitive theory serves as the foundation for the "imagery word formation" theory. The content of these images reflects traditional Chinese culture and common knowledge. Human cognition results from the interaction between individuals and their environment, manifesting in language expression. The culmination of language and action forms culture. Together, language, cognition, and culture constitute the historical basis for the development of Chinese character forms. Designers cannot escape this historical reality, especially when dealing with ideographic structures. Ideograms inherently involve cognition, and understanding occurs within a cultural context. Hence, returning to the historical and cultural context of Chinese character design becomes crucial in searching for imagery. This approach not only acts as a witness to the imagery being sought but also provides a foundation for understanding word meanings. These ideographs, connected to experience and common sense, are inherently rich in knowledge, creating an empirical writing system. Therefore, the imagery within structures must align with traditional Chinese culture and common knowledge; otherwise, the imagery lacks a cognitive basis. These four principles serve as necessary conditions and criteria for exploring the imagery icons, imagery components, and imagery glyphs of Chinese characters. While no unique imagery may meet all these conditions in the search process, adhering to these four principles allows various speculative imagery to compete, with the most explanatory one prevailing. Fulfilling these necessary conditions guarantees the scientific and efficient nature of the word system. 4.2 Methodologies Searching for structural imagery, whether imagery glyphs, imagery components, or imagery icons, requires specific strategies and methods. The overarching strategy employed is "reverse engineering," tracing the cause from the effect—starting from known meanings to decipher internal structures, including the imagery of glyphs, components, and icons. Adherence to the four principles of image searching is essential. The specific methods include the following: First, component analysis or structural analysis: This method involves sorting out the three-level dual-orbital structure within the 9,000 Chinese characters. The aim was to identify the structure of the Chinese character system concerning form-imagery icons, form-imagery components, form-imagery glyphs, and their hierarchical combinations. Second, the induction Method: Leveraging the combinatory nature of Chinese character structures and the multiple meanings of characters, this method involves extracting imagery from related meanings of characters containing a specific component, glyph, or icon. Collecting the meanings, including their multiple meanings, serves as a basis for deducing the associated imagery and explaining the meanings of these characters. This method highlights the innovative aspect of the research. For instance, to determine the imagery of the "" on the right side of "漢," one can analyse characters such as "漢," "難," "艱," "嘆," "歎," and "暵", etc., as they all contain the "." By collecting the meanings of these characters, including their multiple meanings, and considering relevant historical and cultural backgrounds, one may deduce that the imagery of "" is a type of raft—a watercraft made of inflated animal skins common in the waters of the Han River (漢江). This speculative imagery aligns with historical and humanistic facts, explains the meanings of various words, and remains consistent with the imagery of its lower-level components combined with the word "革夫." This method allows for the exploration of experiential cultural imagery, which is both content-rich and a generalization of the many meanings of Chinese characters, explaining the polysemous nature of word meanings. For example, the Chinese character "漢" has the structural imagery of "the waters where rafts are prevalent," reflecting not only the river's waters but also the geographical and cultural concepts associated with the Han River. Exploring the imagery of 9,000 Chinese characters one by one is an intricate and substantial task requiring long-term dedication. The characters are intertwined horizontally and vertically, affecting the entire system and necessitating constant adjustments and cross-checks. Third, there is a wealth of historical documents in Chinese history, such as the Shuowen Jiezi (說文) and the Kangxi Dictionary (康熙字典), providing numerous interpretations of Chinese characters, including annotations of classics. If some of these interpretations align with the four normative principles mentioned above, they may be utilized directly. This method is referred to as the documentary method. For instance, the character "士" is derived from "推十合一為士," 27 a saying attributed to Confucius. Therefore, "士" is a combination of "十, 一," reflecting the ability to generalize and summarize—the ancient criterion for recognizing a reader's ability. Our capacity to summarize character imagery from various meanings is an embodiment of this ability. Fourth, Chinese characters, as ancient scripts with deep historical roots, form structures influenced by the historical and cultural contexts of their time. In essence, they are products of the cognitive processes of ancient scholars within their historical and cultural settings. Hence, comprehending various historical and cultural situations becomes vital for exploring the imagery of these forms. This method, in which historical and cultural traces are utilized to derive imagery, is known as the method of evidence. For example, understanding the construction and play of the GuQin古琴 allows one to easily imagine the imagery of the component "彳山攵" in characters like "徽、徵、微、黴," symbolizing "plucking the strings of the GuQin's YueShan" (岳山), and the imagery glyph of the series "徽、徵、微、黴" will be solved. 4.3 Results To explore the imagery glyphs, imagery components, and imagery icons of the word system, encompassing the glyphs, components, and icons that convey them, we selected 9,000 commonly used Regular Script Chinese characters as a comprehensive and objective representation of the system. After an extensive search, dormant Regular Script structural imagery, which has existed for thousands of years, has been unveiled one by one—a significant achievement that establishes a robust cultural foundation for the theory of “imagery word formation." These results indicate the presence of 84 morphemes in the word system, with up to 10 levels of composition in the Chinese character structure. These 84 morphemes function akin to the alphabet, constructing the entire character and word system and demonstrating its density and efficiency. Table 3 illustrates the comparison between the Regular Script system and previous script systems. The Regular Script Chinese character system averages 107 characters for each morpheme. Table 4 outlines the 84 icons and imagery icons, serving as the fundamental basis for ideographic characters. Table 3 Comparison of the regular script system with other previous Chinese script systems 28 Text Type Total taken Morpheme Average number of characters 甲骨文已釋字 1380 412 3.3 秦簡抽樣 1773 361 4.9 《說文》小篆 10422 414 25.05 楷書漢字 9032 84 107.52 Table 3 shows that the regular script system is more systematic and efficient than the "Shuowen" small seal script. Table 4 List of 84 morphemes and their icons, i.e., imagery icons Icons Imagery icons Icons Imagery icons Icons Imagery icons 、 突出之點 匕 象取用比較之勺 幺 小細絲 一 天地混沌盤古於卵內 十 盤古嚥氣身化萬物成於完備大地 水 拋釣鉤水波盪漾 │ 上下貫通 又 像叉手舉臂做揖禮 斤 像度量秤 亅 鉤 刀 凵 象開口容器 方 象風水方士臨場校察地相 丿 刀痕 標示 厂 山邊棚舍 氏 從旁(側)加入者 口 象人嘴形 丫 象前端分叉的長形物 爪 象鳥獸腳指 勹 用手緊握器具的柄 匚 儲藏櫃 片 劈開之薄木(竹) 冖 覆蓋 月 象條狀臘肉 目 眼睛 𠂊 張嘴 日 象太陽之形 乍 布手知尺 尢 象人腳跛曲脛 女 像婀娜多姿之姑娘 夂 從後而至 乚 象彎曲成圓之形 山 象地上高峰並列 廾 雙手捧起 𠂇 左手༎上肢 川 象江河貫穿通流之形 卩 象竹節༎遇阻礙出示通過之憑證 乃 象母育乳房之形 囗 圍成一片地域༎四周༎ 丩 象瓜藤糾纏蔓延 乂 伏羲割蓍草陰陽占卜 木 象樹之形 皿 象飯食用器(容器) 子 像伸出兩臂之嬰兒 丌 象承載器物之底座 夊 緩行 人 像人雙腿邁步之形 彡 象許多線條流蘇 卂 疾速飛行 入 像木楔之形 彐 動手 羽 象收起之鳥翼毛 冂 範圍༎出入口 之 長隊伍隨前導旌旃曲折前行 阝 左「邑」右「阜」 䒑 兩個༎雙 龴 突出物 屮 象草木植物叢生 八 天地分盤古亡體身分解化萬物 乛 針 虍 老虎身上花紋 丂 咳嗽༎氣損呼吸不順 厶 象鼻出氣 攵 敲擊 几 象高腳案桌 井 像固定井口之護欄 豕 野豬 𧘇 象人走動衣擺飄逸 彑 青銅豬形卣 豸 長脊獸 戈 象平頭戟(古兵器) 㔾 像人卷曲之形 𡗗 雙手棒起༎迎向 𠂢 分流。支流 冎 象凹下或凸起之肉骨 丵 樂器架子鋸齒狀之橫版 癶 不順之兩腳 罒 網狀物 巤 爪利善掘肥膩頭毛有三色白條紋之獾 覀 覆蓋(包裹) 龷 象縱橫交錯之草蓆 黽 象兩棲爬行動物。努力(勤勉) 飞 鳥展翅之樣子 疒 象人倚著之形。病 瓦 象屋頂上板瓦與簡瓦相扣於瓦頭 5. Conclusion Human cognition is manifested through spoken language, which involves contracting internal meanings into speech. This communal contract assigns specific meanings to speech, forming the basis for the development of written texts. This process, based on speech or meaning codes, distinguishes the word formation of ideographs and phonograms significantly. To effectively study Chinese word formation, a conceptual overhaul is necessary. Historical confusion arises from the influence of the traditional concept of Chinese characters and is exacerbated by the emergence of multicharacter words and vernacular languages in modern Chinese. The lack of consistency between words and characters is a consequence of this evolution. The study of word formation gained clarity with the establishment of the concept of "words字詞," identifying word formation as a subject of study. However, while composing multicharacter words, Chinese characters are constructed from other structures within Chinese characters, making them ideograms with smaller units of meaning. Additionally, the traditional six-script六書 theory falls short in explaining word meanings, requiring the exclusion of the cognitive interference of phonograms and distinguishing between cotemporal and historical research for objectivity in scientific research. A survey of 9,000 commonly used Regular Script Chinese characters revealed that these glyphs vividly describe experiential events, forming mental representations linked to the words' meanings. Ideograms are thus ideographically connected to their meanings, enabling metaphorical understanding through imagery. The exploration also delved into the structural aspects of these word forms, uncovering the imagery they project and the cognitive modes through which they combine to form new imagery. The study identified morphemes constituting the entire word system, along with their combined imagery glyphs, imagery components, and imagery icons. Establishing four necessary criteria and exploring four methods ensured a systematic approach to uncovering the imagery behind these constructions. The composition of Chinese words has traversed three stages: the emergence of direct ideograms or pictographs depicting specific objects, the subsequent emergence of combinations of morphemes (icons) in single-character words, and, ultimately, the creation of multicharacter words in response to various linguistic and cultural needs. The repetitive combination of a small number of morphemes, coupled with the establishment of generative word system rules, offers theoretical value to the "imagery word formation" hypothesis. This theory not only theoretically explains the ideological relationship between word meanings and forms, including multiple meanings but also practically reflects the 9,000 Chinese characters and multicharacter words. This approach provides a guiding theory for Chinese word formation. Structural imagery breathes life into Chinese characters, alleviating the challenges of learning the language. The natural order of linking old and new words in the acquisition of Chinese characters, backed by visualized cultural imagery, renders the structures explicable and the learning process more comprehensible. The theory of "imagery word formation" is just the beginning, with the hope that more scholars will contribute, perfect, and develop it in the future. References Coulmas, Florian. 1991. The Writing Systems of the Word . Oxford: Blackwell Press. Glenberg, A. M. & Roberson, D. A. 2000. Symbol grounding and meaning. Journal of Memory Language 43: 379–401. Husserl, E. 1980. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy . Boston: Kluwer Academic press. l. J. Gelb. 1963. A Study of Writing . Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kurt koffka. 1935. Gestalt Psychology . New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Company Press. Kaschak, M. P. & Glenberg, A. M. 2000. Constructing comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 43. Sampson, Geoffrey. Writing Systems: A Linguistic Introduction . 1985. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Author: unknown. Era: Pre-Qin(先秦). The Classic of Mountains and Seas: The Great Desert North(山海經: 大荒北經). PhilSci archive. https://ctext.org/shan-hai-jing/da-huang-bei-jing/zh . Accessed 20 June 2017. Xu Shen(許慎). 100. Shuo Wen Jiezi (說文解字). PhilSci archive. https://ctext.org/shuo-wen-jie-zi/zh . Chen Yanjing(陳延敬), et al. 1716. Kangxi Dictionary ( 康熙字典 ) . Wang Bi(王弼). Lou-Lie edited and annotated 226–249 (樓宇烈). 1980. critical review of Wang Bi's works (王弼集校釋). Beijing: China Bookstore press(北京: 中華書局). Wang Bi(王弼). 226–249. Han Kang Bai Note(韓康伯注). 332–380. Kong Yingda’s Notes (孔穎達疏). The Righteousness of Zhouyi (周易正義). Taipei: Taiwan Zhonghua Bookstore, 1977(台北: 臺灣中華書局, 1977). Wang Bi(王弼). 226–249. Xing shu Notes (邢璹注). Zhou Yi makes an exception (周易略例). Itabashi: Yewen Printing House 1965 (板橋: 藝文印書館 1965年). Wang Xizhi(王羲之).303–361. Self-treatise (自論書(傳)). PhilSci archive. https://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=gb&chapter=647000 . Xie Guoping (謝國平). 2016. Introduction to Linguistics (語言學導論). Taipei: Sanmin Book Company (台北: 三民書局) Qiu Xigui(裘錫圭). 1995. Introduction to Philology (文字學概論). Taipei: Wanjuan Building press(台北: 萬卷樓). Pan Wenguo (潘文國) et al. 1993. A Study of the Structural Methods of the Chinese Language . Taipei, Student Bookstore.(台北: 學生書局) Feng Shengli(馮勝利). 1997. A Study on the Rhyme and Grammar of the Chinese Language (漢語韻律語法研究). Beijing: Peking University Press(北京: 北京大學出版社). Edited by Su Yiwen and Bi Yong'e(蘇以文、畢永峨編著). 2009. Language and Cognition (語言與認知). Taipei: Publication Centre, National Taiwan University(台北: 國立臺灣大學出版中心). Huang Dekuan, Chen Bingxin (黃德寬 陳秉新). History of Hanyu Linguistics (漢語文字學史). Taipei: UMC Press(台北:聯經). Robert J. Sternberg, Karin Sternberg. 2017. Translated by Li Hongyi(李宏鎰譯). Cognitive Psychology(認知心理學). Taipei: Sage Learning Singapore press(台北: 新加坡聖智學習) George A. Miller. 2002. Translated by Hong lan(洪蘭譯). The knowledge of words.(詞的學問) . Taipei: Yuanliu press (台北: 遠流). George Lakoff & Mark Johnson. Translated byZhou Shizhen(周世箴譯). 2006. Metaphors we live by(我們賴以生活的隱喻 ). Taipei: UMC Press(台北:聯經). Zhou Youguang(周有光). 2016. History of the Development of World Writing( ​世界文字發展史). Hong Kong: Commercial Press(香港: 商務印書館). Wang Ning. 2013. Universal Canonical Chinese Character Dictionary (通用規範漢字字典).. Beijing: Commercial Press(北京: 商務印書館). Wang Ning. 2013. Chinese character morphology lecture (漢字構形學講座). Taipei: Sanmin Book Company(台北: 三民). Tang Tingchi(湯廷池). 1994. Internal Structure of Chinese Compound Words (漢語復合詞的內部結構). Taipei: Chinese World Issue 73 (台北: 華文世界, 73期). Xu Tongqiang(徐通鏘). 2019. Linguistic Theory - Structural principles and research methods of semantic language(語言論 - 語義型語言的結構原理和研究方法) . Beijing: The Commercial Press(北京: 商務印書館). Zhan Yong(占勇). 2006. A Review study of Chinese Word Formation(漢語構詞法研究述評). Studies in Linguistics , 2006.(北京: 《語言學研究》) Gu Mingdong (顧明棟). 2009. Mingxiang in "The Book of Changes" and Modern Language Philosophy and Hermeneutics (《周易》明象與現代語言哲學及詮釋學). Journal of Sun Yat-sen University (Social Science Edition) Issue 4, Volume 49 (220 issues in total) (中山大學學報(社會科學版)第4期, 第49卷༈總220期༉. Huang Juren(黃居仁). 2009. Looking at cognition from vocabulary: The interest of lexical semantics research ​(從詞彙看認知: 詞彙語意學研究的趣味). Language and Cognition (語言與認知 ). Taipei: Publication Centre, National Taiwan University (台北: 臺大出版中心). Chin-Chuan Cheng(鄭錦全).1998. Understanding language cognition from a quantitative perspective(從計量理解語言認知)。 Chinese Language Measurement and Computational Research 15–30 (漢語計量與計算研究). Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press(香港: 香港城市大學). Footnotes Pan Wenguo (潘文國) et al. 1993. A Study of the Structural Methods of the Chinese Language,1 . Taipei, Student Bookstore. Zhan Yong(占勇). 