Excerpts of ancient Chinese novels mentioning Maque(long/Chinese)

66 views
Skip to first unread message

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 3:58:16 AM1/18/07
to
Chapter 14 of "Fubao xiantan" written by Ouyang Juyuan in about
1903~1904:
http://bbs.xilu.com/cgi-bin/bbs/view?forum=wave99&message=9604

钱胡子当下叫娘姨撮台子。娘姨答应,拿出一副麻雀牌,派好筹码,扳了座位。钱胡子便对那娘姨道:"阿珠,你替我碰两副,我去去就来。"一面又向众人告罪,登、登、登下楼而去。阿珠坐了钱胡子的座位,掳动麻雀牌,四人便钩心斗角,碰将起来。黄子文恰恰坐在阿珠对面,一眼望去,见阿珠蛾眉淡扫,丰韵天然,不觉心中一动。阿珠也回眼过来看看黄子文,见他把帽子脱了露出了头,就像毛头鹰一般,嘻开了嘴一笑。黄子文以为是有情于他,喜得心花怒发,意蕊横飞;只是碍金慕暾和时豪人,不然便要动手动脚起来。
一霎时间,碰了四圈,看看没有什么大输赢,四人立过身来,拈过座头。这一回黄子文是阿珠的上家,看见阿珠台上碰了三张九索,三张一索,又吃了三、四、五三张索子,轮到黄子文发牌的时候,黄子文故意把一张七索发将出来。阿珠把牌摊下一数:一索碰四和,九索碰四和,七索与二索对倒两和,加上和底十和,共二十和。一翻四十和,两翻八十和,三翻一百六十和。刚刚是时豪人的庄,十块底二四,要输六块四角洋钱。时豪人便鼓噪起来,说黄子文不应该发这张七索。黄子文听他埋怨,不禁发火,便睁圆了眼睛,对着时豪人大喝了一声。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 4:00:59 AM1/18/07
to
Chapter 29 of "Jiu Wei Gui" written by Zhang Chunfan in 1908~1911:
http://www.guoxue.com/minqingstory/9weig/9WEIG_029.htm

坐谈未久,已见娘姨进来排开桌子。派好筹码,议定章秋谷、陈海秋、王小屏与主人辛修甫四人一局,五十块底二四。秋谷道:"我们彼此朋友,不见得想要赢钱。五十块底二四不太大么?"修甫道:"我原没有什么一定,今天是陈海翁的意思,要略略碰得大些。"秋谷听是陈海秋要碰大些,就不开口。扳了位,轮该秋谷起庄,碰了两圈,台上甚是平稳,没有大牌。

秋谷正在起牌之际,蓦地抬起头来往对面一看,只见辛修甫背后坐着蟾珠,正在那里同一个二十岁上下的女子咬着耳朵说话。秋谷留心看去,见这个人的神气打扮不像娘姨,不像大姐,随身衣服懒散梳妆,却生得体态娇娆,风姿艳丽,一眼瞅着秋谷,正与蟾珠说话。秋谷见了他的面貌吃了一惊,寻思他这付神气好似二年前在天津东阎乐的陆畹香,越看越像,不觉看得出了神去,把手内的牌乱发起来。恰好秋谷自己的庄,修甫坐在对面,已经碰出三张西风,手中做的是万子一色,三张二万,三张白板,一对中风,一对九万,已经等张。秋谷自己手中本有一对中风,一张白板,恰好碰了三张一索,打算要发去白板便好等张,说也可笑,秋谷往对面看得认真,正在心中摹拟那陆畹香的丰度,不觉忘其所以,有些模模糊糊起来,本来要抽出白板,一个不留心误抽了一张中风出去,辛修甫"扑"的把牌摊了出来。秋谷见他和了这样一副大牌,又有三张中风,诧异起来,连忙把自己的牌摊出一看,见白板依然不动,中风却少了一张,方才晓得误发了一张中风,致被辛修甫和了一副倒勒,忍不住哈哈大笑道:"我真是有些昏了,你们来看,喏,一对中风竟会打了一张出去,被他和了这样一副大牌,你说可笑不可笑!"

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 4:08:36 AM1/18/07
to
Chapter 30 of "Jiu Wei Gui" written by Zhang Chunfan in 1908~1911:
http://www.guoxue.com/minqingstory/9weig/9WEIG_030.htm

且说章秋谷发错了一张中风,哈哈大笑。对面那人先前见秋谷看得诧异,已觉得有些好笑,及至见他翻出牌来,自家本有一对中风,不知怎的会误打了一张出去,忍不妆噗嗤"一声笑得扭过脸去,弯着腰,扶了修甫的椅背立不起来。秋谷见如此情形,更加狂笑。好容易大家收住笑声,方才算帐,秋谷自己的庄,要输一底多些码子,秋谷照数付讫。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 4:10:05 AM1/18/07
to
Chapter 30 of "Jiu Wei Gui" written by Zhang Chunfan in 1908~1911:
http://www.guoxue.com/minqingstory/9weig/9WEIG_030.htm

秋谷一面碰和,一面絮絮的问他别后的光景,畹香一一的告诉他,二人就谈个不祝那知秋谷一面同畹香说话,分了神思,早不觉又打错了几张牌。畹香在旁看得明白,恐怕他要输钱,叫秋谷不要和他说话,一心一意的碰和。秋谷那里肯听?

还是口中杂七杂八的寻着说话问他,一个不留心,发了一张东风出去,又被下家王小屏和了一副一百二十和的筒子一色。恰恰的小屏又是庄家,秋谷差不多又要输他半底码子,急得陆畹香和他嚷道:"叫耐勿要说话,耐偏生勿旨,瞎碰一出,输得一塌糊涂,倪来替耐碰仔两副罢。"修甫也说秋谷心神乱了,不妨等畹香替你代碰两圈。秋谷不肯,笑道:"你们就把我看得这般无用,输了两副就要请起替身来?通共碰了不到四圈,就见得出什么输赢么?"大家听了,不好再说,于是重复掳牌。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 5:09:45 AM1/18/07
to
Chapter 30 of "Jiu Wei Gui" written by Zhang Chunfan in 1908~1911:
http://www.guoxue.com/minqingstory/9weig/9WEIG_030.htm

轮到秋谷做庄,起出牌来。畹香看秋谷的牌时,只见一对东风,一对西风,一张南风,一张北风,还有三张万子,三张索子,两张筒子。秋谷把头摇了一摇,皱着眉头略略想了一想,不打南风,反打了一张索子出去。畹香见了,连忙把秋谷一拉道:"耐打错仔一只牌哉。"秋谷不语,只叫他不要多言。接着王小屏打了一张东风,秋谷连忙一碰,便又发了一张筒子,下家不要。辛修甫便发了一张南风,接着王小屏又摸出一张北风,随手打出。秋谷见南风北风已经见过,打算他打北风,便先打了北风出去,再去摸牌。不料刚刚凑巧,摸起的牌恰恰是张北风,秋谷连忙把前发的北风缩了进来,打去一张筒子。辛修甫发出一张西风,秋谷又是一碰,再发一张索子。陈海秋见了,忙招呼小屏同修甫道:"庄家东风西风一齐碰出,刚才又缩进一张北风,一定是手中做着四喜,我们须要小心。"秋谷微笑不语。

过了一转,秋谷又摸起一只南风,发出了一只索子,已经等张,南北风对碰和倒。恰好王小屏摸起一张南风,放在手中,正要发时,被陈海秋拦住道:"南北风万发不得,庄家一定是等这两张。"小屏听了,只得扣住南风,拆了一张搭索子。轮到陈海秋摸牌时,刚正摸着一张北风,放在手中,向王小屏一扬道:"我又摸得一只北风,大约庄家的牌被我们扣住的了。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 5:10:41 AM1/18/07
to
秋谷看台上时,南北风已经有了两张,自家现有两对,他们两人每人扣了一张,死也不肯发出,这牌断断和不出来。看那牌时,已差不多将要到底,止有二十余张,秋谷猛然想出一个主意,要出奇制胜的冒险一回,正摸了一张九索,这九索是台上极熟的牌张。秋谷故意把九索翻了转来,明叫众人看见,却拆了北风对子,打出一张北风。畹香见了,急得连声咳嗽,拉着秋谷的衣裳,想叫他缩回重打。秋谷只作不知,凭你怎样,他只如无其事的样儿。气得个陆畹香走了开去,对龙蟾珠道:"我看二少今朝格碰和,实头有点昏哉,从来韵看见歇格号打法。"秋谷听见陆畹香的话只微微而笑。王小屏见秋谷打了一张北风,料想不是四喜,又明明看见他上了一张九索,便放心大胆的不怕他,把先前扣住的一张南风发了出去。秋谷急忙一碰,却故意装作懊悔道:"早晓得还有南风出来,刚刚不该把北风发掉。"王小屏道:"你通是说的痴话,你不把北风发掉,我肯放南风给你么?"秋谷又故作踌躇了一会,方才发了一张九索。

大家那里留心?只有陆畹香听秋谷碰了南风,发去九索,方觉恍然大悟,他用的是那欲擒故纵的法儿,暗暗甚是佩服秋谷的心机圆活。陈海秋坐在秋谷的上家,见秋谷才打北风,料他不要,便也打了一张北风,道:"你刚刚不要北风,我且顶你一只北风何如?"扑的把牌打出。秋谷大笑一声,将牌摊出道:"你现顶北风,我就现领你的盛情。"三家见秋这副牌和得诧异,一个个目定口呆,只把一个陆畹香喜得心花怒开,满心奇痒,张开了一张樱桃小口,笑得"吱吱格格"的再合不拢来。大家看了秋谷的牌,方才明白他拆掉北风对子,是要骗出王小屏的南风,却又明知陈海秋手中还扣着一张北风,所以翻转身来,重吊北风和倒。算一算,四喜要加三倍,不消说已经倒勒。秋谷这一副牌,就赢了三底半筹码,除了前输一底半之外,恰好还赢着两底。大家便重新洗起牌来。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 5:11:45 AM1/18/07
to
Chapter 98 of "Jiu Wei Gui" written by Zhang Chunfan in 1908~1911:
http://www.guoxue.com/minqingstory/9weig/9WEIG_098.htm

当下大家讲明打五十块钱一底的二四,大家扳了坐位便碰起来。碰了几副,叫的局已经来了,梁绿珠和陆丽娟坐在秋谷身后,默默的看他发牌,起先的几付牌,平平的都没有什么输赢。陈海秋碰了两圈,便叫林媛媛和他代碰,刚刚遇着他的庄,一起手便是中风开了个暗杠。陶观察又打了一张东风,林媛媛又碰了出来,转了几转,秋谷见林媛媛的牌只打了一张万子,便和陶观察同修甫道:"庄家是万子一色,你们留神一点。"一句还没有说完,陶观察忽然打了一张发风出来,林嫒媛见了把牌摊出,计算起来四百和牌,给他和了一个倒勒。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 5:12:50 AM1/18/07
to
Chapter 99 of "Jiu Wei Gui" written by Zhang Chunfan in 1908~1911:
http://www.guoxue.com/minqingstory/9weig/9WEIG_099.htm

