Read on Twitter
[THREAD] 【 #香港 “ #Hongkong" and "Hsiang Chiang" in Old Books and a #CIA Document - 通香港都知道呢件事咯】A recent review report urged a scholar to change “Hong Kong” into its romanized pinyin name “ #Xianggang”. The incident reminds me of an earlier romanized name of Hong Kong –
“Hsiang Chiang” – which I saw in some 19th-century materials when I was doing archival research for an article about the pioneering British sinologist and translator T.F. Wade. Before Pinyin developed as the official romanization system for Mandarin Chinese by the PRC
in the 1950s, the Wade-Giles system had been widely used. This system developed my Wade in mid-19th century and completed by Herbert A. Giles near the end of the century. In the next hundred years, its prominence began in the late-Qing, thrived in the Republican era,
and continued in Taiwan and spilled to Chinese-speaking areas outside the Mainland after 1949. The Wade-Giles system’s former body is generally believed to be the 1867 textbook on Peking dialect of Mandarin Wade authored – 語言自邇集.
While this book was specifically intended for students of “Colloquial Chinese as Spoken in the Capital and the Metropolitan Department”, his even earlier book 尋津錄 (Hsin Ching Lu: Book of Experiments) was written as
“the first of a series of contributions to the study of Chinese,” which was published in Hong Kong in 1859 [Fig. 1]. By “Chinese,” he means “the Peking dialect” [Fig. 2]. Hong Kong appears in the 309 entry of the T’ien 天 category. The original Chinese entry goes – 颳西北風的日子
![“the first of a series of contributions to the study of Chinese,” which was published in Hong Kong in 1859 [Fig. 1]. By “Chinese,” he means “the Peking dialect” [Fig. 2]. Hong Kong appears in the 309 entry of the T’ien 天 category. The original Chinese entry goes – 颳西北風的日子](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ee4OtDzUYAEeAXS.jpg "“the first of a series of contributions to the study of Chinese,” which was published in Hong Kong in 1859 [Fig. 1]. By “Chinese,” he means “the Peking dialect” [Fig. 2]. Hong Kong appears in the 309 entry of the T’ien 天 category. The original Chinese entry goes – 颳西北風的日子")
![“the first of a series of contributions to the study of Chinese,” which was published in Hong Kong in 1859 [Fig. 1]. By “Chinese,” he means “the Peking dialect” [Fig. 2]. Hong Kong appears in the 309 entry of the T’ien 天 category. The original Chinese entry goes – 颳西北風的日子](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ee4OusSU0AEBF8u.jpg "“the first of a series of contributions to the study of Chinese,” which was published in Hong Kong in 1859 [Fig. 1]. By “Chinese,” he means “the Peking dialect” [Fig. 2]. Hong Kong appears in the 309 entry of the T’ien 天 category. The original Chinese entry goes – 颳西北風的日子")
, 由省往港的船, 都會有扯起滿篷來, 在那兒跑順風的 [Fig. 3]. Wade translated it as “With a north-west wind, vessels on their way from Canton to Hongkong will run down with every sail set.” He explains in the note: “Chiang is short for Hsiang Chiang = Hongkong” [Fig. 4].
![, 由省往港的船, 都會有扯起滿篷來, 在那兒跑順風的 [Fig. 3]. Wade translated it as “With a north-west wind, vessels on their way from Canton to Hongkong will run down with every sail set.” He explains in the note: “Chiang is short for Hsiang Chiang = Hongkong” [Fig. 4].](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ee4O-jlU4AERTWs.jpg ", 由省往港的船, 都會有扯起滿篷來, 在那兒跑順風的 [Fig. 3]. Wade translated it as “With a north-west wind, vessels on their way from Canton to Hongkong will run down with every sail set.” He explains in the note: “Chiang is short for Hsiang Chiang = Hongkong” [Fig. 4].")
![, 由省往港的船, 都會有扯起滿篷來, 在那兒跑順風的 [Fig. 3]. Wade translated it as “With a north-west wind, vessels on their way from Canton to Hongkong will run down with every sail set.” He explains in the note: “Chiang is short for Hsiang Chiang = Hongkong” [Fig. 4].](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ee4O_wSUwAEO-n7.jpg ", 由省往港的船, 都會有扯起滿篷來, 在那兒跑順風的 [Fig. 3]. Wade translated it as “With a north-west wind, vessels on their way from Canton to Hongkong will run down with every sail set.” He explains in the note: “Chiang is short for Hsiang Chiang = Hongkong” [Fig. 4].")