2006. A Review study of Chinese Word Formation(漢語構詞法研究述評). Studies in Linguistics , 2006.༈北京༚《語言學研究》, 2006年༉ Pan Wenguo (潘文國) et al. 1993. A Study of the Structural Methods of the Chinese Language,29 . Taipei, Student Bookstore. Sampson, Geoffrey. 1985 . Writing Systems: A Linguistic Introduction . Stanford: Stanford University Press. Xie Guoping(謝國平). 2016. Introduction to Linguistics, 16 . Taipei: Sanmin Bookstore. The Chinese characters have been developed in various dialects, including Korean, Japanese, Vietnamese, and other East Asian dialects, and are pronounced in their own way. The current Hanyu Pinyin or Zhuyin system is only a modern standard Hanyu phonetic scheme. The concept of radicals was created by the Eastern Han Dynasty scribe Xu Shen(許慎) in his Shuowen Jiezi(說文解字) (Explaining Characters in Chinese) in 100 A.D. A total of 540 radicals were created. Legend has it that Cang Jie invented Chinese characters. The name Cang Jie is used here to represent the ancient people who designed the codes for the Chinese characters. Wang Bi(王弼). 226–249. Han Kang Bai Note(韓康伯注). 332–380. Kong Yingda’s Notes(孔穎達疏). The Righteousness of Zhouyi, 18 ( 周易正義). Taipei: Taiwan Zhonghua Bookstore, 1977(台北༚臺灣中華書局). Wang Bi(王弼). 226–249. Xing shu Notes(邢璹注).?-752. Zhou Yi makes an exception, 11(周易略例). Banqiao: Art Press 1965(板橋༚藝文印書館 1965年). Gu Mingdong(顧明棟). 2009. Mingxiang in "The Book of Changes" and Modern Language Philosophy and Hermeneutics( 《周易》明象與現代語言哲學及詮釋學 ). Journal of Sun Yat-sen University (Social Science Edition) Issue 4, Volume 49 (220 issues in total) ( 中山大學學報 ༈ 社會科學版 ༉第4期, 第49卷༈總220期༉. Huang Xuanfan(黃宣範).2009. body-dwelling embodied cognition(棲於身的體現認知),344. Language and Cognition ( 語言與認知 ). Taipei: Publication Centre, National Taiwan University(台北༚國立臺灣大學出版中心). Husserl, E. 1980 . Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy Boston: Kluwer Academic. Glenberg, A. M. & Roberson, D. A. 2000. Symbol grounding and meaning. Journal of Memory Language 43, 379–401. Kaschak, M. P. & Glenberg, A. M. 2000. Constructing comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 43, 508–529. Robert J. Sternberg, Karin Sternberg. 2017. Translated by Li Hongyi(李宏鎰譯). Cognitive Psychology(認知心理學) , 298–302. Taipei: Sage Learning Singapore press(台北༚新加坡聖智學習). Same as above, 309. George Lakoff & Mark Johnson. Translated byZhou Shizhen(周世箴譯). 2006. Metaphors we live by(我們賴以生活的隱喻 ),9. Taipei༚UMC Press(台北༚聯經). Chin-Chuan Cheng 鄭錦全(1998), In his article "Understanding Linguistic Cognition from Measurement", examined in-depth the use of words in different scriptures, history books and dictionaries and found that different authors used no more than 8,000 single-character words, and thus put forward the concept of "字涯八千", i.e., the number of single-character words and nonderivative words a person can master the use of. Huang Juren(黃居仁). 2009. Looking at cognition from vocabulary: The interest of lexical semantics research ​(從詞彙看認知༚詞彙語意學研究的趣味). Language and Cognition(語言與認知 ), 222–223.Taipei: Publication Centre, National Taiwan University༈台北༚臺大出版中心༉. These nine thousand commonly used Chinese characters are mainly derived from the "Standard Book Style List of Commonly Used Chinese Characters(常用國字標準書體表)" announced by the Ministry of Education in 1971 and the "Universal Standard Chinese Character Dictionary(通用規範漢字字典)" edited by Wang Ning. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 2013). The statistical results of Zhou Youguang (周有光, 1978) are: the effective phonetic notation rate of modern Chinese characters is 39%, Li Yan et al. (李燕,1992) is 40.54%, and Gao Jiaying (高家鶯, 1993) is 26.3%. Ye Chuqiang (葉楚強,1965:568–570) once made statistics on 7504 Chinese characters in the "Xinhua Dictionary新華字典". Only 4.7% of the phonetic characters have the same pronunciation as their phonetic characters, and 14.7% can be roughly pronounced according to their phonetic characters. Robert J. Sternberg, Karin Sternberg. 2017. Translated by Li Hongyi(李宏鎰譯). Cognitive Psychology(認知心理學),365. Taipei: Sage Learning Singapore press(台北༚新加坡聖智學習) Same as above, 367. Myths and legends are the place where the sun sets. The Classic of Mountains and Seas: The Great Desert North (山海經: 大荒北經). PhilSci archive. https://ctext.org/shan-hai-jing/da-huang-bei-jing/zh . Accessed 20 June 2017. Wang Xizhi(王羲之).303–361.「點畫之間皆有意焉」. Self-treatise ( 自論書 (傳༉). PhilSci archive. https://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=gb&chapter=647000.Accessed 10 June 2019. Shuowen Jiezi (Explaining and Analysing Characters in Chinese): "士" Character. Table 3 Except for the data of Chinese characters in regular script, the rest of the data are from Wang Ning's "Lectures on Chinese Character Composition漢字構形學講座", 18. Taipei: Sanmin Book Company 2013(台北༚三民). Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-3930477","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":271081671,"identity":"86c7b5c1-732d-4e8a-a38d-e358b11fd8ce","order_by":0,"name":"lang feng","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"no","correspondingAuthor":true,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"lang","middleName":"","lastName":"feng","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-02-05 09:05:06","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":false,"vertebrateSubjects":true,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"humanSubjectConsent":false,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"coiExplicitlySet":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3930477/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3930477/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":50725512,"identity":"21edab51-2427-4b0d-8e2f-1fa250a505c9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-06 11:07:05","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":37031,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThree-layer double-rail structure\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3930477/v1/8fd28a419d8fd8c89ca1afea.png"},{"id":50725513,"identity":"332a7ef2-c8fd-4901-8e1e-cc4f8fe0c1d8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-06 11:07:05","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":26840,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eStructure of the \"構\"\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3930477/v1/69aee2107a5507d41feb8ca3.png"},{"id":50725725,"identity":"23e9ca0a-4917-42b6-8302-addf7d3075b3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-06 11:15:06","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":446994,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3930477/v1/11b7524f-9e53-42bc-aa7a-c9ac660e0731.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUnlocking the Enigma: Imagery and Meaning in Chinese Characters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn the realm of language studies worldwide, three distinct traditions have emerged\u0026mdash;the Greek-Roman, the Indian, and the Chinese minorities\u0026mdash;all of which have centred their inquiries around written language. Despite their focus, examination of morphology has perennially remained limited. Despite historical disparities, Chinese and Western traditions have followed disparate paths in linguistic studies, yet both have tended to overlook the exploration of morphology. [1]\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eReflecting on modern times, \u0026quot;馬氏文通\u0026quot; (Ma\u0026rsquo;s Wen Tong 1898) stands out as the initial grammatical work in Chinese history introducing modern linguistics to the country. Zhang Shijian (章士釗 1907) was the first individual in Chinese history to scientifically propose the concept of a \u0026quot;word.\u0026quot;\u003csup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003csup\u003e[2]\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e Additionally, Lai Jinxi (黎錦熙 1922) was a trailblazer in advancing a scientific and grammatical structure for lexemes in his Table of Composition of Polyphonic Lexemes.\u003csup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003csup\u003e[3]\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/sup\u003eIn the 1940s, Chen Wangdao (陳望道 1940) was described for the first time in his Answers to Questions on Grammatical Innovation using the term \u0026quot;morpheme\u0026quot;. Cao Bohan (曹伯韓 1952) delved into exploring the boundaries between words and characters and between words and morphemes. Luk Chi-wai (陸志韋 1956) proposed the enduring \u0026quot;homomorphic substitution method\u0026quot; to isolate morphemes in his work titled The Object and Procedure of Lexical Composition (1956). This method is still in use today. Along with others, Luk Chi-wai compiled a series of books on the structure of words and phrases, a method that persists.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLu Zhiwei and colleagues edited The Composition of Chinese Words (1957), the inaugural monograph devoted to word composition. In the 1980s, Zhang Shoukang (張壽康 1981) differentiated between the composition of words and the composition of word classes (nouns, verbs, adjectives, numerals, quantifiers, pronouns, etc.) in The Composition of Words and the Composition of Words. Pan Wenguo (潘文國) et al. (2004), in \u0026quot;A Study of the Structural Methods of the Chinese Language\u0026quot;, systematically organized and summarized the literature on structural methods from 1898 to 1990.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs we enter the 21st century, scholars have conducted in-depth studies from various theoretical perspectives, presenting a multifaceted and diversified landscape.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDespite more than a century of development in the study of Chinese word formation, these endeavors have not yet attained a satisfactory level of accurate elucidation of the rules governing word formation. To address this shortfall, we propose the need for some conceptual amendments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrimarily, since the introduction of Western linguistics to China more than a century ago, the Chinese people have engaged in profound reflections and modifications of the Chinese language. This evolution spans the promotion of the vernacular language and its alignment with Putonghua, the consolidation of dialects through pinyin symbols, and even the simplification of Chinese character structures. These transformations constitute the primary catalysts for the advancement of modern Chinese word formation studies. Consequently, they delineated the research focus of modern Chinese lexicography, wherein the Chinese language ultimately embraced the concept corresponding to the modern linguistic notion of \u0026quot;words\u0026quot;: 字詞 (words). Chinese lexicography, therefore, represents the meticulous examination of the internal structure, function, and laws governing words.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSecond, a Chinese word can be either monosyllabic or multisyllabic. However, most lexical composition researchers have consistently treated Chinese words as lexemes or morphemes. They have transformed the study of lexical composition into an exploration of multicharacter words, often applying syntactic concepts from Western linguistics. This perspective overlooks the fact that Chinese characters are predominantly composed of other Chinese characters. In ancient Chinese, a single Chinese character was frequently used as a single-character word. There is no inherent distinction between multicharacter words and single-character words formed from their internal components. Even within Chinese characters, there exist smaller semantic units. Therefore, the focus of word formation studies should be on the rules and principles of single-character words, i.e., the Chinese character itself, as multicharacter words are simply an extension of the internal combinations of single-character words.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, global writing systems can be broadly categorized into alphabetic and ideographic systems.\u003csup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003csup\u003e[4]\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e Alphabetic systems rely on the correspondence between letters and their pronunciations to record speech sounds. However, for Chinese characters, there is no such direct correspondence between characters and speech sounds.\u003csup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003csup\u003e[5]\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e Chinese characters do not inherently express sound, and there is no sound-related representation within the character\u0026apos;s structure.\u003csup\u003e\u003csup\u003e[6]\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e Despite this, the concept of pictophonetic characters (形聲字) has been widely accepted since ancient times, during which most structures in Chinese characters are considered sound symbols. This categorization limits ideograms to 540 radicals.\u003csup\u003e\u003csup\u003e[7]\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/sup\u003eHowever, the ideographic nature of Chinese characters, or pictophonetic characters, is not exhaustive, and the character structure lacks sufficient justification to represent the meaning of characters or words. In other words, the structure with the original complete ideograms is incomplete in providing adequate justification. To preserve the ideological integrity of the Han character structure, it is imperative to exclude cognitive interference from phonemes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFinally, as Chinese characters have evolved from oracle bones, jinwen (金文), and Tuan styles (彖體) to contemporary Chinese characters in regular script (楷書), different calligraphic styles of the same character exhibit distinct structures, reflecting varying cognitive thinking in different historical periods. Consequently, structures from different calligraphic styles cannot be mutually interpreted, despite the inherent relationships among them. The study of the composition of various calligraphic styles is deemed more insightful than a study focused solely on dynamic evolution over time. In terms of research sequence, a static diachronic study of calligraphic forms from near to far should precede dynamic chronological studies. This involves a \u0026quot;reverse engineering\u0026quot; approach, progressing from present-day Chinese characters to ancient ones. Closer calligraphic forms provide more certain explanations. This thesis exclusively refers to regular script Chinese characters, with discussions centred on static diachronic studies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMoving on, given that ideographs are unrelated to their sounds, special attention will be directed toward understanding their construction and how they represent meanings, including multiple meanings. We contend that these ideographs are not arbitrarily coded but rather adhere to their own rules and functions, enabling comprehensive explanations of word meanings. Historical references, such as Xu Shen\u0026apos;s \u0026quot;Shuowen Jiezi\u0026quot; (許慎的《說文解字》), suggest an inherent relationship between ideograms and word meanings, distinct from the conventional and arbitrary connections in phonetic scripts. Therefore, a re-examination of the ideological relationship between structures and meanings is warranted from a modern scientific perspective, considering the principles of structure combination and joint ideology mechanisms.