这番秋谷的庄,恰和了一付,又接着连了一付七十二和的筒子一色。接着,辛修甫和了一付,轮着林媛媛的庄。范彩霞在秋谷背后看着他起出牌来,也是平平常常的,不见得怎样好法。碰了两转,上家陶观察发出一张五索,秋谷不吃,顺手去摸一张东风来,打出一张四索。范彩霞看了也不开口,只把秋谷的衣服一拉,秋谷微笑摇头,一转过来,秋谷去起出一张三万,成了三四五万的一搭,便又打出一张六索。辛修甫见了诧异道:"你与其拆掉四索六索,为什么不吃他的五索呢?"秋谷笑道:"照这样的一付牌,就是和了也不过一个平和,有什么希罕。"等了一回,辛修甫发出一张南风,秋谷碰了出来,发出一张九索。这个时候,林媛媛早已碰了三张白板放在桌上,一转过来轮到陶观察发牌,陶观察却顺手发出一张东风来。林媛媛见了大喜,扑的把牌摊出,口中说道:"难末咦敲着仔唔笃一记哉。"大家举目看时,原来是东风和一索对碰和出,是一付索子一色,里头还有三张八索,三张七索,又是个对对和。林媛媛屈指一算道:"对对和要外加一翻,刚刚咦是一付倒勒。"林媛媛正在高兴,不提防章秋谷伸过手去,把那一张东风抢了过来。林媛媛嚷道:"作啥呀,拿倪一张东风抢得去。"

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 5:14:01 AM1/18/07
to
秋谷不慌不忙,把自己的牌摊在桌子上,口中说道:"请你们看看,我的牌怎么样?"辛修甫和陶观察大举眼看时,只见齐齐正正的三张八筒,三张一万,三张三四五万,一张东风,还有三张南风已经碰在桌上。修甫见了,诧异道:"你是独等东风么?"秋谷不答,只点一点头,把陶观察方才打的那张东风和自己的东风放在一起,只把一个背后的范彩霞喜欢得笑得"吱吱格格"的,一张樱桃小口再也合不拢来。辛修甫和陶观察见章秋谷拦了林媛媛的和,心上自然高兴。只有林媛媛谷都着一张嘴,十分扫兴,瞪了秋谷一眼道:"倪勿来,勿作兴实梗格。耐要拦倪格和,为啥勿早点说呀。"秋谷笑道:"你的手脚十分神速,对面的一张东风,刚刚打出,你已经飞一般的抢了过去,叫我那里来得及?"林媛媛听了也觉好笑,便把自己的牌一推,历历碌碌的掳起牌来。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 5:15:21 AM1/18/07
to
Chapter 28 of "Shi Wei Gui" written by Lu Shi'e in about 1911:
http://fiction.workgroup.cn/Article.Aspx?t_id=5467&a_id=22

一会子留学生也走上来,死活拖我叉麻雀。我推说不会,他们只得邀那姓郜的。于是姓郜的就和留学生夫妻兄妹四个儿叉麻雀。我在旁边闲看,这寡老也在旁边闲看,暗地把我袖子一扯。我见他们心都注在牌上,就趁便溜出来。这寡老随步跟出,向我道:'你怎么会到这里来,这里不是好地方呢。'我正要详细询问,那留学生已在里头唤我。寡老道:'这里不便讲话,明日六点钟岭南春三号聚会再谈罢。'我回到里头,只见那留学生嚷道:'单先生你来瞧,郜君这副牌这么和下来,倒说便宜,你看他便宜在那里。'我忙应道:'麻雀我是外教呢,看了也不懂。'口里虽这么说,走到郜老友面前一瞧,见了整整齐齐摊在台上,十四张都是万子,是一二三、三四五、四五六、五六七四搭牌,另外两张麻雀头,也是三万。郜老友道:'如何会错,我方才六万本是一扣,摸起了一张七万,才把六万打去一张的,现在来了张一万,和下来。十和一倍二十,二倍四十,三倍八十和,怎么会错。'留学生道:'差是原没有差,只成全我们少输了几个钱。你摸起七万,打掉六万,不过挺一四七二五八六门罢了,我做了你一定打掉七万的,打掉了七万不过七八两门不和,一万到六万一样要和的。你方才来一万,一样和下来,四万做了麻雀,一二三、三三三、五五五、六六六,要多到三副扣子,二十二起翻,一翻四十四,再翻八十八,三翻一百七十六和。你自己算算,钱要多进帐几许。'性郜的果然懊悔不迭。八圈麻雀碰完,天已凑夜。吃过晚饭,我就兴辞回家。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 5:17:33 AM1/18/07
to
"Dubo Pian" of "Qing Bai Lei Chao" written by Xu Ke in 1911~1912:
叉麻雀
雀亦葉子之一,以之為博,曰叉麻雀。凡一百三十六,曰筒,曰索,曰萬,曰東南西北,曰龍鳳白,亦作中發白。始於浙之寧波,其後不脛而走,遂徧南北。筒,《正韻》「徒弄切,音洞,簫無底也,通則洞。」蓋筒即洞也,象其形也。索,《爾雅》「大者謂之索,小者謂之繩。」索取其貫,所以貫其筒也。《書·牧誓》傳:「索,盡也。」《周禮·夏官》注「索,廋也。」《禮記》注「索,散也。」三者皆非本旨,故不加說。萬,《前漢書·律曆志》:「記於一,協於十,長於百,大於千,衍於萬。」萬者,記其數也。萬或作万。《六書正譌》「或省作麻,非。」則俗字之誤也。龍鳳白,唐李翱《五木經》:「厥二作雉。」註,烏也,即鳳之類也。《五白涇》又曰告白,曰白厥莢八,白之類也。中發,當是《中庸》「發而皆中節」之義。東南西北,《晉書》:「王獻之數歲,嘗觀門生摴蒱,曰:『南風不競。』門生曰:『此郎亦管中窺豹,時見一斑。』」當是東南西北之始。抑又思之,麻雀,馬弔之音之轉也。吳人呼禽類如刁,去聲讀,不知何義,則麻雀之為馬弔,已確而有徵矣。宋名儒楊大年著《馬弔經》,其書久佚,是馬弔固始於宋也。筒,陰象也;索,陽象也;萬,數之極也,蓋本飲食男女之意也。其後以楮易竹,遂稱葉子,繪梁山盜一百八人於上,時尚無中發白東南西北也。至國朝,淮揚鹽賈盛行此戲,陶文毅嘗禁絕之。鹺商乃改繪梁山盜宋江貌如陶文毅,並其女公子。粵寇起事,軍中用以賭酒,增入筒化、索化、萬化、天化、王化、東南西北化,蓋本偽封號也。行之未幾,流入寧波,不久而遂普及矣。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 5:18:41 AM1/18/07
to
光、宣間,麻雀盛行,達乎諸侯大夫及士庶人,名之曰看竹,其意若曰何可一日無此君也。其窮泰極侈者,有五萬金一底者矣。【一底猶言一局。】會稽陶心雲觀察濬宣作長篇詠之,託恉鑑誡,迻錄如左:「罡風吹鳥名鵂鶹,無晝無夜號啾啾。飛向人間啄大屋,賓客歡笑妻孥愁。一啄再啄金屋破,啾啾唧唧號未休。初翔江之右,倏忽騰九州。問制何自始,易竹乃廢紙。非簺亦非蒱,無盧亦無雉。索長矩方規以圓,自一至九環無端。馬融《六簙賦》所遺,李翱《五木經》久刪。呼龍喝鳳揣梅竹,四座鳴對聲關關。鵂鶹來,歡顏開,蒲桃美酒夜光杯,屖筯饜飫鸞刀催。金璫翠鈿名姝陪,蕭筦哀音今集吅豗。賓極歡,主大醉,華燈四照開博臺。鵂鶹去,雞號曙,勝者忻忭負皇遽,面色如土不敢怒。脫下鷫鸘裘,低首長生庫。到門踟躕慚婦孺,誓絕安陽舊博侶。明朝見獵眉色舞,梟化為狼蝮為蠍。破人黃金吮人血,枯魚過河泣何及。自言我本不祥物,方將取汝子,弗僅毀汝室。吾聞東晉陵夷銅駝沒,大地五胡亂羌羯。士夫飲博供清譚,牧豬奴輩亡人國。桓桓我祖長沙公,取投簙簺江流中。天地鼎沸人消搖,千年時局將毋同。沈沈大夢真竹醉,白晝黃昏為易位。咨余往射豈得已,【用韓句。】梟驚墮梁魂破碎。血其爪肉貫翎翅,焚滅鷇卵斷麻類。君不見萬國人人習體操,彊身彊國五禽戲。」

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 5:19:18 AM1/18/07
to
又有以詩詠其事者云:麻雀何難打,祇求實者虛。逢和須要算,死聽不為輸。三項家家大,【中發白。】雙風對對符。自摸清一色,喜煞牧豬奴。今日贏錢局,排排對子招。三元兼四喜,滿貫遇全么。花自槓頭發,【槓後開花者,開槓後自摸和成也。】月從海底撈。【僅餘一張牌自摸自成者,謂之海底撈月。】散場須遠避,竹槓怕人敲。素有盤龍癖,得閒打八圈。上家六合佔,本位自輸錢。勒子看人倒,【三百符謂之倒勒,又謂之勒子。】病張攤我拈。【三項大張難於打出者,謂之病張。】不如加兩點,或可有莊連。又唱竹林戲,謳歌逸興賒。【泰州打牌者,率有唱牌之癖,如西風則曰西瓜玻瓈泡,北風則曰北關橋下水滔滔之類。】四圈輸八弔,一客累三家。包子連連喫,【謂冒險打出大牌,人竟和下,則打之者包全抬。】頭兒屢屢拿。不愁輸得苦,明日早來些。【俗云,不怕輸得苦,單怕缺了賭。」】

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 5:20:24 AM1/18/07
to
Chapter 4 of "Zuijin Guanchang Mimi Shi" written by unknown in about
1922:
http://www.oa18.com/read/classic/2006-2/12/4.htm

黄大军机恰正同着卫显功对躺着抽鸦片烟,谈刚才叉麻雀,和出一对,到拦牌筒子清一色。黄大军机正说道:"一只九筒,实在巧不过。假如你不把三万一拍,这九筒就抡不到我摸。没有这九筒摸着,即使和出,不过九筒一克,八和,底和十和,共是十八和起翻,十八、三十六、七十二、一百四十四和罢哩。大不了赢到多少呢?"


卫显功道:"二四解,当庄和,一百四十四和,一百四十四、二百八十八、五百七十六,每家解五百七十六两银子。三五一十五、三七二十一、三六一十八,共总赢进一吊七百二十八两银子。"


黄大军机道:"不是只得这点点,一吊多点银子吗?幸而你三万一拍,一只九筒拍过来了;我摸来一看,九筒,连忙暗降,我说最好的降底开花。降起来,恰巧一只一筒,等的是一四筒张子,那是算也不用算的了,一吊二百银子一家。一三得三、二三得六、三吊六百银子,畸数亏数,一点儿没有的......"