It’s understandable that 香 (fragrance) is romanized as “hsiang”, but no so much that 港 (port) as “Chiang”, which is weirdly remindful of 腸 when one would die for a sausage 香腸! Either Wade made a excusable mistake in using “ch” to represent two distinct phonemes,
or in the 19th-century Peking dialect, 江 and 港 were homonyms with slightly different tones (but they aren’t today, I think). In fact, “Chiang” rings like the Mandarin 講 (speak), whose Cantonese pronunciation is the same as 港 (port). It’s reasonable to speculate that Wade’s
Chinese pronunciation was, to some extent, influenced by Cantonese when he was serving at the colonial government in Hong Kong in the second half of 1850s. It’s equally reasonable to think this was merely an interesting coincidence. In any event, “Hsiang Chiang”
became the standard Chinese romanized name for Hong Kong in the next hundred years or so. We can find it in 英華成語合璧字集 A Mandarin-Romanized Dictionary of Chinese (1907), published by the Presbyterian Mission Press in Shanghai: “Hisang1-chiang3 — 香港 — Hongkong
(lit. fragrant lagoon)” [Fig. 5 & 6]. It was also used in some CIA’s historical documents during the Cold War. There’s one dated 8 June 1953 listing the “Chinese Communist Names” imposed on the streets of Shanghai at the time, with their “Old Names” used under the government of
![(lit. fragrant lagoon)” [Fig. 5 & 6]. It was also used in some CIA’s historical documents during the Cold War. There’s one dated 8 June 1953 listing the “Chinese Communist Names” imposed on the streets of Shanghai at the time, with their “Old Names” used under the government of](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ee4P1DfUMAIv7bQ.jpg "(lit. fragrant lagoon)” [Fig. 5 & 6]. It was also used in some CIA’s historical documents during the Cold War. There’s one dated 8 June 1953 listing the “Chinese Communist Names” imposed on the streets of Shanghai at the time, with their “Old Names” used under the government of")
![(lit. fragrant lagoon)” [Fig. 5 & 6]. It was also used in some CIA’s historical documents during the Cold War. There’s one dated 8 June 1953 listing the “Chinese Communist Names” imposed on the streets of Shanghai at the time, with their “Old Names” used under the government of](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ee4P1yFUwAA4nTB.jpg "(lit. fragrant lagoon)” [Fig. 5 & 6]. It was also used in some CIA’s historical documents during the Cold War. There’s one dated 8 June 1953 listing the “Chinese Communist Names” imposed on the streets of Shanghai at the time, with their “Old Names” used under the government of")
the International Concession and French Concession. In this CIA document, “Hongkong” was categorized both in “Old Names” and “Chinese Nationalist Names”. The Wade-Giles “Hsiang Chiang”, however, belonged to the “Chinese Communist Names” [Fig. 7]! It is easy to take “Hong Kong”
![the International Concession and French Concession. In this CIA document, “Hongkong” was categorized both in “Old Names” and “Chinese Nationalist Names”. The Wade-Giles “Hsiang Chiang”, however, belonged to the “Chinese Communist Names” [Fig. 7]! It is easy to take “Hong Kong”](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ee4PzsZU0AEeyy5.jpg "the International Concession and French Concession. In this CIA document, “Hongkong” was categorized both in “Old Names” and “Chinese Nationalist Names”. The Wade-Giles “Hsiang Chiang”, however, belonged to the “Chinese Communist Names” [Fig. 7]! It is easy to take “Hong Kong”")
and “Hongkong” for granted; they’re the English names for the place. To find the textual evidence that they were recognized as romanized names for the Cantonese pronunciation of 香港 in the 19th century is quite a different matter.
I could only find one book that gave such a hint. The book was entitled Cantonese Made Easy, published in Hong Kong in 1888 [Fig. 8]. In its “Lesson XIV – Judicial,” Entry 22, “No, I am not. All Hongkong knows about it.” is rendered in Cantonese:
![I could only find one book that gave such a hint. The book was entitled Cantonese Made Easy, published in Hong Kong in 1888 [Fig. 8]. In its “Lesson XIV – Judicial,” Entry 22, “No, I am not. All Hongkong knows about it.” is rendered in Cantonese:](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ee4PxBEUwAAwMaj.jpg "I could only find one book that gave such a hint. The book was entitled Cantonese Made Easy, published in Hong Kong in 1888 [Fig. 8]. In its “Lesson XIV – Judicial,” Entry 22, “No, I am not. All Hongkong knows about it.” is rendered in Cantonese:")
唔係，冇講大話，通香港都知道呢件事咯 [Fig. 9]. Interestingly, on the recto side, the romanization of the sentence shows: “M hai; mo kong tai-wa; tung Hong Kong to chi ni kin sz lok” [Fig. 10]…
![唔係，冇講大話，通香港都知道呢件事咯 [Fig. 9]. Interestingly, on the recto side, the romanization of the sentence shows: “M hai; mo kong tai-wa; tung Hong Kong to chi ni kin sz lok” [Fig. 10]…](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ee4PuhvVoAAyUFv.jpg "唔係，冇講大話，通香港都知道呢件事咯 [Fig. 9]. Interestingly, on the recto side, the romanization of the sentence shows: “M hai; mo kong tai-wa; tung Hong Kong to chi ni kin sz lok” [Fig. 10]…")
![唔係，冇講大話，通香港都知道呢件事咯 [Fig. 9]. Interestingly, on the recto side, the romanization of the sentence shows: “M hai; mo kong tai-wa; tung Hong Kong to chi ni kin sz lok” [Fig. 10]…](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ee4PvcgU4AAb-rb.jpg "唔係，冇講大話，通香港都知道呢件事咯 [Fig. 9]. Interestingly, on the recto side, the romanization of the sentence shows: “M hai; mo kong tai-wa; tung Hong Kong to chi ni kin sz lok” [Fig. 10]…")
I find myself like a bewildered detective... I have always been an archival-research geek after all...