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor millennia, the challenge of Chinese word formation has persisted, with traditional theories such as the six books proving incompatible with modern scientific requirements. The difficulty of learning Chinese persists, prompting a reliance on rote memorization. Contemporary developments in linguistics, cognitive linguistics, cognitive psychology, symbolism, linguistic symbolism, and cultural symbolism offer theoretical groundwork and perspectives for the study of Chinese word formation. Today, Chinese characters are recognized not only as linguistic phenomena but also as manifestations of human social behavior, overall cultural phenomena, and sociopsychological cognitive phenomena. Ideology, in this context, encompasses human understanding and cognition of the entire world. Therefore, the study of Chinese characters and lexicons should encompass a comprehensive examination of language, cognition, culture, and their intricate interrelationships.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2.\tBasic principle: imagery word formation","content":"\u003cp\u003eCang Jie (倉頡) \u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e holds the distinction of being the pioneer in the art of writing, a period when written language had yet to be established but spoken language already existed. While spoken language naturally evolves, writing emerges as a cultural invention, signifying that speech and meaning can be conveyed through written words.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFacing the challenge of inventing writing, Cang Jie grappled with the question of what elements to encode to represent the sounds or meanings of speech. Given that Chinese characters are not phonetic, it became evident that a phonetic representation was impractical. This prompted us to explore the rationale behind the construction of Chinese single-character words (Hanzi漢字), aiming to decipher the ideograms\u0026apos; principles of morphology and their relationship with multiple meanings.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo delve into these questions, we revisit the early days of writing\u0026apos;s inception. In both Eastern and Western history, the origin of writing began with painting\u0026mdash;an attempt to depict external objects by tracing their shapes. However, as cognitive understanding deepens, this method becomes inadequate for representing abstract concepts or meanings. Most languages then adopt phonological coding, encoding symbols about phonemes or syllables to represent concepts or meanings. Phonetic scripts directly record speech sounds according to pinyin rules, establishing a conventional relationship between speech sounds and semantics (word meanings) and thus addressing the challenge of representing abstract concepts indirectly through speech sounds.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAn intriguing question arises: how did the Chinese script diverge onto the ideographic path instead of the phonetic path? The answer lies at the root of Chinese civilization in Ba Gua (八卦 Eight Trigrams). This three-layered combination of a small number of symbols (yin and yang 陰、陽) (乾、兌、離、震、坤、艮、坎、巽) represents various natural phenomena (天、澤、火、雷、地、山、水、風) and serves as a metaphor for comprehending abstract concepts or meanings (trigrams). Through the Ba Gua pattern, the Chinese character structure can be composed of a limited set of symbols combined, imbuing these combinations with experiential imagery and making them effective metaphors for understanding word meanings.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e was created to illustrate the similarities between Ba Gua and Chinese characters:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCorrespondence between Bagua and Chinese Characters\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSymbol\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eElement\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCombination\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eQuantity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRepresentation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eImagery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003emeaning\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e八卦\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(陰陽)爻(2)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3層(卦)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e卦爻\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e卦爻象\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e卦辭\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e漢字\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003csub\u003e形素(84)\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003csub\u003e10層(字形)\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003csub\u003e構形\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003csub\u003e字意\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003csub\u003e字義\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;易傳༎系辭上\u0026rdquo; said:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e書不盡言, 言不盡意。然則聖人之意, 其不可見乎༟子曰: 聖人立象\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e以盡意, 設卦以盡情偽, 繫辭焉以盡其言。\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAncient people grappled with a profound dilemma: written words proved inadequate at fully expressing language, and spoken words fell short of capturing the essence of meaning. How could the wisdom of sages be conveyed? Confucius said that the sages employed a method akin to the Eight Trigrams, namely, \u0026quot;立象\u0026quot; (establishing imagery), to articulate meaning. A pivotal inquiry arises: what does \u0026quot;象\u0026quot; (imagery) signify, and how does \u0026quot;象\u0026quot; effectively convey meaning?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe relation between \u0026quot;discern of words and meanings 言意之辨\u0026quot; is further elucidated in Wang Bi\u0026apos;s \u0026quot;Zhouyi Liaozhi. Mingxiang\u0026quot; (王弼的\u0026rdquo;周易略例༎明象\u0026rdquo;). Wang Bi eloquently highlights the symbiotic relationship between words, images, and meanings, propelling us to a deeper exploration of this linguistic conundrum:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e夫象者, 出意者也。言者, 明象者也。盡意莫若象, 盡象莫若言。言\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e生於象, 固可尋言以觀象;象生於意, 固可尋象以觀意。意以象盡,\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e象以言著。\u003csup\u003e10\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWang Bi\u0026apos;s exposition elucidates the primary function of Chinese character structures, emphasizing their role in constructing imagery. He asserts that only after obtaining the imagery can one comprehend the meaning associated with it. Wang Bi\u0026apos;s articulation clarifies the progressive relationship between words, images, and meaning. The significance of Wang Bi\u0026apos;s \u0026quot;discernment of words and meanings\u0026quot; lies in his exploration of the representation of abstract concepts. These abstractions, derived from concrete or figurative phenomena, result from the extraction of \u0026quot;imagery.\u0026quot; Consequently, abstract concepts can be comprehended through their corresponding \u0026quot;imagery.\u0026quot; There is a certain commonality between abstract concepts and their \u0026quot;imagery,\u0026quot; manifested through similarity and relatedness. The former indicates shared characteristics, while the latter implies a connection in terms of shape, color, space, time, and nature. Once society establishes an associative relationship between the two, analogies can be drawn from imagery or objects.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis relationship between \u0026quot;imagery\u0026quot; and \u0026quot;meaning\u0026quot; forms the foundation for the composition of Chinese characters. For instance, the character \u0026quot;象\u0026quot; (xi\u0026agrave;ng) comprises the upper part of \u0026quot;兔\u0026quot; (t\u0026ugrave;), representing a rabbit\u0026apos;s head, and the upper and lower parts of \u0026quot;豕\u0026quot; (shǐ), forming a \u0026quot;fat animal like a rabbit\u0026apos;s head and a pig\u0026apos;s body.\u0026quot; This construction not only creates imagery but also employs direct metaphors. The imagery crafted by the character structure serves as a metaphor or example for the character\u0026apos;s meaning, illustrating that Chinese character structures represent imagery, which, in turn, functions as metaphors for the meanings of words or concepts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe relationship between \u0026quot;imagery\u0026quot; and \u0026quot;meaning\u0026quot; in Chinese characters is inherently metaphorical, constituting a form of cognition or understanding. Wang Bi\u0026apos;s \u0026quot;discern of words and meanings\u0026quot; can be seen, in modern terms, as a solution to the challenge of meaning and representation in Chinese characters. While Wang Bi\u0026apos;s work stems from a fusion of visions based on Zhouyi (周易༎繫辭), he holds the distinction of being the first in Chinese history to systematically discuss the meaning and representation of Chinese characters. \u003csup\u003e11\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIf we employ modern cognitive science to delve into the relationship between the form and meaning of Chinese characters, a fundamental question arises: where do human concepts or meanings originate? In cognitive linguistics, human experience is considered pivotal in shaping conceptual systems and forms of reasoning.\u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003eEdmund Gustav Albrecht Husserl\u003csup\u003e13\u003c/sup\u003e posited that primitive action is the origin of all cognition, emphasizing the intricate interplay between the body, the brain, and the situation in the formation of cognition.\u003csup\u003e14\u003c/sup\u003e\u003csup\u003e、\u003c/sup\u003e\u003csup\u003e15\u003c/sup\u003e Numerous psychological experiments have demonstrated the close connection between language comprehension and bodily behavior. The Nobel Prize-winning neuroscientist Edelman debunked the notion of meaning as an abstract symbol, deeming it one of the greatest fallacies in the history of science. These experiential theories of cognition provide a robust foundation for the concept of meaning. Substantial evidence indicates that individuals frequently engage in off-site, nonimmediate simulations of external situations, such as mental imagery, involving the mental simulation of external events. In cognitive psychology, cognition is perceived as a process unfolding from experience to knowledge, highlighting the role of sensation, perception, and experience in the formation of concepts or meanings.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTwo pivotal questions arise in the formation of meanings or concepts: first, how are these meanings or concepts represented in our minds? Second, how do these meanings or concepts transition from direct experience to complex abstraction and contribute to the entire conceptual system? Regarding the first question, cognitive psychologists widely concur that knowledge is represented in three coded forms: imagery, words (or other symbols), and propositions.\u003csup\u003e16\u003c/sup\u003eGiven that the Cang Jie (倉頡) era marked the creation of written symbols, the primary forms of coding knowledge were imagery and propositions. The propositional form emerged as a product of advanced logic at later times. Consequently, the predominant form of coding in the ancient creation of words was imagery.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt is crucial to underscore Shepard\u0026apos;s (1971) and other researchers\u0026apos; proposal of a functional equivalence hypothesis between external representations of images,\u003csup\u003e17\u003c/sup\u003esuch as those found in books and photographs, and the internal mental representations known as imagery. This hypothesis posits that the representational forms of imagery are functionally equivalent to the perceptual experiences induced by visual stimuli, even if they are not entirely equivalent in reality. Although it is a specialized concept in cognitive psychology, imagery has long been prevalent in the literature and in the arts. Termed \u0026quot;imagery\u0026quot; or \u0026quot;the image in the mind,\u0026quot; it denotes the reproduction of an external scene within the mind, distinct from objective existence.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAddressing the second question of how meanings or concepts extend from direct experience to complex abstraction and contribute to the entire conceptual system, the \u0026quot;conceptual metaphor theory\u0026quot; in cognitive linguistics offers a comprehensive explanation. In \u0026quot;Metaphors We Live By,\u0026quot; George Lakoff and Mark Johnson assert that everyday conceptual systems are inherently metaphorical.\u003csup\u003e18\u003c/sup\u003e They analyse embodied metaphors, tracing the transition from direct emergent concepts to metaphorical emergent concepts. The primary function of metaphor, they emphasize, is to facilitate understanding by envisioning something through something else. This process involves metaphorically extending familiar concepts to more abstract and complex concepts, leading to the deepening, expanding, and accumulating of meanings or concepts into a system.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eReturning to the question of how Cang Jie coded words, he had to encode known meanings or concepts into tangible forms. This led him to consider the experiential scene underlying the formation of a particular meaning or concept. By reflecting on the event associated with the meaning or concept, mental imagery of the scene emerged in his mind. Cang Jie then encoded this imagery, as it served as a metaphor for the concept or meaning. This metaphor, fundamentally a form of understanding, allowed the imagery to characterize the concept or meaning. For instance, to represent the concept of \u0026quot;tree,\u0026quot; Cang Jie could draw an imaginary tree (木); for the concept of \u0026quot;man,\u0026quot; he could sketch an imaginary man walking sideways (人). These are direct emergence imageries, constituting direct emergent concepts. The key to comprehending the ideological construct of Chinese characters lies in identifying the word\u0026apos;s structural imagery. This structural imagery is not only linked to the meaning of the word but also connected to the context of experience, establishing a metaphorical relationship that is fundamentally a form of understanding. The ideographic nature of Chinese characters primarily involves completing structural coding through the mental representation of the cognitive environment, i.e., imagery.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, only a few simple things can be directly depicted and modelled, whereas most concepts or meanings are more abstract and complex. The following question then arises: How should these abstract concepts be represented? Consider the concept of \u0026quot;many,\u0026quot; for instance. Although \u0026quot;many\u0026quot; does not refer to specific things, it is a generalization, an abstract phenomenon derived from specific instances. Cang Jie, in pondering this, recalled a common image representing the concept of \u0026quot;many\u0026quot;: late at night, everything is hidden, but the stars are shining in the sky. This gave rise to the directly emergent concept of \u0026quot;月moon,\u0026quot; symbolizing night. Its variant \u0026quot;夕eve,\u0026quot; which is slightly less than \u0026quot;月moon,\u0026quot; represents the shallow moon, signifying the early night of dusk. The overlapping combination of two \u0026quot;夕eve\u0026quot; symbols symbolizes the intensified shallow moon, representing the late night. Consequently, the character \u0026quot;多\u0026quot; was created.