Research of square scripts in Vietnam: An overview and prospects

Research materials

The majority of research material for square scripts in Vietnam is centred in the Sino-Nom archives of the Institute of Sino-Nom Studies in Hanoi. Based on statistics in 2016, the institute currently contains approximately 35,000 individual books, among which there are about 6000 unique titles. ¹ The total number of stone stele inscription rubbings is about 70,000. These numbers confirm the institute’s first standing as an archive centre for old books in Vietnam. The collection is made up primarily of Sinographic texts, followed by Việt Nom texts (about 800 unique titles), followed by Tày Nom. Dao Nom texts are not common and there are no Ngạn Nom texts. In reality, the texts reveal that Việt Nom texts appear both as manuscripts and woodblock printed texts, whereas the other three Nom scripts only appear as manuscripts. There are several other archive centres in Vietnam; however, they have smaller collections. These include the National Library in Hanoi, National Archive Center I, Library of the Institute of Social Sciences Information, and several private collections.

Aside from these, many research materials are widely distributed across various regions of the country in the form of inscriptions on steles, bells, medals, plaques, parallel couplets, woodblocks and ancient texts, etc. These are represented on a variety of media such as paper, stone, wood and brick. The Institute of Sino-Nom Studies annually organizes projects to collect and make rubbings and take pictures of these sources in order to diversify the institute’s collection.

For various historical and cultural reasons, there are a number of Vietnamese Sino-Nom materials, yet to be fully documented, archived in France, Japan, China, Taiwan, England, America, Thailand and other countries. The total number of these materials remains unclear. It is expected that in the near future an international symposium centred on Sino-Nom materials archived overseas will soon be organized, with the object in mind being cataloguing the complete corpus of Sino-Nom materials stored outside Vietnam in order to offer to researchers a complete catalogue of Sino-Nom sources both within and outside of Vietnam.

Research institutions of square scripts

The formal educational organizations described above are the main centres of Sino-Nom research, among which the most important is the Institute of Sino-Nom Studies – a research institution on the national level founded in 1970, currently with a staff of 70 members (over 40 of whom are research staff). The remaining institutions and organizations are educational in nature, with each one having about 5–10 lecturers specializing in the discipline of Sino-Nom studies. Aside from these, there are several researchers working in the field of cultural administration at central and local levels, along with several independent scholars with profound professional knowledge. The total number of professional Sino-Nom researchers in Vietnam is most likely no more than 150 people, centred mainly in Hanoi, Hue and Ho Chi Minh City.

Research of Sinographs remains weak, focusing on ‘modern scripts’ as opposed to ‘ancient scripts’

The study of Sinographs is a field that remains largely untapped in Vietnam. The primary similarity between all research projects on Sinographs in Vietnam is that they are all limited to generalized introductions on the history of Sinographs, the construction of Sinographs, the main script styles in calligraphy, the simplification and Romanization of Sinographs in the 20th century, and the influence of Sinographs on the construction of various Nom scripts. Thi Đạt Chí, a hobbyist researcher of Chinese descent, published Researching Sinographs, a small book of only 50 pages which was totally introductory in nature (Thi, 1960). Nguyễn Quang Hồng has undertaken new efforts to discuss central issues and terms in the research of square scripts with other East Asian scholars (Nguyễn QH, 2008). Most recently, Nguyễn Đình Phức and his colleagues published Grammatology of Sinographs, the first college textbook in Vietnam on the study of Sinographs (Nguyễn ĐP et al., 2015). Unfortunately, although the book displays new efforts by young scholars, the content of the book is rather modest, consisting of only 100 pages. Among the various research topics surrounding Sinographs in Vietnam, that which receives the most attention is that of Sino-Vietnamese reading. Regarding this topic, Nguyễn Tài Cẩn is a key scholar who published a study of international standards (Nguyễn TC, 1979). In addition, there are two recently published Doctorate dissertations by Nguyễn Đại Cồ Việt at Beijing University and Duong John Phan, a Vietnamese-American, at Cornell University. Another point that should be addressed is that the research of ‘taboo characters’ in Vietnamese history is centred on the work of Ngô Đức Thọ (Ngô, 1997). Recently, Sinographs in Vietnam attracted some foreign scholars, such as Sasahara Hiroyuki, Kosukegawa Teiji, He Huazhen 何华珍, etc., in which some recent researches by He Huazhen and his colleagues about variant forms of Sinographs are interesting and potential.

