Abstract

Volume 7 of Joseph Needham’s Science and Civilisation in China (SCC) gives the issue of Chinese language in scientific practice pride of place. Its arguments are mainly devised to oppose views, put forward by Marcel Granet in 1920 and then by Derk Bodde in the 1970s, to the effect that the Chinese script (for Granet) or “literary Chinese” (for Bodde) impeded the development of science. The essay outlines the way in which Christoph Harbsmeier, in Part 1 of Volume 7, and then Needham and Kenneth Robinson, in Part 2, expose the fallacies of these views. It suggests that Needham and Robinson’s rebuttals to Bodde’s position, innovative though they might be, share essential features with the latter’s theses. In particular, they all view the Chinese language primarily from the viewpoint of its function of communicating knowledge. The essay argues that Chinese-writing communities of practitioners of mathematics constantly shaped technical languages that drew on but also added to the resources of the Chinese language available to them to pursue their goals. The technical languages thereby shaped were not simply a means of communication with fellow-practitioners; they were also a tool of work. In conclusion, the essay argues that a language and the work done with this language are co-constructed.