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe ideographic development of Chinese characters can be delineated into three stages. The first stage involved the emergence of a small number of direct ideographic characters, depicting the appearance of specific objects and representing direct emergence-type concepts. The second stage involves a combination of characters from the previous stage, including multilevel combinations. Complex and abstract conceptual imagery could be achieved through simple and even multilevel combinations, giving rise to metaphorical concepts. The third stage involved the emergence of multiple character words, avoiding the constant construction of new characters due to stroke complexity and meeting the demand for more words and phrases. This stage led to the creation of a generative word system that combines simplicity with complexity, maintaining the use of Chinese characters within a certain limit. \u003csup\u003e19\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the West, Aristotle proposed a theory of knowledge more than 500 years before 王弼. He identified four modes of understanding external things: source of production, compositional material, distinguishing qualities, and purposeful function. His categorization based on cognition signifies the systematic process of knowledge organization. The relationship between knowledge and its source, or the relationship between abstract concepts and their derivation source, aligns with the relationship between \u0026quot;meaning\u0026quot; and \u0026quot;imagery.\u0026quot; The imagery of the Chinese character captures the visible image as the source of meaning, extending from the visible to the invisible. The structure of a Chinese character is intricately linked to the cognition of its meaning, expanding synchronously with the cognitive expansion of its meaning. It is a writing system rooted in cognition. For those familiar with a character, suggesting this perceptible source can aid in understanding the abstract meaning of the character, akin to a teacher\u0026apos;s example in a classroom. The content of imagery can be embedded in any cognitive experience, including common sense or knowledge of cultural and natural phenomena. Zhou and Huang\u0026apos;s study of ideograms in Chinese characters reveals a robust knowledge representation system that aligns with Aristotle\u0026apos;s empirical framework of knowledge sources.\u003csup\u003e20\u003c/sup\u003e This type of word formation, which represents imagery through constructions to convey the meaning of the word, is referred to as the \u0026quot;imagery word formation\u0026quot; method.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Structures and combinations","content":"\u003cp\u003eWe meticulously selected and dissected 9,000 Chinese characters,\u003csup\u003e21\u003c/sup\u003e revealing that the composition of Chinese characters follows a hierarchical structure. Behind this composition lies a hierarchical process of constructing imagery, representing a mental representation of the experiential context in which the character's meaning is formed. In essence, ideograms are constructed through a specific kind of experiential imagery associated with the word's meaning to achieve effective representation. Therefore, the theory of \"imagery word formation\" encompasses three major tasks: 1. describing the internal structural arrangement of Chinese characters, 2. identifying the cognitive patterns involved in combining structural imagery, and 3. exploring the imagery embedded in the 9,000 Chinese character structures, encompassing both the imagery of various internal components and that of the smallest components.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Terminology and Structure\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWith the introduction of the \"imagery\" concept to Chinese character composition, a fundamental shift in perspective has occurred. Chinese character composition is now viewed as a medium and representation of its imagery service. Consequently, traditional concepts such as strokes and parts are no longer sufficient for describing structures because they lack the essence of imagery. The new inquiry focuses on the imagery associated with a specific form and how different combinations of imagery correspond to structural combinations. This finding underscores the binary relationship between structure and imagery, emphasizing the interplay between the signifier and the signified, with imagery being the core of Chinese character composition.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on the findings from our analysis of 9,000 Chinese characters, we propose a dual-track structure with three levels: upper, middle, and lower. Structurally, these levels are defined as \"glyph-component-icon\", and in terms of imagery, they correspond to \"imagery glyph-imagery component-imagery icon\". This results in a three-level structure in the vertical direction and a dual-orbital relationship in the horizontal direction. Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e and Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e provide schematic diagrams illustrating this three-level dual-orbital structure.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThree-layer double-rail structure\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 level\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConfiguration\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eImagery\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ei\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e字形 glyph\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e字意 imagery glyph\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eii\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e構件 component\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e構意 imagery component\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eiii\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e形素 icon\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e意素 imagery icon\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA glyph, in the context of Chinese characters, refers to the structure or shape represented by a material-based writing stroke. In writing, it manifests as a square block character. The glyph corresponds to its imagery glyph, wherein the imagery glyph represents the essence of the Chinese character. Glyphs are carriers, and imagery glyphs are important, constituting the upper level or glyph class of the Chinese character structure. It is crucial to note that character meaning and imagery glyphs are distinct concepts. The imagery glyph is the empirical imagery associated with the meaning of a character, serving as the foundation for the construction of the glyph. However, character definitions pertain to the meaning of a Chinese character or a single-character word.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCharacters across the world are constructed through combinations of limited elements, often with multiple layers. The same holds for Han character structures. Logically, there must be basic elements or minimal elements in this combination relationship, forming the foundation for the entire word system. These basic elements are components that cannot be further divided. In the context of the Chinese character structure, the basic element is the structure that cannot be subdivided into different images or the structure with the smallest imagery. We refer to this basic element as an icon (形素), with the smallest imagery called an imagery icon (意素). Icons correspond to imagery icons and function as capable of signingifiers and warning signs, constituting the lower level or icon level of the structure of Chinese characters. These terms are the basis of the entire word system.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIcons are loaded with imagery icons, collectively termed morphemes or form-imagery icons (形意素). The morphemes include similar symbols or hieroglyphic characters, also known as \"文\" in traditional primary schools, while imagery icons directly represent emergent concepts, such as \"人、木、日、and 月,\" among others. These morphemes and their imagery icons combine like Lego blocks do to form a complete character system.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntermediate structures with their imagery are situated between glyphs and icons. These images represent the imagery of the component and are referred to as the imagery component. The components correspond to the imagery components and serve as carriers and bodies. Together, they constitute the intermediate or structural levels of the Chinese character structure, forming the form-imagery component (形意構). Components are constructed from elements, other components, or other Chinese characters and combine at various levels until they form a component. Similarly, imagery components are constructed by combining imagery icons, imagery components, or other imagery glyphs at multiple levels until they form an imagery component.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe transition from an icon to a glyph involves multiple combinations, each termed a level or plane. Each level or plane of combination is referred to as a form knot, and the corresponding combination of imagery at the imagery level is called an imagery knot. Collectively, form knots and imagery knots are referred to as form-imagery knots (形意結) or words-knot. Some icons are Chinese characters, and most of the components are also Chinese characters. A Chinese character can function as an icon or a component of another Chinese character. For instance, the structure of \"構\" is illustrated in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe character \"構\" is composed of five morphemes (十、一、冂、井、木), combined at five levels, forming word-knots (土、冉、再、冓、構) to create the character. Apart from \"構\" and its components \"十、一、冂、井、木,\" everything else can be considered a component. The imagery glyph \"構\" depicts \"like a truss of wooden poles above a wellhead,\" using the imagery of a truss of wooden poles above a wellhead as a metaphor for the meaning of \"構,\" encompassing its multiple meanings. Understanding the meaning of \"構\" becomes more accessible for people familiar with traditional well-digging and well usage, such as the salt wells in Zigong (自貢).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt is crucial to recognize that glyphs, components, and icons are observable, while imagery glyphs, imagery components, and imagery icons are implicit according to our experience. Amalgamation between landforms and imagery is evident.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe lowest level of morphemes (icons and imagery icons) within single-character words (漢字) served as the smallest semantic unit of the entire word system, representing the lexemes of the Hanyu word formation. The intermediate form-imagery knots or form-imagery glyphs (形意字) within single-character words or multicharacter words are known as word-knots. For example, if \"語\" is a single-character word and \"吾\" is a \"五口\", \"吾\" is one of the word-knots of \"語\". If \"語言\" is a multicharacter word, \"語\" remains one of the word-knots.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Combination mode\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoving on to the combination mode, the following question arises: How can these limited imagery icons be combined to generate a diverse array of imagery? This question delves into the issue of combining patterns, exploring how complex and varied imagery can be constructed through the multilayered combination of simple images. From the perspective of glyphs, Chinese characters are formed by combining icons to construct imagery. However, the combination of two or more imagery icons or imagery compositions in any plane raises questions about their relationship, the creation of new imagery after combination, and the cognitive mechanism behind their combination.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe analysis of 9,000 Chinese characters revealed that ancient Han people used different images to construct new images, often by combining icons or components to form new components or glyphs. Five modes of combination emerge from this research: conceptual mode, metaphorical mode, gestalt mode, schema (script) model mode, and declension mode. The first four modes are cognitive modes based on the principle of cognition, while the last one relies on the principle of glyph transformation. These five modes of combination are considered the mechanism for constructing imagery in Chinese characters, metaphorically representing the characters' meanings. Collectively, these modes are known as the five rules of ideogram construction, and the theory is referred to as the theory of \"imagery word formation.\"\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2.1 Conceptual Model\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eHuman beings engage with their environment, leading to cognitive processes. Language serves as the analog of this cognition, projecting the empirical world into speech by replicating sensory experiences. This cognitive process involves the classification of the world, where the notion of characteristic generalization of categories forms concepts, and vocabulary assigns linguistic labels to these concepts. Concepts are fundamental units of symbolic knowledge and are tools for comprehending the world. Civilization's evolution, viewed from this perspective, corresponds to the evolution of a classification system in which humans organize numerous concepts through classification. Categories form hierarchies of concepts, and a category is a concept encompassing its members. Hence, a concept inherently exhibits a hierarchical structure, aligning conceptual systems with vocabulary systems through consistent isomorphism. This categorization aids humans in processing their experiences.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmong the various categorization theories, recent emphasis has been on archetype theory, emphasizing feature identity as the key to archetypes. In exploring word meanings and compositions, it becomes evident that ancient civilizations already grasped the principles of categorization and concepts. Specifically, when two images are combined to form new images, numerous patterns follow the conceptual relationship of [category\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;feature]. This pattern is termed a conceptual pattern. For instance, characters such as \"桃, 柚, 梅, 棠, 梨, and 楓\" (peach, pomelo, prune, plum, pear, maple) are commonly referred to as \"pictophonetic characters\" (形聲字). While they are acknowledged as \"sound symbols\" for distinguishing the names of fruits and trees based on similar sounds, we also consider the symbolic imagery of these \"sound symbols\". According to our interpretation, \"兆\" in the character \"桃\" represents one of the characteristics of peach trees. The imagery associated with \"兆\" is \"burning tortoise for divination, signs like water splashing all over,\" derived from divination, symbolizing \"徵候.\" Therefore, \"桃\" is considered \"a fruit tree that brings the sign of spring,\" with \"木\" representing the type and \"兆\" representing the characteristic of the tree. This interpretation aligns with numerous literary works in which, for instance, in Chinese culture, peach blossoms symbolize love affairs between men and women, signifying the arrival of spring. The pronunciation of the \"pictophonetic characters\" has the same or similar sound as its sound symbols;\u003csup\u003e22\u003c/sup\u003e we explain that some of the sound symbols are Chinese characters, which are pronounced according to the conventions of the local language, and this leads to the phenomenon that some pictophonetic characters have the same or similar pronunciation as their phonetic symbols, but this is only an epiphenomenon. Here, the interpretation of epiphenomena is detached from the structure so that this part of the structure loses its role in ideographic function. In other words, the notion of \"pictophonetic characters\" obscures the ideological integrity of the Chinese character.