Why Chinese “Society” is So Called: How Social and Managerial Discourse Caused the Choice of the Word at the Turn of the 19th and 20th Centuries

 Introduction. The purpose of this article is to investigate the reasons for the choice of the   term “shehui” to designate the concept of “society” in China at the turn of the 19th and 20th   centuries. The research novelty of the work is manifested in the complex analysis of social   and managerial discourse of that time and in the identification of factors that influenced the   terminological choice. The relevance of the study is conditioned by the necessity to   understand the processes of formation of social sciences in China, which is important for   the interpretation of modern socio-political processes in the country, including in the   context of modern sociology of management. This is especially important for Russian   sociology, since its area of interest includes the search for mutually beneficial strategies of   interaction between Russian and Chinese societies. And this is impossible without studying   China's approaches to managing the country's development processes, its internal and   external social relations.  

 Methodology and sources. The study applies a system-historical approach, as well as   discursive, terminological, etymographic and factor analysis. The paper analyzes classical   Chinese texts and works of Chinese enlighteners of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and   also uses some materials collected by modern researchers, in particular, by N.M. Kalyuzhnaya.

 Results and discussion. The main results of the study were the identification and analysis   of factors (including internal political, social, foreign policy and linguistic factors) that   determined the social and managerial discourse of the period under study and the choice   in favor of “shehui” among the main terms competing for the right to designate the concept   of “society”. Author pointed out that the process of formation of social and managerial   discourse was in line with the gradual decline in the influence of traditionalism and   strengthening of the ideas of anti-monarchism, people's power and self-government.

  Conclusion. Author emphasized that the term “shehui” became one of the key terms in the   social and managerial discourse of China at the turn of the century, reflecting global socio[1]political trends. The choice of this term is the result of a complex interaction of various   factors in the formation of discursive practices, which themselves were further modified   under the influence of the term and its derivatives. 

1. Kalyuzhnaya, N.M. (2002), Problemy sotsiologii v trudakh kitaiskikh prosvetitelei (nachalo XX veka) [Sociology’s Problems in the Works of Chinese Enlighteners (The Early 20th Century)], Institut Vostokovedeniya RAN, Moscow, RUS.

2. “Society” (2010), The Great Chinese Dictionary, Sichuan Cishu Chubanshe, Chengdu, CHN, pp. 3134–3135.

3. “Society” (1982), Ci Yuan, rev. ed., Shangwu Yinshuguan, Hong Kong, CHN, p. 2263.

4. Feoktistov, V.F. (1976), Filosofskie i obshchestvenno-politicheskie vzglyady Syun'-tszy: issledovanie i perevod [Philosophical and Socio-Political Views of Xunzi: Research and Translation], Nauka, Moscow, USSR.

5. Klassicheskoe konfutsianstvo: v 2-kh t. T. II. Men'-czy. Syun'-czy [Classical Confucianism, in 2 vol., vol. II. Mencius. Xunzi] (2000), Transl. by Zograf, I.T., ID “Neva”, OLMA-PRESS, SPb., Moscow, RUS.

6. Jin, Guantao (2010), Guannian shi yanjiu: Zhongguo xiandai zhongyao zhengzhi shuyu de xingcheng [Research on the History of Concepts: The Formation of Important Modern Chinese Political Terms], Falyu Chubanshe, Beijing, CHN.

7. Liang, Qichao (1989), Yinbingshi wenji zhi er. Di er ce [Collected Works of Liang Qichao], vol. 2, Zhonghua Shuju, Beijing, CHN.

8. Ou, Jujia (1898), “On the Fact that All Changes in the Different Countries are Initiated by the People”, Shi Tiao Bao Newspaper, no. 50, January 3, 1898.

9. Pang, Dawei (2009), “To the History of Sociology in China”, Sociological Studies, no. 4, pp. 130–136.

10. Liu, Xu et al. (ed.) (1975), Tang Jiu Shu [Old Book of Tang], Zhonghua Shuju, Beijing, CHN.

11. Cheng, Yi (1997), “The Life of Master of Bright Path”, Jinsi Lu, vol. 9, Jinfeng Chuban Youxian Gongsi, Taipei, TWN.

12. Yang, Jialuo (ed.) (1964), Song Hui yao Ji ben [Summary of the Most Important Events of the Song Dynasty], Shijie Shuju, Taipei, CHN.

13. Veselova, L.S., Deriugin, P.P. and Lebedintseva, L.A. (2018), “Vectors of Chinese Sociology Becoming: Pragmatic Orientation and Maintaining of Tradition”, Sociological Studies, no. 7 (411), pp. 124–134. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250000169-8.

14. “Questions and Answers” (1902), Xin Min Cong Bao, no. 11, July 5, p. 2.

15. Zhang, Taiyan (2010), “Refuting Kang Youwei’s Theory of Revolution”, Hundred Literary Treasures of the Sea, Shanghai Wenyi Chubanshe, Shanghai, CHN.

16. Zhang, Taiyan (2015), “On the State”, Library of Modern Chinese Thinkers, Renmin Daxue Chubanshe, Beijing, CHN.

17. Zhang, Taiyan (1985), “On The Establishment of Religion”, Collected Works of Zhang Taiyan, vol. 4, Shanghai Renmin Chubanshe, Shanghai, CHN.

18. Liang, Qichao (1896), “General Discussion on Reform”, Shi Wu Bao, August.

19. Kremnyov, E.V. (2012), “Some aspects of evolution of the term “Sociology” (“社会学”) in China”, Vestnik Irkutskogo Gosudarstvennogo Lingvisticheskogo Universiteta, no. 4, pp. 74–78.