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 5:22:42 AM1/18/07
to
Chapter 7 of "Zuijin Guanchang Mimi Shi" written by unknown in about
1922:
http://www.oa18.com/read/classic/2006-2/12/7.htm


有天,林师爷喝了几杯酒,高兴耍钱,同言老五做局。言老五道:"别的耍钱却懂不来,只有叉叉小麻雀,还可以应酬应酬。"


江一道:"我们推两方牌九玩玩吧。你若懂不到,就同林师爷合做个庄家吧。小玩意,你们两家子合凑一吊银子来做本钱。"言老五笑道:"我那里有这么许多银嗄!叉叉小麻雀,两三吊钱的输赢,消个遣儿,还可以应酬。除此之外,你们只管请,不要算我一个人数儿。"


江一不料言老五老定主意,不上他们的当,便掇转口风道:"就叉几圈麻雀玩玩,也使得。"岂知言老五别的能耐却没有,叉麻雀的技艺是超超等,大有把握,可以操得必胜之权。嘴里虽说两三吊钱的输赢,可以应酬应酬,其实不论大小,都肯叉的。林师爷便说:"叉麻雀也好,五百吊钱一底,四八解。"


言老五道:"五百个钱四八解吧。"江一道:"那是忒小了,也没兴会。"林师爷道:"如此一千吊钱,二四吧。"言老五笑道:"可不是同五百吊钱四八解一样吗?我们现钱,还是用筹码?"林师爷道:"自然是现的。"言老五答应了。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 6:54:03 AM1/18/07
to ith...@gmail.com
须臾入局。拼到第三副,轮着言老五做庄,坎坎的和出一副三百和,到拦牌来,该赢二千四百吊钱一家,各人身上顶多不过三、五百吊钱,还是预备捉弄言老五的,所以带着这许多钱。不然三、五十吊钱都拿不出来。蓦地里和出这副拦子牌来,林师爷第一个发急,只得同言老五商量,暂记一记,碰完了再算。言老五道:"那个不兴。说好是现钱现贩,怎说要欠呢?"江一抄着牌道:"碰下去,碰去......,碰完了再算。"言老五把牌按住道:"那是不作兴的!说现钱,须得解了钱再碰。"林师爷道:"没有带着这么多的钱,那是没法的。"

言老五道:"那便拿去......。假如你们和了到拦牌,我使得不拿钱出来吗?"于是顶住了这个收常妙凤自然帮着言老五的。劝解道:"既然说定现钱做输赢呢,自该不作兴欠的。真真输得多了,现钱解过三五千庄,短少两个,究竟不是说不出的话。如今只得第三副牌,一圈庄还没到,又不曾输过三底、五底,就要欠帐。怪不得言大少爷不肯,还是拿了出来再碰吧。"

林师爷道:"身上没有呀!还要说吗?"妙凤摇摇头道:"其实为难。碰到五百吊钱的四八,身上没有两三千吊钱,那里可以坐下去碰呢?"言老五道:"也不用碰了。写张欠据来,约定几天还吧?还有七圈零一副牌。还清了钱,再碰也使得。"

妙凤道:"很说得不错,言大少爷等着这里,林大老爷、江大老爷、方大少爷拿钱到这儿来还吧!说着端过三张信笺、砚台笔墨,放在桌上叫他们三个写契约。言老五道:"人也写一张二千四百吊的契约来。"又递个眼风过去,人也会意,提笔就写。且叫妙凤做中人签了押。言老五又道:"林、江二位,写在一张纸儿上,写四千八百吊。"

林师爷瞧着方人也已写了,没奈何,同江一两个人出面也写了。妙凤做中人签了押。立催着林师爷、江一立刻取了钱来,仍旧碰和,三副牌,碰他怎好意思呢。林师爷、江一也坐不住了,借势一溜烟走了。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 6:56:18 AM1/18/07
to ith...@gmail.com
Chapter 6 of "A Q Zhengzhuan" written by Lu Xun in 1921~1922:
http://www.wxjy.com.cn/jysk/xdwx/luxun/aqzhengzhuan.htm

然而也偶有大可佩服的地方,即如未庄的乡下人不过打三十二张的竹牌,只有假洋鬼子能够叉"麻酱",城里却连小乌龟子都叉得精熟的。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 6:57:15 AM1/18/07
to ith...@gmail.com
"Shi'e Yehua" written by Lu Shi'e in about 1936:
http://www.cntcm.org/cgi-bin/printpage.cgi?forum=6&topic=195

叉麻雀(将)与著围棋,都是玩艺之一种,但是本国人之对于麻雀(将)叉法,已经
数度改良,如老法叉,新法叉,筑双层方城,单层方城,又有自摸和,加倍赢,放人和,加
倍输,全求人,全不求人,除幺断九等种种方法,及日本人之围棋著法,亦与吾国少异,都
是自出心裁,逐次改良,经大众公认为妥善,未曾从扑克等法译出参加,观于玩艺之麻雀、
围棋,则改良如此-对于五千年学术之医学,则改良如彼,岂麻雀、围棋反重于医学欤?

ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 10:27:37 AM1/18/07
to
Hello,

I havn't read through the above books. And for the hugeness of the
amount, it's hard to translate them all into English. I just give out
some views after my reading. If someone needs me to translate one or
several sentences, I'd like to.

1) "Cha maque"(叉麻雀) is also called "Penghu"(碰和) sometime.
Meanwhile, "penghu"(碰和) is another written game in other books. So
"maque"(麻雀) is probably developped on "penghu"(碰和). "Cha maque"
is also called "Kanzhu"(看竹, play bamboos).

2) "Maque"(麻雀) was pronounced the same with "majiang"(麻将) in
some regions.

3) Usually people play maque for 8 rounds and they changed seats after
finishing 4 rounds. The deal passes one by one after a hand is over
whether the dealer wins or not.

4) The dealer pays/receives double. There is no settlement between the
losers.

5) Red Dragon is called "Zhong Feng"(Centre Wind). White Dragon is
called "Bai Ban"(White Board). Green Dragon is called "Fa Feng"(Fa
Wind).

6) The initial points(a base) is 1000 fu. There is a limit of 300 fu
for a winning hand. It's called "Daole"(倒勒) or "Lanpai"(拦牌).

7) Bao rules exsited in some region at that time.

8) Maque was popular at least in Beijing and Southern of Yangtse from
1874(光、宣年间).

9) There are 136 tiles and no flowers in a maque set.

Cheers,
ithinc

cymb...@free.fr

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 11:34:58 AM1/18/07
to
Dear ithinc,

You are killing us! ;-)

Many thanks and congratulations for this wealth of new materials!

> I just give out some views after my reading. If someone
> needs me to translate one or several sentences, I'd like to.

Yes. That would help us, poor idiots who can't read Chinese.

Just a few comments.

> 1) "Cha maque"(???) is also called "Penghu"(??) sometime.

Yes. That was Andrew Lo's assumption in his contribution to the recent
catalogue "Asian Games". (He drew this conclusion from many popular
novels published in Shanghai in the 1880s.)

> Meanwhile, "penghu"(??) is another written game in other books. So
> "maque"(??) is probably developped on "penghu"(??).

The relationship between "penghu" and "maque" was discussed in this
group some years ago.

> "Cha maque" is also called "Kanzhu"(??, play bamboos).

Correct. (Although I think it would be better translated as "watch the
bamboos".)
I have found a few references of the early 20th century where mahjong
is alluded to as "bamboo", or "bamboo grove" ("spending one's time in
the bamboo grove" = "playing mahjong").

> 2) "Maque"(??) was pronounced the same with "majiang"(??) in
> some regions.

a) "Maque"(??) was pronounced 'maqiao': all authors -- Westerners or
Japanese -- who heard the name of the game in Chinese in around
1915-1925 heard 'maqiao'. Giles' Chinese-English dictionary of 1912 has
"ch'iao" as main entry, and "ch'ueh" (= pinyin 'que') as a secondary
pronunciation. (Now, it's the other way round.)

b) We know that some people also heard something like 'ma chiang'
(1912), 'matchang' (1921), 'ma chan' (1923, in Japanese katakana). For
example, K.T. Liou, a Chinese writing in French in Peking in 1921,
wrote about "Le jeu de matchang" (The game of 'matchang'), explaining
it meant "sparrow" and was the way it was pronounced there (meaning in
Peking).

> 8) Maque was popular at least in Beijing and Southern of Yangtse from

> 1874(?????).

Interesting. There are hints that point to a spread of the game to the
North first, before reaching Canton (where the game was hardly known in
1909.
By South of Yangtze you probably mean Jiangnan, don't you?

Again all my congratulations.

Cheers,
Thierry

Tom Sloper

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 11:55:57 AM1/18/07
to
"ithinc" <ith...@sohu.com> wrote...

>I havn't read through the above books. And for the hugeness of the
>amount, it's hard to translate them all into English. I just give out
>some views after my reading. If someone needs me to translate one or
>several sentences, I'd like to.

This is wonderful data, but the important thing for us is the dates. Your
first three posts cited a book dated ca. 1908 - your next two had no date -
your sixth post's book was dated ca. 1921 - your last post's book was dated
ca. 1936.

Generalities about data from such a wide spread of years don't tell us what
we want to know.

>1) "Cha maque"(∟e3?3?) is also called "Penghu"(?I?M) sometime.
>Meanwhile, "penghu"(?I?M) is another written game in other books. So
>"maque"(3?3?) is probably developped on "penghu"(?I?M). "Cha maque"
>is also called "Kanzhu"(?Y|?, play bamboos).

We need to know which names were used in what dates, please.

>2) "Maque"(3?3?) was pronounced the same with "majiang"(3??) in
>some regions.

In what years? Was this term used in 1908? Or just later?

>3) Usually people play maque for 8 rounds and they changed seats after
>finishing 4 rounds. The deal passes one by one after a hand is over
>whether the dealer wins or not.

In what years? All years from 1908-1936?

>4) The dealer pays/receives double. There is no settlement between the
>losers.

In all these novels from 1908-1936?

>5) Red Dragon is called "Zhong Feng"(Centre Wind). White Dragon is
>called "Bai Ban"(White Board). Green Dragon is called "Fa Feng"(Fa
>Wind).

Also in 1908? Or just later?
"Fa" means "get," is that right? So "fa wind" means "get wind"?

>6) The initial points(a base) is 1000 fu. There is a limit of 300 fu
>for a winning hand.

In all the novels from 1908-1936? Or just some of them?

>It's called "Daole"(-?~?) or "Lanpai"(?米P).

What do those terms mean in English?

>7) Bao rules exsited in some region at that time.

Which time? 1908? Or only 1936?

>8) Maque was popular at least in Beijing and Southern of Yangtse from

>1874(ㄓ迆?B??|~?).