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn propositional representation, the conceptual model is expressed as follows:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eChinese characters\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;C (class, characteristic)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHere, C represents the conceptual model, indicating the conceptual relationship between categories and features. Consequently, the proposed expression for \"桃\" can be written as follows:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e桃=C(木, 兆)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2.2 Metaphorical Model\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eLanguage serves as a means of recreating sensory experiences, presenting a conceptual world that has been reassembled and reinterpreted. This process of reassembling experiences is termed metaphor. In ancient China, metaphors found their place in literary works, as seen in the Classic of Poetry. However, since the proposal of the Conceptual Metaphor Theory by George Lakoff \u0026amp; Mark Johnson, our understanding of metaphors has increased to a cognitive level, revealing their ubiquitous nature. Theory posits that metaphors are cognitive phenomena expressed in language and grounded in cognition. Conceptual metaphors establish links between two conceptual domains: the source domain and the target domain. A conceptual domain encompasses semantically relevant properties, characteristics, and functions. The source domain typically involves concrete concepts, such as cash, while the target domain incorporates abstract concepts, such as time. Theory suggests that we use the source domain to understand the target domain. For instance, the expression \"time is money\" employs money as the source domain to describe time. Similarly, when we use \"花時間或金錢 (spending time or money)\" to discuss time or money, we understand that \"花flower\" symbolizes a phenomenon that fades quickly, using \"花\" as the source domain to convey the rapid depletion of time or money. In this context, \"花\" transitions from a noun to a verb, indicating an action such as \"花.\"\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMetonymy theory further delves into the reasons for the associations and relationships between source and target domains. However, within Chinese characters, this metaphorical relationship between source and target domains often appears when two images are combined to construct new imagery. We refer to the pattern of this metaphorical relationship (target domain\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;source domain) in the composition of imagery glyphs or imagery components as a metaphorical pattern. For example, in the character \"坡,\" \"皮\" serves as the source domain to metaphorically represent the target domain \"土,\" suggesting that the ground is curved and sloping like the skin. The metaphor involves a combination of conceptual patterns with the word \u0026ldquo;土,\u0026rdquo; constituting a composite pattern. This metaphorical pattern can be expressed through the propositional formula:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eChinese characters\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;M (target domain, source domain)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHere, M represents the Metaphorical model, signifying a metaphorical relationship between the target domain and the source domain. Therefore, the propositional representation of \"坡\" can be articulated as follows:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e坡=CM(土, 皮)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2.3 Gestalt Model\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eGestalt theory originated in 20th-century Germany. The central tenet of Gestalt psychology is that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, emphasizing that understanding a psychological phenomenon is best achieved by viewing it as an organized and structured whole. According to this perspective, breaking down phenomena into small, fragmented parts offers an incomplete understanding of behavior. In language, where many linguistic messages are inherently incomplete, the human capacity for completeness plays a crucial role. When humans observe and perceive the objective world, their subjective experiences involuntarily contribute to their understanding, linking seemingly unrelated features to achieve a comprehensive grasp of the objective. Similarly, the acceptance of language is an active process for humans, as readers unconsciously connect words to their past experiences and organize the relationship between words and phrases according to their understanding, enabling a holistic grasp of semantic connotations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLikewise, when observing the composition of imagery glyphs with the holistic nature of perfect form, numerous Chinese characters are found to be combined based on the principles of gestalt cognition. In other words, they consist of two or more imagery icons, imagery compositions, or imagery glyphs that collectively represent the overall imagery of a certain thing, showcasing the pattern of [feature\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;feature]. This pattern is referred to as the Gestalt pattern.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor instance, the character \"火\" is formed by combining \"人\" and \"冫,\" portraying the imagery of \"the light and flame that makes people sweat profusely.\" Here, people sweating is the feature, and it points to the concept of \"火fire\" outside the structure. Another example is \"畐\" (畐, a noncharacter component), which represents a square container (basket) from ancient times used to store millet and grain. It comprises \"一\", \"口\" and \"田,\" all of which are characteristics of \"畐.\" \"一\" symbolizes the top and bottom of the lid, \"口\" symbolizes the mouth of the container, and \"田\" symbolizes the container used to hold food.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn propositional representations, this Gestalt pattern can be expressed as follows:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eChinese characters\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;G (character, feature)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHere, G represents the Gestalt model, which indicates a Gestalt relationship between features and characteristics. Therefore, the propositional representation of \"火\" is written as follows:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e火=G(人, 冫)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhat distinguishes the conceptual model from the Gestalt model, both of which have imaging features? In the conceptual mode, imagery glyphs are similar to the members of the category, while in the Gestalt mode, imagery glyphs are not related to the members of the category but only to their features. For example, the concept of the \"身body\" is unrelated to its characteristic components \"自\" and \"才,\" whereas \"桃\" is similar to its component \"木.\"\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2.4 Schemas Model\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn their exploration of how the human mind organizes concepts to form knowledge, cognitive psychologists have uncovered the representation of schemas. Essentially, considering the relational information embedded in concepts and reflecting on how a concept relates to others, as well as how the attributes of that concept interconnect, can enhance our understanding of how meaning is extracted from concepts. Therefore, the schema model is a mental structure employed to organize knowledge, establishing a meaningful structure organized by interconnected concepts.\u003csup\u003e23\u003c/sup\u003e This model represents a higher level of cognitive mechanism than a prototype and is more extensive and comprehensive. It encompasses concepts across language, bodily perception, the world, literary memory, and more, resembling easily accessible background knowledge and fostering the creation of stereotypes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA script is a specific type of schema model containing information about events occurring in a predefined order. Scripts encompass preset values for actors, props, scenes, and the sequence of expected events, forming a comprehensive overview of the event.\u003csup\u003e24\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe introduction of script and schema model knowledge representation is relevant because the imagery of many Chinese characters reflects specific historical events or cultural situations, particularly those conveyed through actions and states. For instance, the Chinese character \"知\" embodies the imagery of \"Bolden used the whistling arrow to convey military messages.\" In addition, a Mongol named Bolden invented an arrow capable of making noise in the air, using it to command his cavalry across the wilderness. The cavalry could decipher these airborne sound messages. Another example is \"我\" and \"找\", which are mainly composed of \"扌\" and \"戈\". How does \"手握戈\" symbolize the concepts of \"我\" and \"找? While we might not experience face-to-face battles in ancient battlefields, we can relate to distinguishing between one's side and the opponent's side in a modern sports field. Modern pitches use color-coded clothing to distinguish between teams, much like ancient battlefields used markings on uniforms. This marking is represented by the \"丿\" symbol. Those with the same marking constitute the \"我\" side, while others continue to search for the enemy side.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHence, this kind of action imagery utilizing specific background knowledge is referred to as the schema model (script) mode. In propositional form, this schema model (script) pattern can be expressed as follows:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eChinese character\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;S(action, background)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHere, S represents the schema mode, indicating the schema relationship between the action and background. Therefore, the propositional expressions for \"知,\" \"我,\" and \"找\" can be written as follows:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e知=S(口, 矢)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e我=S(找, 丿)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e找=S(扌, 戈)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2.5 Declension Model\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe phenomenon of variations in Chinese characters refers to the noncombination of Chinese character structures, wherein Chinese character structures are utilized to change the original imagery by directly altering the structure. Unlike the first four modes of combination, which involve the combination of two or more morphemes or form-imagery components to represent new imagery, the declension mode involves the deletion or displacement of certain components within an existing structure. This change in structure aims to achieve a modification in the imagery glyph or imagery component. For example, \"才\" is formed by the absence of the right apostrophe \"木,\" symbolizing a tree transformed into a rounded timber after its branches and leaves are removed. Another example is \"夬,\" which was derived from \"央\" with a missing left shaft. The imagery of \"央\" is \"大人於內中正,\" while \"夬,\" with a missing right shaft, signifies \"incomplete\" and \"missing.\" Both examples utilize structural changes to alter the original imagery. Therefore, this phenomenon is termed the declension of the Chinese character structure, and the method of generating new imagery (component or glyph) through variations is labelled the declension pattern.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn propositional form, this pattern can be expressed as follows:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eChinese character\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;D (component, deformation)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHere, D represents the Declension mode, indicating a declension relationship between the components and deformations. Therefore, the proposed expression for \"才\" can be written as follows:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e才=D(木,\u0026minus;丿)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, as there are seven types of declensions, the declension components in the propositional expression should be preceded by a declension symbol. Empirical studies reveal that the number of declension Chinese characters is not extensive, numbering less than a hundred, but that they still play a role in imagery generation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe five combination patterns mentioned above occur in every combination plane, including their composite patterns. The composition of a Chinese character begins with the combination of icons, progresses to the combination of components, and concludes with the glyph. Each new glyph and its imagery are constructed through the combination of existing forms and their imagery. Consequently, Chinese characters (single-character words) are continually created and expanded.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, due to the limited space within the box of Chinese characters, the incessant combination of new characters can lead to an overcrowded Chinese character structure. This would be inconvenient for writing and memorization. Hence, people conceived the idea of combining characters in a horizontal direction, resulting in multicharacter horizontal combinations or the emergence of multicharacter words. While most Chinese characters are formed by combinations, multicharacter combinations are a natural extension of such combinations. The advent of multicharacter words enriched single-character words and curbed the invention of more Chinese characters, thus maintaining a stable range of character usage. This development from single-character words to multicharacter words still adheres to the same combination mechanism, i.e., the combination modes of multicharacter words follow the four abovementioned methods (excluding the declension mode).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNevertheless, word combinations of multicharacter words are not combinations of imagery but combinations of word meanings. This combination of word meanings is still constructed imagery, and it allows us to predict the meaning of multicharacter words from the meanings of single-character words. For instance, \u0026ldquo;車頭 (car head), 車頂 (car roof), 車門 (car door), 車椅 (car seat), 車窗 (car window), 車燈 (car light), 車尾 (car tail), 車身 (car body), 車胎 (car tire), 車輪 (car wheel)\u0026rdquo; still exhibit a conceptual pattern. \"火箭 (rocket)\" remains a Gestalt metaphorical pattern, \u0026ldquo;革命 (revolution)\u0026rdquo; is a schema (script) model, and \u0026ldquo;字詞 (words)\u0026rdquo; adheres to a Gestalt pattern. For lianmian words (聯綿詞), such as \u0026ldquo;葡萄grapes, 蜻蜓dragonflies, 蝌蚪tadpoles, 蚯蚓earthworms\", while the individual characters in these multicharacter words have no meaning as single-character words, they still possess imagery, as they have forms that must have imagery components. This imagery is still ideographic for the meanings of multiple character words. The characters in this kind of multicharacter word are all word knots.