One feature of Sinograph research in Vietnam is that it is completely focused on ‘modern scripts’; that is, the various scripts of Sinographs that are ‘modern’ as opposed to those which are ‘ancient scripts’ such as Oracle Bone, Bronze and Seal scripts. Research on ancient scripts by scholars are extremely few in number, including those contributions by Nguyễn Việt, Trịnh Sinh, An Chi, Đinh Khắc Thuân co-authored with Ye Shaofei. Currently, in the Institute of Sino-Nom Studies there is one scholar named Nguyễn Quang Thắng, working on his research on Seal Script in Vietnam’s inscriptions. Once finished, this work will be a new contribution to the study of ancient scripts in Vietnam.

Research of Nom is strongly developing, focusing on Viê˙ t Nom

The most significant accomplishment in the research of square scripts in Vietnam lies in the research of the Việt Nom script. This can be explained by the fact that the Việt Nom script is the largest indigenous script that wielded the greatest influence, was used most widely in the Vietnamese community and has more extant texts compared to Tày Nom, Dao Nom and Ngạn Nom.

Important scholars who have contributed to the study of Việt Nom include Bửu Cầm (before 1975), Đào Duy Anh (1975), Trần Văn Giáp (2002, published posthumously), Lê Văn Quán (1981), Nguyễn Tài Cẩn (1985, 2003), Nguyễn Khuê (1987–1988), Nguyễn Ngọc San (1987, 2003), Nguyễn Tá Nhí (1997), Hoàng Thị Ngọ (1999), Trương Đức Quả (1997), Hoàng Hồng Cẩm (1999), Lã Minh Hằng (2004), Nguyễn Thị Lâm (2006), Nguyễn Quang Hồng (2008) and several younger scholars such as Hoa Ngọc Sơn (2005), Nguyễn Đình Hiền (2012), Trần Trọng Dương (2012), Nguyễn Tuấn Cường (2012), Nguyễn Thị Tú Mai (2012), Đỗ Thị Bích Tuyển (2014), etc. Việt Nom is discussed and assessed from perspectives such as origins, time period of appearance, historical developments, construction, relationship between the written word and spoken Vietnamese, the influence of Sinographs on Nom script, and the creative and nationalistic aspects of Nom. Among the publications on Việt Nom, An Outline of Grammatology of Nom Script (Khái luận văn tự học chữ Nôm) by Nguyễn Quang Hồng is the most comprehensive and, in addition to covering practically all aspects of Nom research, also goes into various specific issues relevant to international scholarship (Nguyễn QH, 2008). If one work on Nom text was considered to be translated into other languages, I would suggest that this work be chosen.

There are a number of foreign scholars who have contributed greatly to research of the Việt Nom script. These include Tomita Kenji, Shimizu Masaaki, Wen You 闻宥, Chen Jinghe 陈荆和, Luo Changshan 罗长山, Li Leyi 李乐毅, Ma Kecheng 马克承, Lin Minghua 林明华, Shi Weiguo 施维国, Qi Guangmou 祁广谋, Nie Bin 聂槟, Li Yashu 李亚舒, etc. However, it must be noted that not many foreign scholars are to actually read Vietnamese written in Nom texts (because they are not fluent in Vietnamese) and therefore they usually focus on issues such as dating the appearance of Nom script and the influence of Sinographs on Việt Nom script – that is to say, these scholars seldom deal with a purely grammatological focus.

