<p>Tl;dr: see points 1. and 6.</p>
<ol>
<li><p><strong>The <em>explanation</em> of function words (虛詞) is already difficult (see point 2.), let alone their <em>etymology</em></strong> (history of grammaticalisation, i.e., how they evolved from words of content (實詞) to words that have grammatical function but little semantical significance; in this case, a preposition).</p>
</li>
<li><p>Historical annotations for function words were often noted to be inaccurate, even far-fetched (穿鑿附會).<sup>1</sup> (Wonderful examples in the source, but I don't intend to list them here out of irrelevance to your question.)</p>
</li>
<li><p>Of course, in terms of etymology, there are fairly logical ones like <code>在</code> (it has the semantic component <code>土</code> which confers a sense of physical existence or presence, see <a href="https://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-mf/search.php?word=%E5%9C%A8" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>). But we don't expect a simple answer for <code>于</code>: even its etymology as a content word – i.e., a wind instrument or the act of exhalation – is controversial, as you have duly mentioned.</p>
</li>
<li><p>One writes <code>由於</code> instead of <code>由于</code> in traditional Chinese. This further complicates your problem; how do we account for the fact that <code>於</code> is a pictogram of a bird (see <a href="https://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-mf/search.php?word=%E6%96%BC" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>), and how do we explain <code>於/于</code> equivalence in modern Chinese? Phonetic loan is most likely, but still, there are people who consider <code>於/于</code> to be semantically distinct.<sup>2</sup></p>
</li>
<li><p>For the reasons above, my sincere advice is that you abandon the etymological route of memorisation for function words and memorise them as-is through exposure.</p>
</li>
<li><p>In classical Chinese, <code>於</code> already possesses the meaning <code>由於</code> ('due to'):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>業精<strong>於</strong>勤，荒<strong>於</strong>嬉。韓愈《進學解》</p>
<p>Progress in studies <em>comes from</em> diligence and is retarded <em>by</em> indolence.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The addition of <code>由</code> ('from'; see <code>由來</code>, <code>緣由</code>) is a way of limiting the polysemy of <code>於</code>. When A emerges 'from' B, you establish causality between the two.</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>References</strong></p>
<p><sup>1</sup> 尹黎雲（1989）〈文言虛詞訓詁十弊〉辭書研究，4，69–77。</p>
<p><sup>2</sup> 楊世鐵（2015）〈從“于 / 於”用法上的變化看複合詞“於是”的產生〉中國語文通訊，94(1)，27–43。 <a href="http://www.cuhk.edu.hk/ics/clrc/crcl_94_1/yang.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.cuhk.edu.hk/ics/clrc/crcl_94_1/yang.pdf</a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-11T09:27:11.910Z
2021-04-11T09:37:28.073Z
2021-04-11T09:37:28.073Z
L Parker
<p>Two possibilities for the object of representation 于 are:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Pictogram (象形). An ancient wind instrument; early form of 竽 (OC *ɢʷa). This view is supported by mainstream palaeography.</p>
</li>
<li><p>Exhaled air; early form of 吁 (OC *qʰʷa, *ɢʷas, “to sigh”). Shuowen considers it to be an ideogrammic compound (會意): 一 (“flat stream of air”) + 丂 (“to exhale”). Compare 乎, 兮, 号.</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>I tried to google 竽, but could not find the ancient wind instrument. could you please link to this instrument they are referring to? In this case how is the meaning transformed to “in, on, at, go to”?</p>
<p>I was searching for 由于 yóuyú 'due to'. 由 'reason' + 于 'go to'?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-11T02:31:25.277Z
“竽” has a wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yu_(wind_instrument)
水巷孑蠻
<meaning><etymology>
Etymology of 于 and transformation to in, on, at, go to
# Etymology of 于 and transformation to in, on, at, go to

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-04-11)

Two possibilities for the object of representation 于 are:

1. Pictogram (象形). An ancient wind instrument; early form of 竽 (OC \*ɢʷa). This view is supported by mainstream palaeography.
2. Exhaled air; early form of 吁 (OC \*qʰʷa, \*ɢʷas, “to sigh”). Shuowen considers it to be an ideogrammic compound (會意): 一 (“flat stream of air”) + 丂 (“to exhale”). Compare 乎, 兮, 号.

I tried to google 竽, but could not find the ancient wind instrument. could you please link to this instrument they are referring to? In this case how is the meaning transformed to “in, on, at, go to”?

I was searching for 由于 yóuyú 'due to'. 由 'reason' + 于 'go to'?

**Tags:** meaning, etymology

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: “竽” has a wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yu_(wind_instrument)  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2021-04-11. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

Tl;dr: see points 1. and 6.

1. **The *explanation* of function words (虛詞) is already difficult (see point 2.), let alone their *etymology*** (history of grammaticalisation, i.e., how they evolved from words of content (實詞) to words that have grammatical function but little semantical significance; in this case, a preposition).
2. Historical annotations for function words were often noted to be inaccurate, even far-fetched (穿鑿附會).1 (Wonderful examples in the source, but I don't intend to list them here out of irrelevance to your question.)
3. Of course, in terms of etymology, there are fairly logical ones like `在` (it has the semantic component `土` which confers a sense of physical existence or presence, see [here](https://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-mf/search.php?word=%E5%9C%A8)). But we don't expect a simple answer for `于`: even its etymology as a content word – i.e., a wind instrument or the act of exhalation – is controversial, as you have duly mentioned.
4. One writes `由於` instead of `由于` in traditional Chinese. This further complicates your problem; how do we account for the fact that `於` is a pictogram of a bird (see [here](https://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/lexi-mf/search.php?word=%E6%96%BC)), and how do we explain `於/于` equivalence in modern Chinese? Phonetic loan is most likely, but still, there are people who consider `於/于` to be semantically distinct.2
5. For the reasons above, my sincere advice is that you abandon the etymological route of memorisation for function words and memorise them as-is through exposure.
6. In classical Chinese, `於` already possesses the meaning `由於` ('due to'):

   > 業精**於**勤，荒**於**嬉。韓愈《進學解》
   >
   > Progress in studies *comes from* diligence and is retarded *by* indolence.

   The addition of `由` ('from'; see `由來`, `緣由`) is a way of limiting the polysemy of `於`. When A emerges 'from' B, you establish causality between the two.

**References**

1 尹黎雲（1989）〈文言虛詞訓詁十弊〉辭書研究，4，69–77。

2 楊世鐵（2015）〈從“于 / 於”用法上的變化看複合詞“於是”的產生〉中國語文通訊，94(1)，27–43。 <http://www.cuhk.edu.hk/ics/clrc/crcl_94_1/yang.pdf>


---