Wow!

>9) There are 136 tiles and no flowers in a maque set.

Even in 1921 and 1936?

Thanks for finding all those excerpts, ithinc!
Tom


Cofa Tsui

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 1:17:21 PM1/18/07
to

EXCELLENT WORK! Yes, you really are going to kill us all ^_^

I believe there's going to be a long long discussion that would follow.
To make things look better, may I suggest the following "convention":

In order to display the Chinese fonts properly (if you would quote the
original fonts), please post on the Google website instead of using
your own email editor. Ithinc and I have the same experience: include
small amount of Chinese fonts on the Google site interface and it will
display well (if the system refuses your post, it means your post with
Chinese font is not accepted); Chinese fonts posted from an email
editor don't normally display properly.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

I have had a quick review of the excerpts and would like to give these
brief comments:

a) Excerpts that come with references as to book title, author and
date, such references are provided at the top of the message.

b) One shall understand that Ithinc's excerpts are from different books
that may cover a wide range of time period; therefore, the contents
shall not be considered to be dealing with just one particular game
form for the entire time period. (Although all authors might be
describing the same game form(s) there was(were) popular at the time
period of writing.)

c) Overall, the excerpts give amble of information about:
- How the game is called
- The contents (playing pieces, and I would say, a full picture) of the
game
- How scores are derived
- Base value and payment structure are provided
(We might need to gather all info from different pieces and put
together again, though)

c) "Dubo Pian" of "Qing Bai Lei Chao" written by Xu Ke in 1911~1912:
This excerpt contains info on the contents of the playing pieces of the
game "ma que," what the names (of the pieces and of the game) mean, and
approximate time it was formed.

d) Chapter 4 of "Zuijin Guanchang Mimi Shi" written by unknown in about
1922: http://www.oa18.com/read/classic/2006-2/12/4.htm
This post gives a very clear example of how scores are awarded.
In general, all of the excerpts, if scores and payments are provided,
indicate that there is NO settlement between non winning players.

e) "Shi'e Yehua" written by Lu Shi'e in about 1936:
http://www.cntcm.org/cgi-bin/printpage.cgi?forum=6&amp;topic=195
This is about how the game has been evolved/modified over time.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

With (d) above, I paid little more attention to excerpts that are close
to the 1920s. I noticed that "NO settlement between non winning
players" seems to be still the norm! This is a big contrast to those
books in the 1920s written mainly by foreign authors, who seemed to
have found the "CC-like" form only ("settlement between non winning
players" is an essential feature). Any comments?

Again, Ithinc, an EXCELLENT work!

-----
Cofa Tsui
www.iMahjong.com

Cofa Tsui

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 7:16:32 PM1/18/07
to
Ithinc has written:

> >5) Red Dragon is called "Zhong Feng"(Centre Wind). White Dragon is
> >called "Bai Ban"(White Board). Green Dragon is called "Fa Feng"(Fa
> >Wind).

Tom Sloper asked:


> "Fa" means "get," is that right? So "fa wind" means "get wind"?

"Fa" 发 (fortune) is the one used in "fa cai" 发财 (remember Gong Xi
Fa Cai 恭喜发财 in the Chinese new year greetings?). It's called
"Fa Feng" (Fortune Wind) in these novels. I don't understand why it is
called "Feng" (Wind)? Fa Feng is equivalent to Green Dragon in modern
mahjong.

Ithinc wrote:
> 6) The initial points(a base) is 1000 fu. There is a limit of 300 fu

> for a winning hand. It's called "Daole"(倒勒) or "Lanpai"(拦牌).

And Tom asked:


> In all the novels from 1908-1936? Or just some of them?

Not all the excerpts provide scoring details. Some talk about
activities among the characters and some about the game in general.

> What do those terms mean in English?

"Daole"(倒勒):
倒 "Dao" = Reverse
勒 "le" = 1. stop. 2. force. 3. carve. (as in my Chinese-English
dictionary)
"Lanpai"(拦牌):
拦 "Lan" = Block, hold back, bar
牌 "pai" = (as for "ma que pai", "mahjong pai")

Nothing seems meaningful except used as a game's term. This causes me
to compare this with the terms 辣 "la" (Cantonese "Laak"), 双辣
"shuang la" ("double laak"), and 三辣 "san la" ("triple laak"), in
HKOS. "Laak" is a short term to represent 4 fans (4 doubles), double
laak = 6 fans, triple laak = 8 fans.

Now we have "daole" representing a maximum number of fu and "laak"
representing a number of fans, would "laak" in HKOS be another feature
similar to the early years form that is not found in CC (1977) and
CC-like (1920s)?

In all these new excerpts "he 和" is used to represent the "scores" or
"points" of sets, not "fu 副" as used in a previous novel "Guangchang
Xianxing Ji". I have a feeling that "fu" (or "he") does not simply mean
points as used in CC (Millington); however, I can't tell at this point
if it shall mean anything different or anything specific, if any at
all.

-----
Cofa Tsui
www.iMahjong.com

Tom Sloper

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 9:23:51 PM1/18/07
to
Ithinc has written:
>>>5) Red Dragon is called "Zhong Feng"(Centre Wind). White Dragon is
>>>called "Bai Ban"(White Board). Green Dragon is called "Fa Feng"(Fa
>>>Wind).

Tom Sloper asked:
>> "Fa" means "get," is that right? So "fa wind" means "get wind"?

"Cofa Tsui" <cofa...@hotmail.com> wrote

>"Fa" ? (fortune) is the one used in "fa cai" ?? (remember Gong Xi
Fa Cai ???? in the Chinese new year greetings?).

Thank you, Cofa. I do know that the "fa" is contained in *gung hei fa choi*
and especially in *fa choi.* But my understanding was (please bear with me,
I'm trying to understand) that it is the entire two-character phrase *fa
choi* (fa cai) that means "fortune." According to Zhongwen.com, the single
character *fa* by itself means "shoot/issue forth" or "become/occur" or
"state/present."

And I know that in Japanese, the character is pronounced "hatsu" and means
"hit" (in keeping with the "shoot or issue forth" meaning listed on
Zhongwen).

Lastly, according to Zhongwen, the standalone character "cai" means "wealth"
(fortune).

I always explain to my mahjong students that although the character "fa"
means merely "get," the Chinese always immediately mentally add "... rich"
when reading or hearing the word "fa" (i.e., hear "fa" but think "fa cai").
Thus the character "fa" has an *implied* meaning of "fortune" but doesn't
*actually* mean "fortune."

Have I been teaching my students wrongly all these years? That's what I want
to know about "fa."

Ithinc wrote:
>>> 6) The initial points(a base) is 1000 fu. There is a limit of 300 fu

>>> for a winning hand. It's called "Daole"(??) or "Lanpai"(??).

And Tom asked:
>> In all the novels from 1908-1936? Or just some of them?

Cofa:


>Not all the excerpts provide scoring details. Some talk about
>activities among the characters and some about the game in general.

I assumed that to be the case. My question for ithinc is, "which novels
(written in which years) describe this exact scoring system?"


>"Daole"(??):
>? "Dao" = Reverse
>? "le" = 1. stop. 2. force. 3. carve. (as in my Chinese-English
dictionary)
>"Lanpai"(??):
>? "Lan" = Block, hold back, bar
>? "pai" = (as for "ma que pai", "mahjong pai")


>
>Nothing seems meaningful except used as a game's term. This causes me

>to compare this with the terms ? "la" (Cantonese "Laak"), ??
>"shuang la" ("double laak"), and ?? "san la" ("triple laak"), in


>HKOS. "Laak" is a short term to represent 4 fans (4 doubles), double
> laak = 6 fans, triple laak = 8 fans.

Thank you, I appreciate that helpfulness.

>Now we have "daole" representing a maximum number of fu and "laak"
>representing a number of fans, would "laak" in HKOS be another feature

>similar to the early years form that is not found in CC ... [snip]

In English CC rules, 4 fan is simply called "4 doubles." But if the Chinese
in the 1920s used the term "laak" for this, then no, it's not a difference.
It's just terminology.

>In all these new excerpts "he ?" is used to represent the "scores" or
>"points" of sets, not "fu ?" as used in a previous novel "Guangchang


>Xianxing Ji". I have a feeling that "fu" (or "he") does not simply mean
>points as used in CC (Millington); however, I can't tell at this point
>if it shall mean anything different or anything specific, if any at
>all.

I have a different "feeling," but OK, thanks.


ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 10:29:54 PM1/18/07
to

"cymb...@free.fr 写道:

"
> Just a few comments.
>
> > 1) "Cha maque"(???) is also called "Penghu"(??) sometime.
>
> Yes. That was Andrew Lo's assumption in his contribution to the recent
> catalogue "Asian Games". (He drew this conclusion from many popular
> novels published in Shanghai in the 1880s.)
Oh, did he list what novels he had read? Maybe it is similar to my
list.

> > 2) "Maque"(??) was pronounced the same with "majiang"(??) in
> > some regions.
>
> a) "Maque"(??) was pronounced 'maqiao': all authors -- Westerners or
> Japanese -- who heard the name of the game in Chinese in around
> 1915-1925 heard 'maqiao'. Giles' Chinese-English dictionary of 1912 has
> "ch'iao" as main entry, and "ch'ueh" (= pinyin 'que') as a secondary
> pronunciation. (Now, it's the other way round.)
>
> b) We know that some people also heard something like 'ma chiang'
> (1912), 'matchang' (1921), 'ma chan' (1923, in Japanese katakana). For
> example, K.T. Liou, a Chinese writing in French in Peking in 1921,
> wrote about "Le jeu de matchang" (The game of 'matchang'), explaining
> it meant "sparrow" and was the way it was pronounced there (meaning in
> Peking).

I think the two statements are all right. "Maque" is a mandarin
pronunciation. It is pronounced "maqiao" in some Wuyu regions(mostly
Suzhou) while it is also pronounced "machiang" in another some Wuyu
regions(mostly Ningbo). Don't you think "maqiao" is somewhere similar
to "machiang"?

>
> > 8) Maque was popular at least in Beijing and Southern of Yangtse from
> > 1874(?????).
>
> Interesting. There are hints that point to a spread of the game to the
> North first, before reaching Canton (where the game was hardly known in
> 1909.
> By South of Yangtze you probably mean Jiangnan, don't you?

Yes, I mean Jiangnan. The novels I have read are mostly describing
Shanghai and Jiangnan, so I have no knowledge of how maque is in
Canton. I mention Beijing for I know the maque was popular in
Forbidden City. It should be spreaded there by the officials.

Cofa Tsui

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 10:37:59 PM1/18/07
to
Tom Sloper wrote:

[...]


> I always explain to my mahjong students that although the character "fa"
> means merely "get," the Chinese always immediately mentally add "... rich"
> when reading or hearing the word "fa" (i.e., hear "fa" but think "fa cai").
> Thus the character "fa" has an *implied* meaning of "fortune" but doesn't
> *actually* mean "fortune."
>
> Have I been teaching my students wrongly all these years? That's what I want
> to know about "fa."