Regarding the three other Nom scripts belonging to ethnic minorities, the Tày Nom script receives the most attention. Research of Tày Nom script has received contributions from Cung Khắc Lược (1992), Nguyễn Văn Huyên (1995), Hoàng Triều Ân (2003), Lục Văn Pảo, Lưu Đình Tăng, and several scholars belong to a younger generation such as Hoàng Phương Mai, Nguyễn Văn Tuân, Phạm Hoàng Giang, Trần Thu Hường, Chu Xuân Giao and Triệu Thị Kiều Dung. These researchers focus on issues such as the origins and construction of Tày Nom script along with their relationship to Việt Nom script, Sinographs and Zhuang script 壮族方块字. The Institute of Sino-Nom Studies has published a series of transliterations and photo reproductions of Tày Nom script, edited by Trịnh Khắc Mạnh, now numbering about 20 volumes. Recently, Tày Nom has attracted the attention of foreign scholars such as David Holm (National Chengchi University) and Shimizu Masaaki (Osaka University). This bears good tidings for the field of Tày Nom research.

There are few people who research Dao Nom script – the contributions of Hoàng Hựu (2007, 2012) form the primary basis of research in this area. Ngạn Nom script has only been introduced in one research essay of Nguyễn Quang Hồng in 2007, due to the paucity of Ngạn Nom texts. Clearly, these are fields that remain empty – partially due to lack of extant and available research materials.

Compiling dictionaries of Chinese and Nom characters

In terms of classical Chinese dictionaries (excluding modern Chinese–Vietnamese dictionaries aimed at students of modern Chinese), the dictionaries of Đào Duy Anh (1932) and Thiều Chửu (1942) published in the first half of the 20th century and reprinted many times since remain the most popular in Vietnam. Aside from these two dictionaries, dictionaries have also been compiled by Bửu Kế (1999), Phan Văn Các (1999), Vĩnh Cao and Nguyễn Phố (2001), Nguyễn Tôn Nhan (2002) and Trần Văn Chánh (2011).

Regarding Nom scripts, Việt Nom, Tay Nom and Dao Nom characters have all been compiled into dictionaries – Hoàng Triều Ân has compiled A Dictionary of Tày Nom Characters (Từ điển chữ Nôm Tày, 2003) and Hoàng Hựu has compiled A List of Nom Characters used by the Dao Minority (Bảng tra chữ Nôm dân tộc Dao, 2012).

Dictionaries of Việt Nom are especially diverse. From 1970 to the present, many Việt Nom dictionaries have been compiled and published including those of Nguyễn Quang Xỹ and Vũ Văn Kính (1971), the Institute of Linguistics (1976), Vũ Văn Kính (1992, 1994, 2002), the Trương Đình Tín and Lê Quý Ngưu (2007), Trần Văn Kiệm (2004), Nguyễn Quang Hồng (2006, 2014), the Institute of Vietnamese Studies (2009), with contributions from foreign scholars such as Takeuchi Onosuke (1988) and Paul Schneider (1993). Among the titles listed above, the newest publication, A Dictionary of Nom Characters with Quotations and Annotations (Tự điển chữ Nôm dẫn giải, 2 volumes) by Nguyễn Quang Hồng (2014) is the single largest achievement in the history of Nom dictionaries in Vietnam. Regarding the organizational method of Nom dictionaries, there are two main patterns: one is dictionaries compiled based on the memory of the compiler without referencing Nom texts; the other is dictionaries with references to extant Nom texts, making them more reliable. Today, there are only three dictionaries that have been compiled according to this second method – two by Nguyễn Quang Hồng (2006, 2014) and one by the Institute of Vietnamese Studies (2009).