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Scope, Methodology, and Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe previously proposed hypothesis of \"imagery word formation\" is more of a descriptive account of the actual structure of Chinese characters than a theoretical framework. In reality, the shapes (glyphs), meanings, and sounds of characters have long been established and used in practice. While the unalterable nature of these elements remains, our objective is to elucidate the relationship between the shapes (glyphs) and meaning. This explanation needs to be applied to each Chinese character individually. Thus, one of our objectives is to uncover the latent imagery or rationalizations behind the compositional justifications and their corresponding structures. This endeavor aimed to transform Chinese characters and the entire word system into genuine ideographs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1 Scope\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, these latent images have not been explicitly conveyed throughout history. To explore these images and their corresponding structures within Chinese characters, certain specifications aligned with scientific rigor must be established. Speculations about these images need to be confined within scientifically defined boundaries. To accomplish this, we formulated four essential conditions or principles that must not be violated by speculative imagery. These criteria served as the standards for our exploration. These include consistency, objectivity, interpretability, and adherence to the principles of traditional culture and common sense. Without these constraints, the constructive imagery discussed earlier would lack rationality. If the imagery of 9,000 Chinese characters cannot be reasonably identified, the theory of \"imagery word formation\" and the entire word system risks being built on shaky grounds.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1.1 Principles of Consistency\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe principle of consistency asserts that any morphemes, form-imagery components, or form-imagery glyphs must maintain uniformity in form and imagery throughout the entire word system. Given that the entire word system is the outcome of repeated combinations of morphemes (imagery icons), this principle demands that morphemes, regardless of how frequently they are repeated, preserve the consistency of their imagery and structures. This consistency extends not only within the entire word system but also among its constituents. Adherence to this consistency of imagery and composition is crucial for tightly linking the entire collection of words and phrases as a system. This approach is a prerequisite for scientific systematicity, preventing the interpretation of individual characters and ensuring efficient learning of Chinese characters. For instance, the character \"艮\" is formed by the morphemes \"日\" and \"\u0026#161287;,\" representing the sun and walking on both feet, respectively. Together, they symbolize the mythological imagery of \"Kuafu夸父 chasing after the sun to the Yungu Valley禺谷\u003csup\u003e25\u003c/sup\u003e.\" When combined with other characters, such as \"根、即、既、艱、良、垠、很、恨、狠、限、哏、退、茛、痕、眼、硍、裉、跟、銀、簋、齦、誏、琅,\" it consistently plays a role in interpreting the imagery.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1.2 Objectivity principles\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur focus of study is the structure of Chinese characters. The term \"compositional study\" implies an examination of how the structure forms words. Therefore, the object of study should be an objective phenomenon. However, the same Chinese character may appear in different styles, each possessing its own distinct structure and rationale due to evolving historical contexts. These styles represent different objective phenomena, and additional studies are needed. Hence, the study of word formation must differentiate between the examination of contemporary scripts and that of historical periods. The principle of objectivity emphasizes that the research object must be confined to the phenomenon within the same character styles, avoiding the mixing of different styles. For instance, using an earlier script, such as the oracle bone script, to explain a later script, such as the Regular Script, is discouraged.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, each script has its rationale for formation. The Regular Script, as a standardized style, has specific imagery between dots and strokes.\u003csup\u003e26\u003c/sup\u003eAny alteration in the number of structural strokes in subsequent generations is considered unacceptable, as it signifies a change in the underlying imagery. Any arbitrary modification of the structure in the future, without constructing a new character according to ideograms, risks disrupting the ideographic nature and systematicity of Chinese characters.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1.3 Principles of interpretability\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterpretability asserts that there exists a metaphorical understanding of the relationship between an imagery glyph and the meaning of words. The imagery glyph must serve as a specific and concrete representation of the concept's meaning. This representation should align with common sense in general culture, enabling literate individuals to easily comprehend the character's meaning. Ideographs achieve interpretability by creating imagery that explains or comprehends the word's meaning, including its multiple meanings. This interpretability is a fundamental characteristic of ideographs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs discussed earlier, concepts or meanings are derived from experiences with external things, and imagery serves as the mental representation of these experiences. An abstract concept can be understood in association with concrete experiences related to the abstract concept, as the abstract concept is generalized from the figurative perspective. Metaphors aid in this process of comprehension, acting as bridges between the concrete and the abstract. This imaginative experience that aids comprehension is the interpretability of ideographs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn contrast, phonetic alphabetic characters are mere symbols for recording speech sounds, and the relationship between speech sounds and meanings is arbitrary and contractual. Ideographs and phonograms are coded on different bases: ideographs are coded based on comprehensible imagery, while phonograms are coded based on phonological rules. Ideographs are concrete, visual, and empirically linked to word meanings, providing a direct representation of experiences. This unique characteristic is exclusive to traditional Chinese culture and enriches empirical knowledge. Ideographs' interpretability is rooted in the direct representation of experience, offering a natural understanding of the meaning of characters for those with corresponding experiential knowledge. For instance, the structural imagery \"水\" (water) represents \"the swaying of a fishhook causing the water to ripple,\" linking the experience of fishing to the concept of \"水.\" This is more sensual, visual, and accessible than the symbol \"water,\" which records a phonological code. Ideograph interpretability reflects a fundamental principle of the \"imagery word formation\" theory.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1.4 Principles of Cultural Knowledge\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eCognitive theory serves as the foundation for the \"imagery word formation\" theory. The content of these images reflects traditional Chinese culture and common knowledge. Human cognition results from the interaction between individuals and their environment, manifesting in language expression. The culmination of language and action forms culture. Together, language, cognition, and culture constitute the historical basis for the development of Chinese character forms. Designers cannot escape this historical reality, especially when dealing with ideographic structures. Ideograms inherently involve cognition, and understanding occurs within a cultural context. Hence, returning to the historical and cultural context of Chinese character design becomes crucial in searching for imagery. This approach not only acts as a witness to the imagery being sought but also provides a foundation for understanding word meanings. These ideographs, connected to experience and common sense, are inherently rich in knowledge, creating an empirical writing system. Therefore, the imagery within structures must align with traditional Chinese culture and common knowledge; otherwise, the imagery lacks a cognitive basis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese four principles serve as necessary conditions and criteria for exploring the imagery icons, imagery components, and imagery glyphs of Chinese characters. While no unique imagery may meet all these conditions in the search process, adhering to these four principles allows various speculative imagery to compete, with the most explanatory one prevailing. Fulfilling these necessary conditions guarantees the scientific and efficient nature of the word system.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2 Methodologies\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSearching for structural imagery, whether imagery glyphs, imagery components, or imagery icons, requires specific strategies and methods. The overarching strategy employed is \"reverse engineering,\" tracing the cause from the effect\u0026mdash;starting from known meanings to decipher internal structures, including the imagery of glyphs, components, and icons. Adherence to the four principles of image searching is essential. The specific methods include the following:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst, component analysis or structural analysis: This method involves sorting out the three-level dual-orbital structure within the 9,000 Chinese characters. The aim was to identify the structure of the Chinese character system concerning form-imagery icons, form-imagery components, form-imagery glyphs, and their hierarchical combinations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecond, the induction Method: Leveraging the combinatory nature of Chinese character structures and the multiple meanings of characters, this method involves extracting imagery from related meanings of characters containing a specific component, glyph, or icon. Collecting the meanings, including their multiple meanings, serves as a basis for deducing the associated imagery and explaining the meanings of these characters. This method highlights the innovative aspect of the research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor instance, to determine the imagery of the \"\" on the right side of \"漢,\" one can analyse characters such as \"漢,\" \"難,\" \"艱,\" \"嘆,\" \"歎,\" and \"暵\", etc., as they all contain the \".\" By collecting the meanings of these characters, including their multiple meanings, and considering relevant historical and cultural backgrounds, one may deduce that the imagery of \"\" is a type of raft\u0026mdash;a watercraft made of inflated animal skins common in the waters of the Han River (漢江). This speculative imagery aligns with historical and humanistic facts, explains the meanings of various words, and remains consistent with the imagery of its lower-level components combined with the word \"革夫.\" This method allows for the exploration of experiential cultural imagery, which is both content-rich and a generalization of the many meanings of Chinese characters, explaining the polysemous nature of word meanings. For example, the Chinese character \"漢\" has the structural imagery of \"the waters where rafts are prevalent,\" reflecting not only the river's waters but also the geographical and cultural concepts associated with the Han River.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eExploring the imagery of 9,000 Chinese characters one by one is an intricate and substantial task requiring long-term dedication. The characters are intertwined horizontally and vertically, affecting the entire system and necessitating constant adjustments and cross-checks.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThird, there is a wealth of historical documents in Chinese history, such as the Shuowen Jiezi (說文) and the Kangxi Dictionary (康熙字典), providing numerous interpretations of Chinese characters, including annotations of classics. If some of these interpretations align with the four normative principles mentioned above, they may be utilized directly. This method is referred to as the documentary method. For instance, the character \"士\" is derived from \"推十合一為士,\" \u003csup\u003e27\u003c/sup\u003ea saying attributed to Confucius. Therefore, \"士\" is a combination of \"十, 一,\" reflecting the ability to generalize and summarize\u0026mdash;the ancient criterion for recognizing a reader's ability. Our capacity to summarize character imagery from various meanings is an embodiment of this ability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFourth, Chinese characters, as ancient scripts with deep historical roots, form structures influenced by the historical and cultural contexts of their time. In essence, they are products of the cognitive processes of ancient scholars within their historical and cultural settings. Hence, comprehending various historical and cultural situations becomes vital for exploring the imagery of these forms. This method, in which historical and cultural traces are utilized to derive imagery, is known as the method of evidence. For example, understanding the construction and play of the GuQin古琴 allows one to easily imagine the imagery of the component \"彳山攵\" in characters like \"徽、徵、微、黴,\" symbolizing \"plucking the strings of the GuQin's YueShan\" (岳山), and the imagery glyph of the series \"徽、徵、微、黴\" will be solved.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3 Results\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo explore the imagery glyphs, imagery components, and imagery icons of the word system, encompassing the glyphs, components, and icons that convey them, we selected 9,000 commonly used Regular Script Chinese characters as a comprehensive and objective representation of the system. After an extensive search, dormant Regular Script structural imagery, which has existed for thousands of years, has been unveiled one by one\u0026mdash;a significant achievement that establishes a robust cultural foundation for the theory of \u0026ldquo;imagery word formation.\"\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese results indicate the presence of 84 morphemes in the word system, with up to 10 levels of composition in the Chinese character structure. These 84 morphemes function akin to the alphabet, constructing the entire character and word system and demonstrating its density and efficiency. Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e illustrates the comparison between the Regular Script system and previous script systems. The Regular Script Chinese character system averages 107 characters for each morpheme. Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e outlines the 84 icons and imagery icons, serving as the fundamental basis for ideographic characters.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eComparison of the regular script system with other previous Chinese script systems\u003csup\u003e28\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eText Type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal taken\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMorpheme\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAverage number of characters\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e甲骨文已釋字\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1380\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e412\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e秦簡抽樣\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1773\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e361\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e《說文》小篆\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10422\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e414\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e楷書漢字\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9032\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e84\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e107.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e shows that the regular script system is more systematic and efficient than the \"Shuowen\" small seal script.