国立情報学研究所 - ディジタル・シルクロード・プロジェクト
『東洋文庫所蔵』貴重書デジタルアーカイブ

Portulaca oleracea, in Chinese is 馬 齒 莧 ma-ch'ih-hsien, lit. « horse-teeth amaranth »; another ancient designation is ma-ch'ih [龍 牙] lung-ya, « horse-teeth and dragon sprouts », the second part being perhaps for 龍 牙 lung-ya, « dragon teeth », which is in fact given by TARANZANO; another name, for a species with smaller leaves, is 鼠 齒莧 shu-ch'ih-hsien, lit. « rat-teeth amaranth » (cf. Pên-ts'ao kang-mu, 27, 12 b; STUART, Materia Medica, 347). These names are said to have been given on account of the way in which the leaves are ranged on the stalk, but, whatever the case may be, there is something in the purslane which reminded the Chinese of the teeth of certain animals; and we know that one of the best attested ancient names of the cowry in Chinese was pei-ch'ih, « shell teeth » (see « Cowry »). On the other hand, I cannot but be struck by the extraordinary coincidence which, independently of any European influence (hardly possible moreover in view of the mediaeval scholarship it would have required), occurs in the Siamese name of the « purslane » : this is phâk blâ, « cowry vegetable », in other words porcellana (cf. PALLEGOIS, Dictionarium linguae Thai, 54). I wonder whether some analogous comparison did not help in the corruption which altered a derived form of porcilaca, « purslane », and made it coincide with porcellana, « cowry ».

318. PULISANGHIN

palisangin V pulisangan R pulisangîm FAt
poluisanguis VL pulisanghin Ft, FBr, t pulisanglinz VA
pulinçanghim LT pulisanghine (?) L pulisangra FAr
pulinzachi TA³ pulisanghinz FB pulisangriz P
pulinzanchiz TA¹ pulisanghinz F pulisanguins FA
pulinzanghym LTr pulisanghyn Z pullicanzino VB
pulisanchi Fr

The question has long been debated whether we should take this name for the Persian Pul-i-sängin, « Stone Bridge », or as a Sino-Persian Pul-i-Sangin, « Bridge of the Sang-kan », 桑 乾 Sang-kan being then commonly used as a name of the 渾 河 Hun-ho (cf. Y, II, 5-8; « Hwan-ho » and « Lu-ku-k'iao » are bad transcriptions for « Hun-ho » and « Lu-kou-ch'iao »). Polo certainly gives the name which was known to Persian-speaking people, and he may not have had himself a clear idea about what it really meant. But if we remember that Rašidu-'d-Din speaks of the Sang-kan river, and calls it آب سکن Āb-i-Sangin, « Sangin river » (Bl, II, 463), the balance of evidence will be in favour of Pul-i-Sangin, « Bridge of the Sang-kan ». Moreover, Polo gives as the name of a river what is really the name of a bridge, and his error would be more serious if the name meant only « Stone Bridge ». It is possible however that the name, originally derived from that of the Sang-kan river, was given in Persian-speaking circles the easy popular etymology of Pul-i-sängin, « Stone Bridge ».