Tao Qian，Saussure and Taoism：The Paradox of Poetic Language

Fang Zheng

In both Western and Eastern literature， as well as philosophic system， there is one question that has been endlessly discussed： language is insufficient for the expression of ultimate reality，? or sincerest emotion， or transcendent beauty， and the eloquence with which the allegation is made. If a person claims that his language is adequate to express the reality about itself， then the allegation cannot be true. There is a daily phrase： “words fail me”， which expresses the same feeling. However， when saying： “it is indescribable”， we are actually giving a kind of description—that is where paradox comes. The puzzle arises from the seeming contradiction between asserting that ultimate reality， or sincerest emotion， or transcendent beauty， can be spoken without words， and then followed by making this allegation in words. It is the same with Sakyamunis instant understanding to his disciple Kasyapa by picking a flower without either of them saying a word as wordless communication when cannot using words. To discuss how language fails to express， and the paradoxical phrase when describing wordless， this article will firstly introduce Tao Qians poem， and explores how his poem implies both western and eastern philosophy of language.

Tao Qians “Drinking Wine （V）” is the best example to reflect how weakness the wordsare：

What revelation at this view？

Words fail me if I try to tell you. （tr. Xu Yuanchong）

Tao Qian uses the word “忘” （forget） to describe that when he tried to grasp the ephemeral feeling， the epiphanic moment that he got from the nature， he realized that the language he could use is not expressive enough to describe it. Therefore， he said he “forget” the language. Here， Tao Qiao are implying two aspects of paradoxes： anyone who writes poetry struggles the difficult task of telling the indescribable nature of reality; and anyone who writes poetic struggles the even more difficult task of describing the indescribable nature of writing. The word “forget” actually plays on the paradoxical nature of poetics， first disclaiming the possibility of describing the secrets of the art of writing and then proceeding to make such adescription. The words “try to tell you” originates from “辯”， which equally means “to speak expressively， dispute” and “to make differences”.

In the terminology of modern linguistics， proposed by Ferdinand de Saussure， the reason why words cannot exhaust meaning（書不盡言，言不盡意） is because of the natural gap between the “signifier” and “signified”— there is no regular relationship between the object and the name given to the object. Therefore， the “thing” and the “words” are from two dimensions of existent. When Tao Qian saw the transcendent view of South Mountain， he tries to grasp a “word” to correspond with the current， but found that the two dimensioncannot be synchronized. All the “poetic words” that could be used is mispairing. That is the paradoxical moment when we use language to describe， especial when trying to be “poetic”， which makes the gap between the signifiers and signified even more huger.

The dilemma faced by Tao Qian， who has expressed reality as an undifferentiated whole， is the same as that faced by Zhuang Zi： for Tao to convey， in poetry， his sense of the undifferentiated state of reality， he has no resort other than words， which involve the making of distinctions. He resolves the dilemma by accepting Zhuang Zis advice to “forget words” after getting the “meaning” as well as the latters paradox， “Great eloquence does not speak” （Guo 4）. The point of the last line is not so much that the poet wishes to speak but cannot find the words as that he has reached the stage of understanding that no longer requires words. The paradox is that he needs to utilize words to disclose to us that he has overlooked words， and since he is expounding on his own demonstration of composing this poem， his words may likewise be taken for instance of the meta-paradox of poetics， in the event that we may incorporate into the expression “poetics” any composition on verse， particularly verse on verse. Poetry， which speaks to an especially uplifted and unsure utilization of dialect， delineates the mystery of dialect in an especially intense frame， and artists， being especially touchy to dialect， are regularly definitely mindful of this Catch 22， particularly when they expound on the written work of verse. The same is valid for artistic scholars and commentators who endeavor to clarify the idea of verse or endorse manages on the most proficient method to compose verse; and in conventional China every single abstract scholar and pundits were additionally writers， regardless of whether not great ones on occasion.

The paradox of poetics， obviously， depends on the element of dumbfounding dialect， which was unmistakably nearness in early Chinese philosophical writings of the Daoist school. Both Lao Zi and Zhuang Zi contain various entries about the paradox of dialect， yet their exceptionally presence constitutes a delineation of the mystery， since both condemn， or claim to lament， the impediments of dialect. The natural words found toward the start of any customary release of the Lao Zi state the deficiency of dialect as a method for depicting extreme reality.