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eList of 84 morphemes and their icons, i.e., imagery icons\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIcons\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eImagery icons\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIcons\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eImagery icons\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIcons\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eImagery icons\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e、\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e突出之點\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e匕\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象取用比較之勺\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e幺\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e小細絲\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e一\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e天地混沌盤古於卵內\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e十\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e盤古嚥氣身化萬物成於完備大地\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e水\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e拋釣鉤水波盪漾\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e│\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e上下貫通\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e又\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e像叉手舉臂做揖禮\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e斤\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e像度量秤\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e亅\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e鉤 刀\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e凵\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象開口容器\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e方\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象風水方士臨場校察地相\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e丿\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e刀痕 標示\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e厂\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e山邊棚舍\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e氏\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e從旁(側)加入者\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e口\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象人嘴形\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e丫\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象前端分叉的長形物\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e爪\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象鳥獸腳指\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e勹\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e用手緊握器具的柄\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e匚\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e儲藏櫃\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e片\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e劈開之薄木(竹)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e冖\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e覆蓋\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e月\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象條狀臘肉\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e目\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e眼睛\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026#131210;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e張嘴\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e日\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象太陽之形\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e乍\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e布手知尺\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e尢\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象人腳跛曲脛\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e女\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e像婀娜多姿之姑娘\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e夂\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e從後而至\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e乚\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象彎曲成圓之形\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e山\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象地上高峰並列\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e廾\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e雙手捧起\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026#131207;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e左手༎上肢\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e川\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象江河貫穿通流之形\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e卩\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象竹節༎遇阻礙出示通過之憑證\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e乃\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象母育乳房之形\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e囗\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e圍成一片地域༎四周༎\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e丩\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象瓜藤糾纏蔓延\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e乂\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e伏羲割蓍草陰陽占卜\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e木\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象樹之形\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e皿\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象飯食用器(容器)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e子\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e像伸出兩臂之嬰兒\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e丌\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象承載器物之底座\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e夊\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e緩行\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e人\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e像人雙腿邁步之形\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e彡\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象許多線條流蘇\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e卂\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e疾速飛行\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e入\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e像木楔之形\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e彐\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e動手\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e羽\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象收起之鳥翼毛\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e冂\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e範圍༎出入口\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e之\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e長隊伍隨前導旌旃曲折前行\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e阝\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e左「邑」右「阜」\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e䒑\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e兩個༎雙\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e龴\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e突出物\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e屮\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象草木植物叢生\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e八\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e天地分盤古亡體身分解化萬物\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e乛\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e針\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e虍\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e老虎身上花紋\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e丂\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e咳嗽༎氣損呼吸不順\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e厶\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象鼻出氣\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e攵\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e敲擊\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e几\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象高腳案桌\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e井\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e像固定井口之護欄\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e豕\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e野豬\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026#161287;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象人走動衣擺飄逸\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e彑\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e青銅豬形卣\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e豸\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e長脊獸\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e戈\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象平頭戟(古兵器)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e㔾\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e像人卷曲之形\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026#136663;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e雙手棒起༎迎向\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026#131234;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e分流。支流\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e冎\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象凹下或凸起之肉骨\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e丵\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e樂器架子鋸齒狀之橫版\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e癶\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e不順之兩腳\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e罒\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e網狀物\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e巤\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e爪利善掘肥膩頭毛有三色白條紋之獾\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e覀\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e覆蓋(包裹)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e龷\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象縱橫交錯之草蓆\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e黽\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象兩棲爬行動物。努力(勤勉)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e飞\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e鳥展翅之樣子\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e疒\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象人倚著之形。病\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e瓦\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e象屋頂上板瓦與簡瓦相扣於瓦頭\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eHuman cognition is manifested through spoken language, which involves contracting internal meanings into speech. This communal contract assigns specific meanings to speech, forming the basis for the development of written texts. This process, based on speech or meaning codes, distinguishes the word formation of ideographs and phonograms significantly.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo effectively study Chinese word formation, a conceptual overhaul is necessary. Historical confusion arises from the influence of the traditional concept of Chinese characters and is exacerbated by the emergence of multicharacter words and vernacular languages in modern Chinese. The lack of consistency between words and characters is a consequence of this evolution. The study of word formation gained clarity with the establishment of the concept of \"words字詞,\" identifying word formation as a subject of study. However, while composing multicharacter words, Chinese characters are constructed from other structures within Chinese characters, making them ideograms with smaller units of meaning. Additionally, the traditional six-script六書 theory falls short in explaining word meanings, requiring the exclusion of the cognitive interference of phonograms and distinguishing between cotemporal and historical research for objectivity in scientific research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA survey of 9,000 commonly used Regular Script Chinese characters revealed that these glyphs vividly describe experiential events, forming mental representations linked to the words' meanings. Ideograms are thus ideographically connected to their meanings, enabling metaphorical understanding through imagery. The exploration also delved into the structural aspects of these word forms, uncovering the imagery they project and the cognitive modes through which they combine to form new imagery. The study identified morphemes constituting the entire word system, along with their combined imagery glyphs, imagery components, and imagery icons. Establishing four necessary criteria and exploring four methods ensured a systematic approach to uncovering the imagery behind these constructions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe composition of Chinese words has traversed three stages: the emergence of direct ideograms or pictographs depicting specific objects, the subsequent emergence of combinations of morphemes (icons) in single-character words, and, ultimately, the creation of multicharacter words in response to various linguistic and cultural needs. The repetitive combination of a small number of morphemes, coupled with the establishment of generative word system rules, offers theoretical value to the \"imagery word formation\" hypothesis. This theory not only theoretically explains the ideological relationship between word meanings and forms, including multiple meanings but also practically reflects the 9,000 Chinese characters and multicharacter words. This approach provides a guiding theory for Chinese word formation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStructural imagery breathes life into Chinese characters, alleviating the challenges of learning the language. The natural order of linking old and new words in the acquisition of Chinese characters, backed by visualized cultural imagery, renders the structures explicable and the learning process more comprehensible. The theory of \"imagery word formation\" is just the beginning, with the hope that more scholars will contribute, perfect, and develop it in the future.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCoulmas, Florian. 1991. \u003cem\u003eThe Writing Systems of the Word\u003c/em\u003e. Oxford: Blackwell Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGlenberg, A. M. \u0026amp; Roberson, D. A. 2000. Symbol grounding and meaning. Journal of Memory Language 43: 379\u0026ndash;401.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHusserl, E. 1980. \u003cem\u003eIdeas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy\u003c/em\u003e. Boston: Kluwer Academic press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003el. J. Gelb. 1963. \u003cem\u003eA Study of Writing\u003c/em\u003e. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKurt koffka. 1935. \u003cem\u003eGestalt Psychology\u003c/em\u003e. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Company Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKaschak, M. P. \u0026amp; Glenberg, A. M. 2000. Constructing comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 43.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSampson, Geoffrey. \u003cem\u003eWriting Systems: A Linguistic Introduction\u003c/em\u003e. 1985. Stanford: Stanford University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAuthor: unknown. Era: Pre-Qin(先秦). The Classic of Mountains and Seas: The Great Desert North(山海經: 大荒北經). PhilSci archive. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://ctext.org/shan-hai-jing/da-huang-bei-jing/zh\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://ctext.org/shan-hai-jing/da-huang-bei-jing/zh\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Accessed 20 June 2017.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eXu Shen(許慎). 100. \u003cem\u003eShuo Wen Jiezi\u003c/em\u003e(說文解字). PhilSci archive. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://ctext.org/shuo-wen-jie-zi/zh\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://ctext.org/shuo-wen-jie-zi/zh\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen Yanjing(陳延敬), et al. 1716. \u003cem\u003eKangxi Dictionary (\u003c/em\u003e康熙字典\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang Bi(王弼). Lou-Lie edited and annotated 226\u0026ndash;249 (樓宇烈). 