Digitization and creation of a Sino-Nom keyboard

Within the past 20 years, Sino-Nom scholars and technology experts have worked together in order to digitize Sino-Nom characters, create a font of Việt Nom characters and create keyboards and input methods for Sino-Nom characters. Currently, almost 10,000 Việt Nom characters have been adapted into fonts and incorporated into international Unicode. The digitization of Nom characters is the result of efforts from the Vietnamese Nom Preservation Foundation (VNPF; the USA), the Mojikyo organization (Japan), the Dynalab company (Taiwan), the Đạo Uyển group, and several experts from the Institute of Information Technology and Institute of Sino-Nom Studies (Vietnam). There are two common Sino-Nom keyboards used in Vietnam – one created by the Tống Phước Khải group, the other created by the Phan Anh Dũng group. The VNPF has also collaborated with the Vietnamese National Library in Hanoi to digitize over 1200 Sino-Nom books in their collection. ² The digitization of Sinographs and Nom characters in Vietnam has helped to convenience many researchers of the Sino-Nom scripts.

Creating a digital database for square scripts

As mentioned above, research materials related to square scripts, especially Sinographs and Việt Nom script, in Vietnam are extremely diverse. It is very necessary to invest time in creating a digital database in order to aid the research of these scripts. Such a database could be divided along lines of research subject and be used to initiate research ranging from specific to general. Modern scholarship emphasizes the need for a detailed database of individual characters – not merely the digitization, photo reproduction or scans of texts. Optical character recognition (OCR), correct portrayal of characters, fonts representative of different script styles, and online databases with open access are important in order to provide useful and up-to-date resources for researchers. In this regard, Vietnamese Sino-Nom scholars must learn from the methods and examples of the Center for the Study and Application of Chinese Characters at East China Normal University in their dealings with Sinographs.

Co-operation with foreign institutions and scholars

In the field of ‘square scripts’ in Vietnam, tight co-operation is needed with foreign institutions in both training scholars and doing research. Some potential young scholars should be sent to Mainland China, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Europe and the USA to deal with their MA or PhD theses. They would have opportunities to learn from these best centres of grammatology, in order to prepare their knowledge and methodology to conduct studies on square scripts in Vietnam, or compare with other scripts in the ‘Sinographic cosmopolis’ (or Sinosphere). Vietnam also needs to invite foreign scholars to come to Vietnam to do research on Sinographs and Nom scripts in Vietnam, or to conduct comparative studies between Vietnamese square scripts and Manyogana, Hiragana, Katakana and Kanji in Japan, and Hanja, Hangul and Hyangka on the Korean Peninsula, etc. Vietnamese scholars should work with foreign scholars to learn from their knowledge and experience by participating in international conferences, research projects, studying abroad, and having their publications published in foreign grammatological journals. In Vietnam, as for the field of ‘square scripts’ in particular and the field of scholarship in general, international integration is a must-go path in the present situation of globalization and internationalization.

Organizing square script education at the elementary and university levels

At present in Mainland China, Taiwan, Japan and South Korea, Sinographs continue to be taught within the elementary school system – in China and Taiwan this is obvious since Chinese characters are used to write the local language. In Japan and Korea, students graduating from secondary school are required to know a certain number of Sinographs. Since the abandonment of the Vietnamese civil service examination in 1919, Chinese characters continued to be taught in state-sponsored classes (in the regime of Republic of Vietnam, 1955–1975) or in private classes nationwide. After 1975, Chinese characters ceased to be a part of the elementary curriculum compiled by the Ministry of Education and Training. This has caused Vietnamese people to become increasingly alienated from Sino-Nom scripts. Due to this rupture of continuity between past and present, Vietnamese people are largely unable to read old texts. Sino-Nom scripts are now taught in only a few programmes related to specialized research as described above.

It is not unreasonable that opinions have been put forth supporting the reinvigoration of Sino-Nom script education at the elementary and secondary levels along with the reintroduction of Sino-Nom script education at university level in subjects related to social sciences and humanities. I am of the persuasion that this is an important subject requiring careful research that would ideally propose a suitable method for introducing Sino-Nom script education into public schools (for example, offering Sino-Nom classes as an option, not as a required course) in order to satisfy the needs of society rather than as a matter of enforcing policy.