Change a little bit could be better (^_^):

a) A single Chinese word normally can't tell the correct or exact
meaning; Chinese words used to be in *phrase* to be meaningful. As to
"fa", I think "dispatch", "issue", "fire" are all appropriate meanings
for just the single word. (You have: according to Zhongwen.com, the
single character *fa* by itself means "shoot/issue forth.")

b) Since Chinese words used to be in phrase to be meaningful, "fa"
(even not used in a phrase) being interpreted as "fa cai" or "fa da"
(having fortune, getting rich) is acceptable, and can be used that way.

c) I don't understand why you have "fa" = "get" in mind. How did you
get that? "Fa" does not mean "get." (Unless your answer to my question
suggests otherwise.)

Cheers!

-----
Cofa Tsui
www.iMahjong.com

Tom Sloper

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 11:14:18 PM1/18/07
to
"Cofa Tsui" <cofa...@hotmail.com> wrote

> c) I don't understand why you have "fa" = "get" in mind. How did you
> get that? "Fa" does not mean "get." (Unless your answer to my question
> suggests otherwise.)

It's easy to see how I got that.
See Zhongwen.
"facai" = "get rich"
"cai" = "wealth" (riches, wealthy, rich)
So then what else could "fa" mean all by itself?
(That was my thinking.)

If the tile is supposed to mean "fortune" why aren't both characters "fa"
and "cai" present on the tile? Note: I did read what you wrote. And I don't
expect you to be able to justify why both characters aren't on the tile
(since it wasn't your decision). Just explaining myself.

Tom


ithinc

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 11:54:17 PM1/18/07
to

"Tom Sloper wrote:
"
[...]

> This is wonderful data, but the important thing for us is the dates. Your
> first three posts cited a book dated ca. 1908 - your next two had no date -
> your sixth post's book was dated ca. 1921 - your last post's book was dated
> ca. 1936.
You'd better read them at google site. For I cannot post them in one
post(Google Group reports an error), I had to split them. When some
post has no title,author and date, it is continuing with the upper one.
The order you mentioned above is different with it at google site.

ithinc wrote:
> >1) "Cha maque"(¡èe3?3?) is also called "Penghu"(?I?M) sometime.


> >Meanwhile, "penghu"(?I?M) is another written game in other books. So
> >"maque"(3?3?) is probably developped on "penghu"(?I?M). "Cha maque"
> >is also called "Kanzhu"(?Y|?, play bamboos).

Tom Sloper wrote:
> We need to know which names were used in what dates, please.

"Cha maque" was called "Penghu" mostly in "Jiu Wei Gui"(Zhang Chunfan,
1906~1910, this date is more accurate) and "Shi Wei Gui"(Lu Shi'e,
about 1911). In other novels, it is often said "after having Penged 4
rounds" etc.

>
> >2) "Maque"(3?3?) was pronounced the same with "majiang"(3??) in
> >some regions.
>
> In what years? Was this term used in 1908? Or just later?

In "A Q Zhengzhuan"(Lu Xun, 1921~1922), "Cha majiang"(叉麻酱) was
written. Lu Xun was a Shaoxinger, under the Hangzhou fu.

>
> >3) Usually people play maque for 8 rounds and they changed seats after
> >finishing 4 rounds. The deal passes one by one after a hand is over
> >whether the dealer wins or not.
>
> In what years? All years from 1908-1936?

Sorry, the 1936 one is not a novel. I got the above view through all
the novels, from 1903~1922.

>
> >4) The dealer pays/receives double. There is no settlement between the
> >losers.
>
> In all these novels from 1908-1936?

Yes, from 1903~1922.

>
> >5) Red Dragon is called "Zhong Feng"(Centre Wind). White Dragon is
> >called "Bai Ban"(White Board). Green Dragon is called "Fa Feng"(Fa
> >Wind).
>

> Also in 1908? Or just later?

> "Fa" means "get," is that right? So "fa wind" means "get wind"?

"Fa Feng" is mentionged in "Fupu Xiantan"(Ouyang Juyuan, 1903~1904) and
"Jiu Weigui"(Zhang Shifan, 1906~1910). Feng is maybe a term, just
corresponding to Honors in CMCR.

>
> >6) The initial points(a base) is 1000 fu. There is a limit of 300 fu
> >for a winning hand.
>

> In all the novels from 1908-1936? Or just some of them?

Yes, all the novels from 1903~1922. As you know, the novels are not
rulesets. These things are not directly written in the novels.

>
> >It's called "Daole"(-?¡ã?) or "Lanpai"(?¦ÌP).


>
> What do those terms mean in English?

Cofa wrote:
> "Daole"(倒勒):
> 倒 "Dao" = Reverse

> 勒 "le" = 1. stop. 2. force. 3. carve. (as in my Chinese-English
> dictionary)
> "Lanpai"(拦牌):
> 拦 "Lan" = Block, hold back, bar
> 牌 "pai" = (as for "ma que pai", "mahjong pai")


>
> Nothing seems meaningful except used as a game's term. This causes me

> to compare this with the terms 辣 "la" (Cantonese "Laak"), 双辣

> "shuang la" ("double laak"), and 三辣 "san la" ("triple laak"), in


> HKOS. "Laak" is a short term to represent 4 fans (4 doubles), double
> laak = 6 fans, triple laak = 8 fans.
>

> Now we have "daole" representing a maximum number of fu and "laak"
> representing a number of fans, would "laak" in HKOS be another feature

> similar to the early years form that is not found in CC (1977) and
> CC-like (1920s)?

It is hard to translate directly. "勒子"(lezi) should be the same
word to "辣子"(lazi, Cantonese "Laak"). The concept is also inherited
in today's Shanghai Mahjong. For example, Pure Pungs in Shanghai
Mahjong is double lazi.

Tom wrote again:


> In English CC rules, 4 fan is simply called "4 doubles." But if the Chinese
> in the 1920s used the term "laak" for this, then no, it's not a difference.
> It's just terminology.

"Laak" is not fan or double or "4 doubles". It is a limit. There's a
similar concept "Yiman"(役满, I don't know the pronunciation in
Japanese) in Japanese Mahjong.


>
> >7) Bao rules exsited in some region at that time.
>
> Which time? 1908? Or only 1936?

I have no exact date, but it must be before 1911, for a poem mentioning
"bao" was quoted in "Qing Bai Lei Chao"(Xu Ke, 1911~1912).

>
> >8) Maque was popular at least in Beijing and Southern of Yangtse from

> >1874(£¤¨²?B??|~?).


>
> Wow!
>
> >9) There are 136 tiles and no flowers in a maque set.
>
> Even in 1921 and 1936?

Yes, in all the novels from 1903~1922.
[...]

Cofa worte others:
> In all these new excerpts "he 和" is used to represent the "scores" or
> "points" of sets, not "fu 副" as used in a previous novel "Guangchang


> Xianxing Ji". I have a feeling that "fu" (or "he") does not simply mean
> points as used in CC (Millington); however, I can't tell at this point
> if it shall mean anything different or anything specific, if any at
> all.

It's not "he 和", but "hu 和". Either "hu 和", or "fu 副", or "fu
付", they point to the same thing. "hu" and "fu" are the same(or
similar) pronunciation in wuyu.

For the date of each term/rule is so important to some people, is it
necessary to discuss every novel in an individual thread?

ithinc

Cofa Tsui

unread,
Jan 19, 2007, 12:04:17 AM1/19/07
to
"Tom Sloper" <tsl...@DONTsloperamaSPAMME.com> wrote in message
news:8uKdnd_Ow4TX2y3Y...@giganews.com...

> "Cofa Tsui" <cofa...@hotmail.com> wrote
>> c) I don't understand why you have "fa" = "get" in mind. How did you
>> get that? "Fa" does not mean "get." (Unless your answer to my question
>> suggests otherwise.)
>
> It's easy to see how I got that.
> See Zhongwen.
> "facai" = "get rich"
> "cai" = "wealth" (riches, wealthy, rich)
> So then what else could "fa" mean all by itself?
> (That was my thinking.)

I knew it! An interesting and somewhat beautiful misunderstanding ^_^

>
> If the tile is supposed to mean "fortune" why aren't both characters "fa"
> and "cai" present on the tile? Note: I did read what you wrote. And I
> don't expect you to be able to justify why both characters aren't on the
> tile (since it wasn't your decision). Just explaining myself.

I can (justify...), as per (b) in my previous post.

--
Cofa Tsui
www.iMahjong.com


ithinc

unread,
Jan 19, 2007, 12:10:09 AM1/19/07
to
The single word "fa" has a same meaning with "facai". In ancient
Chinese, people used to use single character. The appearing of the word
"fa" should be earlier than "facai".

ithinc

unread,
Jan 19, 2007, 12:23:33 AM1/19/07
to

"Cofa Tsui 写道:
"
[...]

> c) "Dubo Pian" of "Qing Bai Lei Chao" written by Xu Ke in 1911~1912:
> This excerpt contains info on the contents of the playing pieces of the
> game "ma que," what the names (of the pieces and of the game) mean, and
> approximate time it was formed.
>
[...]

>
> e) "Shi'e Yehua" written by Lu Shi'e in about 1936:
> http://www.cntcm.org/cgi-bin/printpage.cgi?forum=6&amp;topic=195
> This is about how the game has been evolved/modified over time.
>
Hello Cofa,
Thank you very much for your comments. They would help others to reduce
questioning me:)

Two more comments:
1) "Qing Bai Lei Chao" and "Shi'e Yihua" are not novels. "Qing Bai Lei
Chao" is something like a cyclopaedia. "Dubo Pian" of "Qing Bai Lei
Chao" could be found
at:http://www.caotang.net/index_Article_Content.asp?fID_ArticleContent=5396
2) "Shi'e Yihua" is a book about medicine. Lu Shi'e was firstly a
doctor then a writer. In his last life, he wrote a lot of books about
medicine.

Tom Sloper

unread,
Jan 19, 2007, 1:29:17 AM1/19/07
to

"ithinc" <ith...@sohu.com> wrote\...

> The single word "fa" has a same meaning with "facai". In ancient
> Chinese, people used to use single character.

How about that! Thanks, ithinc.
Tom

John (Z R) L

unread,
Jan 19, 2007, 2:00:13 AM1/19/07
to
> The single word "fa" has a same meaning with "facai". In ancient
> Chinese, people used to use single character.

Using a single character/kanji for a specific meaning seems to occur
extremely often in Japanese (kanji root + kana), I noticed for verbs
and adjectives in my textbook.

Sorry I didn't read the entire topic, but "Fa" is related to growing,
something occuring. Examples:

Fa da = developed
Fa mei = going mouldy
Fa cai = going rich
Fa ya = sprouting (plant)
Fa sheng = happen
Fa she = shooting

ithinc

unread,
Jan 19, 2007, 3:13:24 AM1/19/07
to

"John (Z R) L 写道:
Oh, It's near to modern Chinese. You can read the "Qing Bai Lei Chao"
above. It's written in typical ancient Chinese. You can find most words
are single-character. Two-character words or multiple-character words
are few in ancient Chinese. The novels posted here are written mostly
in colloquialism of that time.