1980. \u003cem\u003ecritical review of Wang Bi's works\u003c/em\u003e(王弼集校釋). Beijing: China Bookstore press(北京: 中華書局).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang Bi(王弼). 226\u0026ndash;249. Han Kang Bai Note(韓康伯注). 332\u0026ndash;380. Kong Yingda\u0026rsquo;s Notes (孔穎達疏). \u003cem\u003eThe Righteousness of Zhouyi\u003c/em\u003e (周易正義). Taipei: Taiwan Zhonghua Bookstore, 1977(台北: 臺灣中華書局, 1977).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang Bi(王弼). 226\u0026ndash;249. Xing shu Notes (邢璹注). \u003cem\u003eZhou Yi makes an exception (周易略例).\u003c/em\u003e Itabashi: Yewen Printing House 1965 (板橋: 藝文印書館 1965年).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang Xizhi(王羲之).303\u0026ndash;361.\u003cem\u003eSelf-treatise\u003c/em\u003e(自論書(傳)). PhilSci archive. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=gb\u0026amp;chapter=647000\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=gb\u0026amp;chapter=647000\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eXie Guoping (謝國平). 2016. \u003cem\u003eIntroduction to Linguistics\u003c/em\u003e(語言學導論). Taipei: Sanmin Book Company (台北: 三民書局)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eQiu Xigui(裘錫圭). 1995. \u003cem\u003eIntroduction to Philology\u003c/em\u003e(文字學概論). Taipei: Wanjuan Building press(台北: 萬卷樓).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePan Wenguo (潘文國) et al. 1993. \u003cem\u003eA Study of the Structural Methods of the Chinese Language\u003c/em\u003e. Taipei, Student Bookstore.(台北: 學生書局)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFeng Shengli(馮勝利). 1997. \u003cem\u003eA Study on the Rhyme and Grammar of the Chinese Language\u003c/em\u003e(漢語韻律語法研究). Beijing: Peking University Press(北京: 北京大學出版社).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEdited by Su Yiwen and Bi Yong'e(蘇以文、畢永峨編著). 2009. \u003cem\u003eLanguage and Cognition\u003c/em\u003e(語言與認知). Taipei: Publication Centre, National Taiwan University(台北: 國立臺灣大學出版中心).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHuang Dekuan, Chen Bingxin (黃德寬 陳秉新). \u003cem\u003eHistory of Hanyu Linguistics\u003c/em\u003e(漢語文字學史). Taipei: UMC Press(台北:聯經).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRobert J. Sternberg, Karin Sternberg. 2017. Translated by Li Hongyi(李宏鎰譯). \u003cem\u003eCognitive Psychology(認知心理學).\u003c/em\u003e Taipei: Sage Learning Singapore press(台北: 新加坡聖智學習)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGeorge A. Miller. 2002. Translated by Hong lan(洪蘭譯). \u003cem\u003eThe knowledge of words.(詞的學問)\u003c/em\u003e. Taipei: Yuanliu press (台北: 遠流).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGeorge Lakoff \u0026amp; Mark Johnson. Translated byZhou Shizhen(周世箴譯). 2006. \u003cem\u003eMetaphors we live by(我們賴以生活的隱喻\u003c/em\u003e). Taipei: UMC Press(台北:聯經).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhou Youguang(周有光). 2016. \u003cem\u003eHistory of the Development of World Writing(\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e​世界文字發展史). Hong Kong: Commercial Press(香港: 商務印書館).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang Ning. \u003cem\u003e2013. Universal Canonical Chinese Character Dictionary\u003c/em\u003e(通用規範漢字字典).. Beijing: Commercial Press(北京: 商務印書館).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang Ning. \u003cem\u003e2013. Chinese character morphology lecture\u003c/em\u003e(漢字構形學講座). Taipei: Sanmin Book Company(台北: 三民).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTang Tingchi(湯廷池). 1994. \u003cem\u003eInternal Structure of Chinese Compound Words\u003c/em\u003e(漢語復合詞的內部結構). Taipei: Chinese World Issue 73 (台北: 華文世界, 73期).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eXu Tongqiang(徐通鏘). 2019. \u003cem\u003eLinguistic Theory - Structural principles and research methods of semantic language(語言論 - 語義型語言的結構原理和研究方法)\u003c/em\u003e. Beijing: The Commercial Press(北京: 商務印書館).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhan Yong(占勇). 2006. A Review study of Chinese Word Formation(漢語構詞法研究述評). \u003cem\u003eStudies in Linguistics\u003c/em\u003e, 2006.(北京: 《語言學研究》)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGu Mingdong (顧明棟). 2009. Mingxiang in \"The Book of Changes\" and Modern Language Philosophy and Hermeneutics (《周易》明象與現代語言哲學及詮釋學). \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sun Yat-sen University (Social Science Edition) Issue 4, Volume 49 (220 issues in total)\u003c/em\u003e (中山大學學報(社會科學版)第4期, 第49卷༈總220期༉.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHuang Juren(黃居仁). 2009. Looking at cognition from vocabulary: The interest of lexical semantics research\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e​(從詞彙看認知: 詞彙語意學研究的趣味). \u003cem\u003eLanguage and Cognition (語言與認知\u003c/em\u003e). Taipei: Publication Centre, National Taiwan University (台北: 臺大出版中心).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChin-Chuan Cheng(鄭錦全).1998. Understanding language cognition from a quantitative perspective(從計量理解語言認知)。\u003cem\u003eChinese Language Measurement and Computational Research\u003c/em\u003e 15\u0026ndash;30 (漢語計量與計算研究). Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press(香港: 香港城市大學).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Footnotes","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Pan Wenguo (潘文國) et al. 1993. \u003cem\u003eA Study of the Structural Methods of the Chinese Language,1\u003c/em\u003e. Taipei, Student Bookstore.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Zhan Yong(占勇). 2006. A Review study of Chinese Word Formation(漢語構詞法研究述評). \u003cem\u003eStudies in Linguistics\u003c/em\u003e, 2006.༈北京༚《語言學研究》, 2006年༉\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Pan Wenguo (潘文國) et al. 1993. \u003cem\u003eA Study of the Structural Methods of the Chinese Language,29\u003c/em\u003e. Taipei, Student Bookstore.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Sampson, Geoffrey. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1985\u003c/span\u003e. \u003cem\u003eWriting Systems: A Linguistic Introduction\u003c/em\u003e. Stanford: Stanford University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Xie Guoping(謝國平). 2016. \u003cem\u003eIntroduction to Linguistics, 16\u003c/em\u003e. Taipei: Sanmin Bookstore.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e The Chinese characters have been developed in various dialects, including Korean, Japanese, Vietnamese, and other East Asian dialects, and are pronounced in their own way. The current Hanyu Pinyin or Zhuyin system is only a modern standard Hanyu phonetic scheme.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e The concept of radicals was created by the Eastern Han Dynasty scribe Xu Shen(許慎) in his Shuowen Jiezi(說文解字) (Explaining Characters in Chinese) in 100 A.D. A total of 540 radicals were created.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Legend has it that Cang Jie invented Chinese characters. The name Cang Jie is used here to represent the ancient people who designed the codes for the Chinese characters.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang Bi(王弼). 226\u0026ndash;249. Han Kang Bai Note(韓康伯注). 332\u0026ndash;380. Kong Yingda\u0026rsquo;s Notes(孔穎達疏). \u003cem\u003eThe Righteousness of Zhouyi, 18\u003c/em\u003e(\u003cem\u003e周易正義).\u003c/em\u003e Taipei: Taiwan Zhonghua Bookstore, 1977(台北༚臺灣中華書局).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang Bi(王弼). 226\u0026ndash;249. Xing shu Notes(邢璹注).?-752. \u003cem\u003eZhou Yi makes an exception, 11(周易略例).\u003c/em\u003e Banqiao: Art Press 1965(板橋༚藝文印書館 1965年).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Gu Mingdong(顧明棟). 2009. Mingxiang in \"The Book of Changes\" and Modern Language Philosophy and Hermeneutics(\u003cem\u003e《周易》明象與現代語言哲學及詮釋學\u003c/em\u003e). \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sun Yat-sen University (Social Science Edition) Issue 4, Volume 49 (220 issues in total)\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cem\u003e中山大學學報\u003c/em\u003e༈\u003cem\u003e社會科學版\u003c/em\u003e༉第4期, 第49卷༈總220期༉.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Huang Xuanfan(黃宣範).2009. body-dwelling embodied cognition(棲於身的體現認知),344. \u003cem\u003eLanguage and Cognition\u003c/em\u003e(\u003cem\u003e語言與認知\u003c/em\u003e). Taipei: Publication Centre, National Taiwan University(台北༚國立臺灣大學出版中心).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Husserl, E. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1980\u003c/span\u003e. \u003cem\u003eIdeas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy\u003c/em\u003e Boston: Kluwer Academic.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Glenberg, A. M. \u0026amp; Roberson, D. A. 2000. Symbol grounding and meaning. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Memory Language\u003c/em\u003e 43, 379\u0026ndash;401.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Kaschak, M. P. \u0026amp; Glenberg, A. M. 2000. Constructing comprehension. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Memory and Language\u003c/em\u003e 43, 508\u0026ndash;529.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Robert J. Sternberg, Karin Sternberg. 2017. Translated by Li Hongyi(李宏鎰譯). \u003cem\u003eCognitive Psychology(認知心理學)\u003c/em\u003e, 298\u0026ndash;302. Taipei: Sage Learning Singapore press(台北༚新加坡聖智學習).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSame as above, 309.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGeorge Lakoff \u0026amp; Mark Johnson. Translated byZhou Shizhen(周世箴譯). 2006. \u003cem\u003eMetaphors we live by(我們賴以生活的隱喻\u003c/em\u003e),9. Taipei༚UMC Press(台北༚聯經).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Chin-Chuan Cheng 鄭錦全(1998), In his article \"Understanding Linguistic Cognition from Measurement\", examined in-depth the use of words in different scriptures, history books and dictionaries and found that different authors used no more than 8,000 single-character words, and thus put forward the concept of \"字涯八千\", i.e., the number of single-character words and nonderivative words a person can master the use of.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Huang Juren(黃居仁). 2009. Looking at cognition from vocabulary: The interest of lexical semantics research\u003c/span\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Par59\" class=\"Para\"\u003e​(從詞彙看認知༚詞彙語意學研究的趣味). \u003cem\u003eLanguage and Cognition(語言與認知\u003c/em\u003e), 222\u0026ndash;223.Taipei: Publication Centre, National Taiwan University༈台北༚臺大出版中心༉.\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e These nine thousand commonly used Chinese characters are mainly derived from the \"Standard Book Style List of Commonly Used Chinese Characters(常用國字標準書體表)\" announced by the Ministry of Education in 1971 and the \"Universal Standard Chinese Character Dictionary(通用規範漢字字典)\" edited by Wang Ning. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 2013).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e The statistical results of Zhou Youguang (周有光, 1978) are: the effective phonetic notation rate of modern Chinese characters is 39%, Li Yan et al. (李燕,1992) is 40.54%, and Gao Jiaying (高家鶯, 1993) is 26.3%. Ye Chuqiang (葉楚強,1965:568\u0026ndash;570) once made statistics on 7504 Chinese characters in the \"Xinhua Dictionary新華字典\". Only 4.7% of the phonetic characters have the same pronunciation as their phonetic characters, and 14.7% can be roughly pronounced according to their phonetic characters.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Robert J. Sternberg, Karin Sternberg. 2017. Translated by Li Hongyi(李宏鎰譯). \u003cem\u003eCognitive Psychology(認知心理學),365.\u003c/em\u003e Taipei: Sage Learning Singapore press(台北༚新加坡聖智學習)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Same as above, 367.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Myths and legends are the place where the sun sets. The Classic of Mountains and Seas: The Great Desert North (山海經: 大荒北經). PhilSci archive. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://ctext.org/shan-hai-jing/da-huang-bei-jing/zh\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://ctext.org/shan-hai-jing/da-huang-bei-jing/zh\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Accessed 20 June 2017.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Wang Xizhi(王羲之).303\u0026ndash;361.「點畫之間皆有意焉」. \u003cem\u003eSelf-treatise\u003c/em\u003e(\u003cem\u003e自論書\u003c/em\u003e(傳༉). PhilSci archive. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=gb\u0026amp;chapter=647000.Accessed\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=gb\u0026amp;chapter=647000.Accessed\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e 10 June 2019.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Shuowen Jiezi (Explaining and Analysing Characters in Chinese): \"士\" Character.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e Except for the data of Chinese characters in regular script, the rest of the data are from Wang Ning's \"Lectures on Chinese Character Composition漢字構形學講座\", 18. Taipei: Sanmin Book Company 2013(台北༚三民).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"words (字詞), imagery, cultural knowledge, word formation, cognition","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3930477/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3930477/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003ePhonetic characters neatly tie letters to pronunciation for recording speech sounds. Conversely, Chinese characters deviate from this phonetic simplicity, as their meanings veiled behind a mysterious ideological mechanism. Our analysis, spanning 9,000 regular script Chinese characters, unravels this enigma, revealing a rich tapestry of imagery encapsulating experiential events. Unlike their phonetic counterparts, Chinese characters refrain from direct sound representation. Instead, our findings illuminate a fascinating revelation\u0026mdash;these characters employ imagery as metaphors to convey meanings. In essence, the structures themselves craft mental representations of experiences tied to word meanings. This intricate dance between structure and meaning forms a powerful ideological connection, facilitating our comprehension of word meanings. To systematically explore these visual metaphors, we establish four necessary conditions, adhering to scientific rigor and steering clear of unwarranted speculation. By collecting and analysing the meanings of characters sharing identical structures, we distill structural imagery that meets our stringent criteria. In conclusion, we identify the structural imagery underpinning 9,000 regular script Chinese characters and their intricate formations. Additionally, we outline five cognitive patterns governing their interactions. These revelations reveal the mechanism of ideogram formation in the Chinese language, offering a guiding theory for the nuanced study of Chinese word formation. Beyond theoretical significance, our research has practical implications, as it could enhance the efficiency of Chinese word acquisition.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Unlocking the Enigma: Imagery and Meaning in Chinese Characters","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-02-06 11:07:01","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3930477/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"0875e3ad-4045-495a-9290-016c80cd9c52","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 6th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":28600068,"name":"Cultural Studies"},{"id":28600069,"name":"Linguistics"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-02-06T11:07:01+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-02-06 11:07:01","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-3930477","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-3930477","identity":"rs-3930477","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"rHA-KDH7Qsr4HCuvH75dn","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}