Translating foreign publications of square script research into Vietnamese

To alleviate the lack of published research on Chinese characters in Vietnam, Nguyễn Tuấn Cường translated 11 general-view papers written in Chinese and English by Chinese and American scholars on topics including general grammatology, studies of East Asian scripts, studies of Sinographs, constructionist Sinographic studies, cultural Sinographic studies, Sinographic phonology, revised Sinographs and Pinyin Romanization – the collected translation of these papers totalled around 250 pages. These translations can be used as an introductory map of Chinese character studies (Nguyễn TC, 2010). A classic book – A History of Writings by J. Friedrich (1966) – was translated by Phạm Văn Khoái (2006) but remains in an unpublished collection of translated materials unknown to a large readership. However, in reality, this collection of translated materials has been used in lectures on Sino-Nom at a number of universities at various levels.

Despite this, the translations mentioned above are limited in scope and are introductory in nature. It is pertinent to select, translate and publish other works on character studies written around the world – from works with a broad spectrum (such as those by Coulmas, 1996, 2003; Diringer, 1962; Gelb, 1952; Sampson, 1985; Schmandt-Besserat, 1992) to those focusing on scripts in East Asian countries (such as those by Kim, 2005; Kono, 1994; Mizoguchi et al., 1992; Qiu, 1988; Sasahara, 2011; Sha, 2008; Shaughnessy, 1997; Wang YL, 2001; Zhou, 1997, 1998) and those written by foreign scholars focusing specifically on square scripts in Vietnam (such as those of DeFrancis, 1977; Liang, 2014; Minea 1972; Wang L, 1958; Wei, 2004). Vietnamese scholars will need to consult international academia regarding the selection of appropriate and relevant works to be translated into Vietnamese.

Researching issues in character studies as a whole

The key issues in character studies must be expanded upon from important points such as the origin and development of scripts; the construction of scripts; the history of scripts; comparison between scripts; the influence of foreign scripts; script construction, pronunciation and meaning; script education; societal and cultural studies of scripts, etc. Most especially, efforts must be made to delve into the research of ancient scripts (not just modern scripts) not only to read seal scripts common to Vietnamese steles and stamps, of which many remain unreadable, but also to collaborate with other East Asian researchers in the deciphering of ancient Sinographs. ⁴

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figures 1–14.

Several variant Sinographs in Vietnam.

Researching bilingual ‘Sino-Việt’ and Bi-scriptual ‘Sino-Nom’ dictionaries

Regarding dictionaries (both single-character and multi-character), past Vietnamese lexicographers were unique in that they rarely tended to compile purely Sinographic dictionaries (i.e. dictionaries that defined Sinographs in literary Sinitic). However, they were quite fond of compiling bilingual Sino-Việt and bi-scriptual Sino-Nom dictionaries, which were composed of both Chinese and Vietnamese in a linguistic aspect, represented by both Sinographs and Nom script in the written aspect. Dictionaries of this kind were compiled from the 15th–17th centuries to the 20th century. ⁵ These are important sources from which to research the history of standardization of Sino-Nom characters in Vietnam, the history of translation, Vietnamese historical vocabulary, and archaic words. By analysing these dictionaries, we can develop the most commonly used vocabulary of Sinographs in Vietnam and compare these dictionaries with dictionaries compiled in other East Asian countries. Currently, there are several research projects in Vietnam focused on these types of dictionaries, such as those of Trần Xuân Ngọc Lan (1985), Lã Minh Hằng (2013) and Hà Đăng Việt (2014), Hoàng Thị Ngọ (2016) and Trần Trọng Dương (2016). Most recently, Vietnamese and Chinese scholars co-operated to organize an international conference in Hangzhou, China, in May 2017 about Vietnamese Sino-Nom dictionaries; the edited volume (He and Nguyễn, 2017) published after that should be a good read in the field.