J. R. Fitch

unread,
Jan 19, 2007, 5:06:48 AM1/19/07
to

I think of it as meaning "acquire", which is a synonym for "get" but has
connotations of "accumulate" which can be stretched to "plenty", as in
wealth.

--
J. R. Fitch
Nine Dragons Software
San Francisco, CA USA
http://www.ninedragons.com

Edwin Phua

unread,
Jan 19, 2007, 6:19:11 AM1/19/07
to

And there is also "fa feng" ('to go mad'). :)

Perhaps this is in Modern Chinese, but 发风 Fa Feng (Fortune Wind)
does sound too close to 发疯.

Cheers!
Edwin Phua

Julian Bradfield

unread,
Jan 19, 2007, 7:07:17 AM1/19/07
to
"ithinc" <ith...@sohu.com> writes:

> You'd better read them at google site. For I cannot post them in one
> post(Google Group reports an error), I had to split them. When some
> post has no title,author and date, it is continuing with the upper one.
> The order you mentioned above is different with it at google site.

Please remember that Google Groups is simply one company's Web
interface to the Usenet News system. If you're posting to Usenet, you
should not make any assumptions about the order in which articles
appear - it may be different on every computer. So you need to put,
e.g. (1/2) and (2/2) in the subjects of split articles, so people can
tell the order you intend.

cymb...@free.fr

unread,
Jan 19, 2007, 10:09:52 AM1/19/07
to
Tom Sloper a écrit :

> It's easy to see how I got that.
> See Zhongwen.
> "facai" = "get rich"
> "cai" = "wealth" (riches, wealthy, rich)
> So then what else could "fa" mean all by itself?
> (That was my thinking.)

"Fa" in itself doesn't mean "get" but "produce" or "hit".

This is why Wilkinson was puzzled by the word "zhongfa" he saw stamped
on the box he bought in Ningbo (now in the British Museum) in 1890.

He tried to translate it, and -- where we would now say "Red
Dragon-Green Dragon" (zhong+fa), he came with "hit and go". Probably he
got it wrong, but that was the best literal translation he could give.

Cheers,
Thierry

cymb...@free.fr

unread,
Jan 19, 2007, 10:43:39 AM1/19/07
to
ithinc a écrit :

> Two more comments:
> 1) "Qing Bai Lei Chao" and "Shi'e Yihua" are not novels. "Qing Bai Lei
> Chao" is something like a cyclopaedia. "Dubo Pian" of "Qing Bai Lei
> Chao" could be found
> at:http://www.caotang.net/index_Article_Content.asp?fID_ArticleContent=5396

Just a bit of pedantic information on the books and authors unearthed
by "ithinc".

Ouyang Juyuan was Li Boyuan's collaborator and successor.
About Ouyang Juyuan I read this:
"Ouyang Juyuan continued in the footsteps of his mentor [Li Boyuan]. It
is said that he did much of the actual writing and editing of Li
Boyuan's papers and even some parts of his novels. He arrived in
Shanghai in 1898..." (from Catherine Vance Yeh, "Shanghai Love :
Courtesans, Intellectuals, and Entertainment Culture, 1850-1910",
Seattle, WA : University of Washington Press, 2006, and not a word on
mahjong!!)

Zhang Chunfan (ca. 1875-1908), Jiu wei gui = The Nine-Tailed Turtle, a
novel which was published in Shanghai in 1910. (There is a French
doctoral thesis by Jean Duval, 1975, on this novel.)

Lu Shi'e's Shiwei gui = The Ten-Tailed Turtle, is commented upon thus:
"This little-known novel is an amusing spoof of the more famous Jiuwei
gui [by Zhang Chunfan], but written in vernacular Chinese."

Xu Ke's 'Qing bai leichao' ("Classified Anecdotes of the Qing
Dynasty"), was published in Shanghai in 1917. It is not unknown to us.
There are a few threads which discussed some mahjong details from this
large "encyclopedia" of daily life. (Type "Xu Ke" in the "Search in
this group" box.)

Cheers,
Thierry

ithinc

unread,
Jan 20, 2007, 3:33:41 AM1/20/07
to
Chapter 26 of "Haishang Hua Liezhuan" written by Han Bangqing in
1892~1894:
http://fiction.workgroup.cn/Article.Aspx?t_id=5601&a_id=26

庄荔甫忽然想起,欲有所问,却为吴松桥、张小村两人一心只想碰和,故意摆庄豁拳,叉断话头。等至出局初齐,张小村便怂恿陈小云碰和。小云问筹码若干,小村说是一百块底。小云道:"忒大哉。"小村极力央求应酬一次,吴松桥在旁帮说。陈小云乃问洪善卿:"我搭耐合碰阿好?"善卿道:"我匆会碰末,合啥嗄?要末耐搭荔甫合仔罢。"小云又问庄荔甫,荔甫转向施瑞生道:"耐也合点。"瑞生心中亦有要事,慌忙摇手,断不肯合。

于是陈小云、庄荔甫言定输赢对拆,各碰四圈。李鹤汀道:"要碰和末,倪酒(要勿)吃哉。"施瑞生听说,趁势告辞,仍和陆秀宝同去。张小村不知就里,深致不安,并恐洪善卿扫兴,急取鸡缸杯筛满了酒,专敬五拳。吴松桥也代主人敬了洪善卿五拳。十杯豁毕,局已尽行,惟留下杨媛媛连为牌局。众人略用稀饭而散。

登时收过台面,开场碰和。张小村问洪善卿:"阿高兴碰两副?"善卿说:"真个勿会碰。"吴松桥道:"看看末就会哉。"洪善卿即拉只凳子坐于张小村、吴松桥之间,两边骑看。杨媛媛自然坐李鹤汀背后。庄荔甫急于吸烟,让陈小云先碰。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 20, 2007, 3:34:38 AM1/20/07
to
恰好骰色挨着小云起庄。小云立起牌来即咕噜道:"牌啥实概样式嗄?"三家催他发张。发张以后,摸过四五圈,临到小云,摸上一张又迟疑不决,忽唤庄荔甫道:"耐来看囗,我倒也勿会碰哉囗。"荔甫从烟榻上崛起跑来,看时,乃是在手筒子清一色,系囗囗囗囗囗囗囗囗囗囗囗囗囗囗共十四张。荔甫翻腾颠倒,配搭多时,抽出一张六筒,教陈小云打出去,被三家都猜着是筒子一色。张小村道:"勿是四七筒,就是五八筒,大家当心点。"可巧小村摸起一张立筒,因台面上么简是熟张,随手打出。陈小云急说:"和哉!"摊出牌来,核算三倍,计八十和。

三家筹码交清,庄荔甫复道:"该副牌,阿是该应打六筒?耐看,一四七筒,二五八筒,要几花和张哚。"吴松桥沉吟道:"我说该应打七筒,打仔七筒,不过七八筒两张勿和,一筒到六筒一样要和。难一筒和下来,多三副掐子,廿二和加三倍,要一百七十六和哚,耐去算囗。"张小村道:"蛮准,小云打差哉。"庄荔甫也自佩服。李鸿河道:"耐吸几个人才有多花讲究,啥人高兴去算俚嗄!"说着,便历乱掳牌。

洪善卿在傍,默默寻思这副牌,觉得各人所言皆有意见,方知碰和亦非易事,不如推说不会,作门外汉为妙。为此无心再看,讪讪辞去。杨媛媛坐了一全,也自言归。

比及八圈满庄,已是两点多钟了。吴松桥、张小村皆为马桂生留下,其余三人不及再用稀饭,告别出门。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 20, 2007, 3:49:53 AM1/20/07
to
Chapter 13 of "Haishang Hua Liezhuan" written by Han Bangqing in
1892~1894:
http://fiction.workgroup.cn/Article.Aspx?t_id=5601&a_id=13

吴松桥举杯让客,周少和道:"吃仔酒晚歇勿好碰和,倒是吃饭罢。"松桥乃让赵朴斋道:"耐勿碰和,多吃两杯。"朴斋道:"我就吃两杯,耐(要勿)客气。"张小村道:"我来陪仔耐吃一杯末哉。"于是两人干杯对照。及至赵朴斋吃得有些兴头,却值李鹤汀来了,大家起身,请他上坐。李鹤汀道:"我吃过哉。耐哚四家头阿曾碰歇和?"吴松桥指赵朴斋道:"俚勿会碰,等耐来里。"

周少和连声催饭。大家忙忙吃毕,揩把面,仍往亭子里来,却见靠窗那红木方桌已移在中央,四枝膻烛点得雪亮,桌上一副乌木嵌牙麻雀牌和四分筹码,皆端正齐备。吴松桥请李鹤汀上场,同周少和、张小村拈阄坐位。金姐把各人茶碗及高装糖果放在左右茶几上。李鹤汀叫拿票头来叫局。周少和便替他写,叫的是尚仁里杨媛媛。少和问:"阿有啥人叫?"张小村说:"倪勿叫哉。"吴松桥道:"朴斋叫一个罢。"赵朴斋道:"我匆碰和末,叫啥局囗?"张小村道:"阿要我搭耐合仔点?"李鹤汀道:"合仔蛮好。"张小村道:"写末哉:西棋盘街聚秀堂陆秀宝。"周少和一并写了,交与金姐。吴松桥道:"让俚少合仔点罢,倘忙输得大仔好像难为情。"张小村道:"合仔二分末哉。"赵朴斋道:"二分要几花嗄?'调少和道:"有限得势,输到十块洋钱碰满哉。"朴斋不好再说,却坐在张小村背后看他碰了一圈庄,丝毫不懂,自去榻床躺下吸烟。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 20, 2007, 5:21:14 AM1/20/07
to
Chapter 21 of "Haishang Fanhua Meng" written by Sun Jiazhen in 1898:
http://bbs4.xilu.com/cgi-bin/bbs/view?forum=wave99&message=7041

故此阿珍的牌,愈和愈旺,后来竟和出一副索子三台的倒勒牌来,乃是中风一碰,自板
一,九索暗杠,五索一碰,等的是三索麻雀。因摸着了一只一索,把三索打去,没有人要,一个
圈子一摸,又是一只一索。和了下来算一算时,对对和,一共四百九十六和,作三百和倒勒。阿珍
只喜得眉花眼笑。这一副牌,乃是冶之的庄家,被他敲了一下。冶之摇摇头道:"怎么有这好大的
牌!"志和道:"不但牌脚好大,你看他和的乃是只一索麻雀,我这里已有了一对一索,他偏偏还
会自摸,你想这一只可算会摸得很!"阿珍道:"一索麻雀,乃是摸起了把三索掉的,刚巧一个圈
子,又摸了一只一索,成了个对对和,真是难得!"少霞道:"若然你摸不到这一索,怎么碰得出
对对和来?这多是你会摸一索的好处。"
众人闻言,一齐大笑,多说:"看不出阿珍会摸的是一索,会碰的是对对和。"少霞道:"你
们还不晓得么?他本来最会碰自摸一索的对对和!"阿珍被众人一嘲,心上已有些不甚自然,又听
少霞这样的说,不由不脸上红红儿的,向少霞连啐数口,把牌一推,假意发怒道:"人家替你正正
经经的碰和,好容易和了一副倒勒,五十块洋钱底码么二解,闲家十五,庄家三十,赢了六十块钱,
好话不说一声,倒说人家会摸的是一索,会碰的是对对和。

cymb...@free.fr

unread,
Jan 20, 2007, 5:26:16 AM1/20/07
to
Cofa Tsui a écrit :

> c) "Dubo Pian" of "Qing Bai Lei Chao" written by Xu Ke in 1911~1912:
> This excerpt contains info on the contents of the playing pieces of the
> game "ma que," what the names (of the pieces and of the game) mean, and
> approximate time it was formed.