The dao that can be daoed is not the constant Dao;

The name that can be named is not the constant name.（Gao 4）

Most pundits and interpreters concur that in the primary sentence the first and third events of “Dao” ought to be taken as “way”， and the second event as “speak”. I think Lao Zis comment can be deciphered as a refusal of the likelihood of any phonetic or semiotic framework in that capacity. In the phrasing of Ferdinand de Saussure， Lao Zi is preventing the likelihood from securing dialect as langue yet conceding the need of dialect as parole， for to call something "Dao" is a discourse demonstration， or a case of parole， however to feel that this word is a piece of a steady framework， or langue， would be a mix-up. From Lao Zis perspective， there could be no structuralist linguistics， which regards dialect as a shut arrangement of signs. the use of the wording of Saussure， by and large thought about the organizer of present day structuralist semantics， to propose that such a phonetics is not attainable however another paradox. In spite of the declaration that the Dao cannot be named， Lao Zi in any case endeavors to depict it in different ways and recognizes the mystery in chapter 25

I do not know its name， but force myself to nickname it “Dao”， Force myself to name it “great”. （Gao 11）

While conceding that dialect is fundamental as a temporary， Lao Zi additionally cautions us that words are not lasting exemplifications of the real world. His idea here is tantamount to Martin Heideggers intersection out of “Being” （Sein） or Jacques Derridas putting words under deletion （sous rature）： every one of the three battle to name the unnameable and certainly acknowledge the oddity of dialect in its first essential form. In addition， a variety of the paradox shows up in chapter 56：

One who knows does not speak;

One who speaks does not know. （Gao 13）

These phrases are paradoxical as well， as Bai Juyis （772-846） comment in his stanza “On Reading the Lao Zi”：

“One who speaks does not know;one who knows is silent”：

This remark I have heard from the Old Master.

If you say the Old Master was one who knew，

Wherefore did he himself write his “Five Thousand Words”？ （tr. Xu Yuanchong） It is conceivable that Bai composed this poem as a jeu d'esprit as opposed to as a genuine nullification of Lao Zi. Maybe we may enter the soul of the diversion and manage the paradox without depending on some other content than the Lao Zi itself by belligerence as takes after： since Lao Zi has talked， he is not one who knows， and along these lines his words cannot be taken as obvious， including the announcement “one who talks does not know”， in which case this announcement cannot be taken as verification that Lao Zi does not know. This roundabout contention could go on until the end of time. In any case， we cannot retroactively restrict an old savant from discussing dialect that discussions about dialect. Regardless， to state that “this announcement is valid for all dialect aside from dialect that discussions about dialect" is to discuss dialect， and we are back where we began. Looking back to Tao Qians “Words fail me if I try to tell you”. It seems that， in Chinese traditional poetics， a paradoxical view comes up with： the less is said， the more is meant. Interestingly， this kind of poetics paradox originated from early Chinese traditional philosophic text about the paradoxical of language and meaning. And coincidently， in modern western linguistic study， the same idea happens within the system of semiology. However， the more limitation of language the literature or philosophy realized， at the same time， the more potentiality of language， as well as how it used to describe the physical and spiritual word， could be explored.

Works Cited

[1]Bai Juyi 白居易（722-846）.Baishi Changqing ji《白氏長慶集》.In SBBY.

[2]Gao Heng 高亨.Lao Zi zhenggu《老子正詁》.Beijing： Zhonghua shuju（中華書局）. 1980. Print.

[3]Guo Qingfan 郭慶藩. Zhuang Zi jishi 《莊子集釋》. Beijing Zhonghua shuju（中華書局）. 1961. Print.

[4]Saussure， Ferdinand de. Course in General Linguistics.Translated by W ade Baskin. London： Fontana. 1974. Print.

[5]Tao Qian 陶潛（365-427）.Jingjie xiansheng ji《靖節(jié)先生集》.In SBBY.

[6]Xu Yuanchong 許淵沖.Xuanyuanchong yi Bi juyi shixuan《許淵沖譯白居易詩選》. Beijing：zhongguo duiwaifanyi chuban（中國對外翻譯出版有限公司）.1999.Print——Version of classical Chinese poetry Golden，treasury of Chinese.

[7]poetry in Han， Wei and Six dynasties eng 《許淵沖經(jīng)典英譯古代詩歌 1000 首—漢魏六朝詩》. Beijing： Haitun chuban（海豚出版）.2008. Print.