Researching the history of Sino-Nom script education in the past

A common research topic in Vietnam, one with a good number of publications, is Sino-Nom script education throughout Vietnamese history. These research projects share a common point in their focus on higher education among the scholar-official class – that is to say, they gravitate more towards Confucian moral education rather than the elementary education of children; that is, basic character and linguistic education (Nguyễn TC, 2015). Even in regard to higher education, the primary focus is educational content and the organization of exam essays – little has been researched regarding educational activities as they relate to central elements of education such as the educator, the student, content of studies, study materials, tuition and fees, examination formats, goals and purposes of education, results of education, societal needs, etc. Deeper research of Sino-Nom script education in Vietnamese history will be a great help in understanding the intellectual basis of traditional Sino-Nom writers – the authors of the Sino-Nom texts that we archive today.

Researching compatibility of written scripts with language in Vietnam

Influenced by Darwinian evolutionary theory and Eurocentrism, a number of early 20th-century researchers proposed that written scripts around the world all evolved from pictographs, to ideographs, to alphabets (Diringer, 1962; Gelb, 1952; Zhou, 1997). From the end of the 20th century to the present, this view of a ‘three-part development’ has been quite heavily criticized, especially by Chinese and American scholars. The critics argue that the development of alphabetical scripts in Europe cannot be applied to scripts with different organizational systems such as Sinographs. The movement to completely Romanize the Chinese language in the early 20th century eventually failed, an eloquent witness to the superior compatibility of Chinese characters to represent an isolated language like Chinese.

Like Chinese, Vietnamese is also an isolated language. Before the creation of the ‘Quốc ngữ script’ (literally ‘script for national language’ – a Romanization of Vietnamese which appeared around the 17th century and which was universally promoted in the early 20th century), the Việt Nom script was the sole script used to write the Vietnamese language for almost 1000 years until it was replaced entirely by Quốc ngữ script. This decision was influenced by historical and cultural reasons – there can be no fantasies about a distant future in which the Vietnamese people will return to use Nom script as they did in the past. However, from the perspective of script research, the compatibility of Việt Nom and Quốc ngữ scripts to the Vietnamese language must be compared and researched. This is an issue with theoretical implications which the discipline of Sino-Nom grammatology in Vietnam can explore to contribute to science and life.

Calligraphy: Scripts from practical and artistic perspectives

The history of Sinographs is linked to the history of calligraphy. In Vietnam there have been several unique styles of calligraphy rarely seen in Asia; for example, the style used on decrees of the Restored Lê dynasty (1533–1789). Inheriting and carrying on the calligraphic tradition, there are about 20 calligraphers in modern Vietnam who have reached high standards in their art. All of these calligraphers are in their 30s–40s and have been self-motivated and autodidactic in their practice of calligraphy. They have been the main factors behind the Sino-Nom calligraphy activities during the New Year festival around the House of Great Learning in the Temple of Confucius in Hanoi for 20 years now. Their activities have even had a wider social impact; following their example, within the past decade hundreds of people have begun to set up stands around the Temple of Confucius in Hanoi to showcase and sell their calligraphy during the New Year. For the most part, these young calligraphers follow traditional trends in East Asian calligraphy. A prime example is the calligrapher Nguyễn Sử, author of the first book written on the history of Vietnamese calligraphy – A History of Calligraphy in Vietnam (Lịch sử thư pháp Việt Nam) published in 2017. Aside from traditional calligraphy, there are few avant-garde calligraphers as well. The ‘Zenei Gang of Five’ includes Lê Quốc Việt, Nguyễn Đức Dũng, Trần Trọng Dương, Nguyễn Quang Thắng and Phạm Văn Tuấn (the latter three are researchers at the Institute of Sino-Nom Studies). Their activities are both well organized and creative. Their calligraphy exhibits receive much attention and some of their works have been purchased for thousands of US dollars. Regrettably, as yet there has been no sustained research on Vietnamese Sino-Nom calligraphy from either practical or artistic perspectives. From the viewpoint of reading square characters, research of Vietnamese calligraphy gives insight into the methods employed with brush strokes, helping researchers to read difficult texts, such as those written in the cursive or seal scripts.