Xu Ke (published in 1917) does not give rules. He is more interested in
the origins - money-suited card games (like 'mohu' and 'penghu'), salt
merchants of the Huai Valley around 1830 then Taipings... - and
etymology (highly fanciful) of the game than in its actual rules.

> d) Chapter 4 of "Zuijin Guanchang Mimi Shi" written by unknown in about
> 1922

> This post gives a very clear example of how scores are awarded.
> In general, all of the excerpts, if scores and payments are provided,
> indicate that there is NO settlement between non winning players.

We would be very grateful to you if you could at least summarise what
this anonymous piece ("The Officials' Latest Secret History"?) says
exactly.

> e) "Shi'e Yehua" written by Lu Shi'e in about 1936:
> http://www.cntcm.org/cgi-bin/printpage.cgi?forum=6&amp;topic=195
> This is about how the game has been evolved/modified over time.

We would very much like to know what Lu Shi'e, also the author of
Shiwei gui ("The Ten-Tailed Turtle"), 1911, says about the evolution
(history?) of the game!

Cofa


>With (d) above, I paid little more attention to excerpts that are
>close to the 1920s. I noticed that "NO settlement between non
>winning players" seems to be still the norm! This is a big contrast
>to those books in the 1920s written mainly by foreign authors,
>who seemed to have found the "CC-like" form only ("settlement
>between non winning players" is an essential feature).

Indeed, this is a reversal of common opinion. The picture we now have
from original Chinese sources tells us that there was a somewhat
standard form played in Shanghai in the first decades of the 20th
century, that did not involve settlement of score between non-winning
players. But apart from this, I don't see many differences from CC...

Did the "foreign authors" invent this feature? No. Even if we have no
100 per cent-guaranteed pure Chinese sources, it would be unreasonable
to assume Wilkinson and Mauger, not to mention many 1920's authors
(some of whom were Chinese) who were close to the Mahjong Heimat,
invented it. It really existed in China. Perhaps not in Shanghai or in
Jiangnan ("Wuyu country"), although Shanghai was the best place where
Westerners could encounter a Chinese game.

Also settlement of score between non-winning players was not unknown to
Chinese card games. For example, we find it used in the game 'sise pai'
as played in the 19th century with 'chess cards".

Cheers,
Thierry

msta...@aol.com

unread,
Jan 20, 2007, 9:40:13 AM1/20/07
to
ithinc wrote:
[snip]

> 5) Red Dragon is called "Zhong Feng"(Centre Wind). White Dragon is
> called "Bai Ban"(White Board). Green Dragon is called "Fa Feng"(Fa
> Wind).

Hello ithinc. May I too, thank you for this wealth of information. I
suspect it will give us much to ponder over for some time to come. I
have 4 questions that I hope you can answer for me?

Can you tell me the earliest mention of these tiles as "Zhong Feng" and
"Fa Feng"?

[snip]


> 8) Maque was popular at least in Beijing and Southern of Yangtse from

> 1874(光、宣年间).

Can you tell me the text from which you got this piece of information?
Also, Does the text actually say the game was called 'maque' from 1874?

> 9) There are 136 tiles and no flowers in a maque set.

Does this piece of information relate to the time from 1874?

Cheers
Michael

ithinc

unread,
Jan 20, 2007, 11:51:39 AM1/20/07
to

"msta...@aol.com 写道:

"
> ithinc wrote:
> [snip]
> > 5) Red Dragon is called "Zhong Feng"(Centre Wind). White Dragon is
> > called "Bai Ban"(White Board). Green Dragon is called "Fa Feng"(Fa
> > Wind).
>
> Hello ithinc. May I too, thank you for this wealth of information. I
> suspect it will give us much to ponder over for some time to come. I
> have 4 questions that I hope you can answer for me?

No problem. It's really too much information for us all. I'm also
reading the related books and try to find more valuable info.

>
> Can you tell me the earliest mention of these tiles as "Zhong Feng" and
> "Fa Feng"?

As I have read, "Zhong Feng" was mentioned the earliest in "Haishang
Fanhua Meng" written by Sun Jiazhen in 1898 and "Fa Feng" was mentioned
the earliest in "Fupu Xiantan" written by Ouyang Juyuan in 1903~1904.

>
> [snip]
> > 8) Maque was popular at least in Beijing and Southern of Yangtse from
> > 1874(光、宣年间).
>
> Can you tell me the text from which you got this piece of information?
> Also, Does the text actually say the game was called 'maque' from 1874?

I got this mainly from "Qing Bai Lei Chao".
"光、宣間,麻雀盛行,達乎諸侯大夫及士庶人". In the
period of Guangxu(1874~1908) and Xuantong(1908~1911), Maque was popular
in the officials and common people. 1874 was not actually mentioned but
"Maque" was.

>
> > 9) There are 136 tiles and no flowers in a maque set.
>
> Does this piece of information relate to the time from 1874?

This statement is my estimation, for in all the novels I have
read(1892~1922), I haven't found flowers tiles mentioned.

ithinc

ithinc

unread,
Jan 20, 2007, 11:57:23 AM1/20/07
to
> "msta...@aol.com 写道:

> > > 9) There are 136 tiles and no flowers in a maque set.
> >

"ithinc 写道:


> > Does this piece of information relate to the time from 1874?
> This statement is my estimation, for in all the novels I have
> read(1892~1922), I haven't found flowers tiles mentioned.

It's also mentioned in Xu Ke's "Qing Bai Lei Chao"
"凡一百三十六"(totally 136 tiles).

ithinc

ithinc

unread,
Jan 21, 2007, 6:53:09 AM1/21/07
to
Chapter 28 of "Shi Wei Gui" written by Lu Shi'e in about 1911:
http://fiction.workgroup.cn/Article.Aspx?t_id=5467&a_id=22

一会,这寡老纠合我们叉麻雀。我当时还有甚定力来抵拒,自然谨遵台命,就在他房间里搬开桌子来叉麻雀。叉的是二十块底二四小麻雀,叉到八圈结帐,我只输了三十多块,那朋友输了二十多块,姓郜的只输得十几块,都是这寡老一家赢的。临末还要我们每个人拿出三块钱头钱来。

Chapter 29 of "Shi Wei Gui" written by Lu Shi'e in about 1911:
http://fiction.workgroup.cn/Article.Aspx?t_id=5467&a_id=23

于是康小姐、王珍珠、费太太、费大小姐四个人扳庄入座,碰的乃是一百块洋钱一底的,二四麻雀。叉毕四圈,天已凑夜,周凤姑邀请众人到外边去便饭。这席菜是本厨房办的,烧得十分精致。周凤姑亲自陪席,殷勤劝酒。费太太等因为麻雀没有终局,不敢尽量,覆杯,告醉。吃毕夜饭,重行扳庄。费大小姐手色盛起来,连和几副大牌。结末庄轮到费太太,又和下一副倒勒三百和大脾。碰完结帐,费大小姐赢了一百八十五元,费太太赢了九十七元,康小姐最输,输到二百十元,王珍珠只输得七十二元。

Chapter 30 of "Shi Wei Gui" written by Lu Shi'e in about 1911:
http://fiction.workgroup.cn/Article.Aspx?t_id=5467&a_id=24

早有娘姨上来调开桌子,摆上牙牌筹码。巧宝、凤姑、小燕、咸贵四个子扳庄入座。这一回叉得大了,是一千块底么半头。起初两圈,没甚进出。第三圈挨着咸贵做庄,小燕和下副三番倒勒牌。刚刚敲一记庄,是发财一扣,北风坐着开拱,九万一扣,二万一对,五六七万一搭。接着便是凤姑做庄,又连和了两副大脾,一副是九十六和同子清一色,一副是三元格倒勒三百和。后四圈重新扳,庄张咸贵输掉了锋头,捏着很好的牌,总是和不出。就和出副巴,也不过是平和起码牌。碰完结帐,张咸贵足足输了两底半码子,输的他面孔都失色。

ithinc

unread,
Jan 21, 2007, 7:15:45 AM1/21/07
to

"ithinc 写道:
"
> "Tom Sloper wrote:
> "
> [...]

> ithinc wrote:
> > >5) Red Dragon is called "Zhong Feng"(Centre Wind). White Dragon is
> > >called "Bai Ban"(White Board). Green Dragon is called "Fa Feng"(Fa
> > >Wind).
> >
> > Also in 1908? Or just later?
> > "Fa" means "get," is that right? So "fa wind" means "get wind"?
> "Fa Feng" is mentionged in "Fupu Xiantan"(Ouyang Juyuan, 1903~1904) and
> "Jiu Weigui"(Zhang Shifan, 1906~1910). Feng is maybe a term, just
> corresponding to Honors in CMCR.

Green Dragon is called "Fa Cai" in "Shi Wei Gui"(Lu Shi'e, about 1911).
Except the three novels, I haven't found Green Dragon mentioned in
others.

msta...@aol.com

unread,
Jan 21, 2007, 9:36:27 AM1/21/07
to
ithinc wrote:
> "msta...@aol.com 写道:

> > Can you tell me the earliest mention of these tiles as "Zhong Feng" and
> > "Fa Feng"?
>
> As I have read, "Zhong Feng" was mentioned the earliest in "Haishang
> Fanhua Meng" written by Sun Jiazhen in 1898 and "Fa Feng" was mentioned
> the earliest in "Fupu Xiantan" written by Ouyang Juyuan in 1903~1904.

Hello ithinc. Very interesting. As I report in one of my articles on
earlier tile sets, 'zhong' was included in the "four points of the
compass" group. I have inferred that this is what the author would have
called them as he describes four other tiles as "rulers of the four
points of the compass". In this very early tile set there was no 'fa'
tile.

> > Can you tell me the text from which you got this piece of information?
> > Also, Does the text actually say the game was called 'maque' from 1874?
>
> I got this mainly from "Qing Bai Lei Chao".
> "光、宣間,麻雀盛行,達乎諸侯大夫及士庶人". In the
> period of Guangxu(1874~1908) and Xuantong(1908~1911), Maque was popular
> in the officials and common people. 1874 was not actually mentioned but
> "Maque" was.

Ah yes. Xu Ke. I also refer to his descriptions in one of my articles.
It is interesting to note that when he referred to the extent of the
period the game was popular, he may have had to use the name of the
game as it was called circa 1917 - cha maque - since this relevant part
of his report is about the contemporary game,including its name.

> > > 9) There are 136 tiles and no flowers in a maque set.
> >
> > Does this piece of information relate to the time from 1874?
> This statement is my estimation, for in all the novels I have
> read(1892~1922), I haven't found flowers tiles mentioned.

That is my experience. I have reported at least eight tile sets from
the period 1873 to 1909. None specifically have or mention flower
tiles, although four of them do have extra tiles. The 1st sight of
these tiles is in the Culin set of 1909, collected in Shanghai.

Cheers
Michael

Cofa Tsui

unread,
Jan 21, 2007, 1:41:01 PM1/21/07
to
cymb...@free.fr wrote:
> Cofa Tsui a écrit :
[...]

> > d) Chapter 4 of "Zuijin Guanchang Mimi Shi" written by unknown in about
> > 1922
> > This post gives a very clear example of how scores are awarded.
> > In general, all of the excerpts, if scores and payments are provided,
> > indicate that there is NO settlement between non winning players.
>
> We would be very grateful to you if you could at least summarise what
> this anonymous piece ("The Officials' Latest Secret History"?) says
> exactly.

I'll try to do that soon -:)

> > e) "Shi'e Yehua" written by Lu Shi'e in about 1936:
> > http://www.cntcm.org/cgi-bin/printpage.cgi?forum=6&amp;topic=195
> > This is about how the game has been evolved/modified over time.
>
> We would very much like to know what Lu Shi'e, also the author of
> Shiwei gui ("The Ten-Tailed Turtle"), 1911, says about the evolution
> (history?) of the game!

I'll try to do that soon -:)

> >With (d) above, I paid little more attention to excerpts that are
> >close to the 1920s. I noticed that "NO settlement between non
> >winning players" seems to be still the norm! This is a big contrast
> >to those books in the 1920s written mainly by foreign authors,
> >who seemed to have found the "CC-like" form only ("settlement
> >between non winning players" is an essential feature).
>
> Indeed, this is a reversal of common opinion. The picture we now have
> from original Chinese sources tells us that there was a somewhat
> standard form played in Shanghai in the first decades of the 20th
> century, that did not involve settlement of score between non-winning
> players. But apart from this, I don't see many differences from CC...

Sorry I don't mean to create unnecessary arguments but at this point,
i.e., with so many evidences that "CC" is not the only original form of
the game (i.e., "mahjong"), we shall not continue to place "CC" in the
centre of all games in the discussions about the older evidences of the
game. Since the "standard form played in Shanghai in the first decades
of the 20th century" can be the ancestor of various later forms, all
later forms shall be referred to this circa 1903 form as the centre of
references.

Although "CC" doesn't seem to have many differences from the circa 1903
form, its difference in score settlement is a fundamental one that
would, in my opinion, qualify an argument that it has transformed from
the older form into a newer one.

> Did the "foreign authors" invent this feature? No. Even if we have no
> 100 per cent-guaranteed pure Chinese sources, it would be unreasonable
> to assume Wilkinson and Mauger, not to mention many 1920's authors
> (some of whom were Chinese) who were close to the Mahjong Heimat,
> invented it. It really existed in China. Perhaps not in Shanghai or in
> Jiangnan ("Wuyu country"), although Shanghai was the best place where
> Westerners could encounter a Chinese game.

It is highly unlikely that this feature was invented by foreign
authors. Instead, it has two possibilities:
1) "CC-like" was evolved from the circa 1903 form. From early 1900s
through 1920s - a good time any new features could be
evolved/developed. And the descriptions of Mauger's book (1915) could
be an indication of such transition, perhaps?
2) An older form has this feature and that "older form" is yet to be
discovered.

> Also settlement of score between non-winning players was not unknown to
> Chinese card games. For example, we find it used in the game 'sise pai'
> as played in the 19th century with 'chess cards".

Sise Pai (四色牌) doesn't seem to have "settlement of score between
non-winning players," according to info on hand:

- I have mentioned this in my "History of MAHJONG" page (item "D" at
http://www.imahjong.com/maiarchives205_ori.html).

- The link to Wai Wa Huang's article on the above page is no longer
valid. I have found the current location of the article:
http://www.ofb.net/~whuang/ugcs/gp/ssp/
It says (at section "Scoring"): Generally, points are turned into
monetary units (e.g., dollars) and are paid to the winner by the loser
(the player who discarded the winning card, or, if the card was drawn,
all players pay that amount). You can also penalize false claims by
making the false claimer pay everybody.

msta...@aol.com

unread,
Jan 21, 2007, 4:23:31 PM1/21/07
to

Cofa Tsui wrote:
> > >With (d) above, I paid little more attention to excerpts that are
> > >close to the 1920s. I noticed that "NO settlement between non
> > >winning players" seems to be still the norm! This is a big contrast
> > >to those books in the 1920s written mainly by foreign authors,
> > >who seemed to have found the "CC-like" form only ("settlement
> > >between non winning players" is an essential feature).
> >
> > Indeed, this is a reversal of common opinion. The picture we now have
> > from original Chinese sources tells us that there was a somewhat
> > standard form played in Shanghai in the first decades of the 20th
> > century, that did not involve settlement of score between non-winning
> > players. But apart from this, I don't see many differences from CC...
>
> Sorry I don't mean to create unnecessary arguments but at this point,
> i.e., with so many evidences that "CC" is not the only original form of
> the game (i.e., "mahjong"), we shall not continue to place "CC" in the
> centre of all games in the discussions about the older evidences of the
> game. Since the "standard form played in Shanghai in the first decades
> of the 20th century" can be the ancestor of various later forms, all
> later forms shall be referred to this circa 1903 form as the centre of
> references.
>
> Although "CC" doesn't seem to have many differences from the circa 1903
> form, its difference in score settlement is a fundamental one that
> would, in my opinion, qualify an argument that it has transformed from
> the older form into a newer one.

Hello Cofa. 1stly, I think we would have to make sure that if any
relationship is attempted between various 'forms' then we would need to
make sure that these forms are from the same region or location and are
sufficiently close in time. This is so because of Babcock's observation
regarding the existence of a plethora of variations in different
regions of China during the period 1913 - 1923. What constituted the
differences between these to warrant them being separate variations is
still open to debate however. Would it have been possible to have
various game-plays in one region such as Shanghai for example? What
about the players mentioned in these texts bringing their own styles of
game-play from other regions of China etc?

Just some musings.

Cheers
Michael

Tom Sloper

unread,
Jan 21, 2007, 10:54:41 PM1/21/07
to
"ithinc" <ith...@sohu.com> wrote

>Two more comments:
>1) "Qing Bai Lei Chao" and "Shi'e Yihua" are not novels. "Qing Bai Lei
>Chao" is something like a cyclopaedia. "Dubo Pian" of "Qing Bai Lei
>Chao" could be found
>at:http://www.caotang.net/index_Article_Content.asp?fID_ArticleContent=5396

When I listed Qing Bai Lei Chao in the timeline (FAQ 11h), I didn't know
what to do with "Dubo Pian." The book's title, I assume, is "Qing Bai Lei
Chao" - but what is "Dubo Pian"? A chapter name or section title?

Thanks again, ithinc. By the way, I listed these discussion threads as a
source in FAQ 11 (the parent page for the other FAQ 11 pages).

Cheers,
Tom

ithinc

unread,
Jan 22, 2007, 4:27:00 AM1/22/07
to

"ithinc 写道:

In "Ren Hai Chao" written by Ping Jinya(Wang Zhusheng, 1895~1980) in
1927:
Red Dragon is called "Zhong Feng" 5 times,
Green Dragon is called "Fa Cai" 1 time,
White Dragon is called "Bai Ban" 8 times or "Bai Pi" 11 times,
In a quoted poem, the three Dragons are called "龙凤白"(Dragon
Phoenix White).

Till now, I have not seen the saying of "Hong Zhong" or "Lv Fa" in
these novels.

Cheers,
ithinc

ithinc

unread,
Jan 22, 2007, 4:34:08 AM1/22/07
to

"Tom Sloper 写道:

Yes, "DuBo Pian"(Gambling Section) is a section title. In this section,
many old games including Mohu, Penghu, Chamaque, etc, are mentioned.

cymb...@free.fr

unread,
Jan 22, 2007, 4:41:34 AM1/22/07
to
Cofa Tsui a écrit :

> It is highly unlikely that this feature was invented by foreign
> authors. Instead, it has two possibilities:
> 1) "CC-like" was evolved from the circa 1903 form. From early 1900s
> through 1920s - a good time any new features could be
> evolved/developed. And the descriptions of Mauger's book (1915) could
> be an indication of such transition, perhaps?
> 2) An older form has this feature and that "older form" is yet to be
> discovered.

OK. I agree.

> > Also settlement of score between non-winning players was not unknown to
> > Chinese card games. For example, we find it used in the game 'sise pai'
> > as played in the 19th century with 'chess cards".
>

> Sise Pai (???) doesn't seem to have "settlement of score between


> non-winning players," according to info on hand:

That's the late 20th-century form, but *in the 19th century* there was
a settlement between losers. We owe this to a description of the game
by a Dutch ethnologist, published in 1886.

The game is roughly the same as Wai Wa Huang's but with a more
complicated scoring system. Wai Wa Huang's seems to be a simplified
modern version.

Thierry

Tom Sloper

unread,
Jan 22, 2007, 11:13:10 PM1/22/07
to

"ithinc" <ith...@gmail.com> wrote

>Yes, "DuBo Pian"(Gambling Section) is a section title. In this section,
>many old games including Mohu, Penghu, Chamaque, etc, are mentioned.

OK, thanks!
Tom


Cofa Tsui

unread,
Jan 23, 2007, 3:39:08 AM1/23/07
to
ithinc wrote:
> Chapter 4 of "Zuijin Guanchang Mimi Shi" written by unknown in about
> 1922:
> http://www.oa18.com/read/classic/2006-2/12/4.htm
>

[snipped the original Chinese texts - Google cannot accept the post
with the Chinese texts]

The above link to the original texts doesn't seem to work at the time
of this writing.

The above script is about two players reviewing a winning hand of a
game event a moment ago. Let's call the players Huang (the winner) and
Wei.

1st section: Huang said: "A 9 Tan, it's just wonderful. Should you not
pung the 3 Wan, I'd not have the chance to pick this 9 Tan. Without
this 9 Tan, even if I win, it's only 9 Tan a pung, 8 hu, plus base win
10 hu, a total of 18 hu to start with doubling, eighteen, thirty six,
seventy two, one hundred forty four and that's it. Not a big deal for
the win?"

2nd section: Wei said: "Two-four structure, win as the zhuang, one
hundred forty four hu, o