<p>Let us look at the reconstructions (specifically, at Baxter-Sagart):</p>
<ul>
<li>吏 (lì) 'officer' is <strong>[r]əʔ-s</strong>;</li>
<li>史 (shǐ) 'scribe' is <strong>s-rəʔ</strong>;</li>
<li>使 (shǐ) 'to send, to cause' is <strong>s-rəʔ</strong>;</li>
<li>使 (shì) 'to be sent as an envoy; envoy' is <strong>s-rəʔ-s</strong>.</li>
</ul>
<p>I will append also the probably basic etymon, even though it is written with an unrelated character:</p>
<ul>
<li>理 (lǐ) 'envoy' is <strong>m(ə).rəʔ</strong> (or probably just <strong>rəʔ</strong> for this word).</li>
</ul>
<p>The relation between all the words is clear:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>we have a basic root <strong>rəʔ</strong> 'to serve' (which, per Schuessler, is the same as 理 'to regulate, to administer'; Baxter-Sagart p. 144),</p>
</li>
<li><p>from which we get 吏 'officer' <strong>rəʔ-s</strong> with the ordinary
nominalizing suffix <strong>-s</strong>,</p>
</li>
<li><p>with the valency-increasing prefix <strong>s-</strong> we move to 使 'to send, to
cause' <strong>s-rəʔ</strong>,</p>
</li>
<li><p>and finally nominalize the latter as 使 'envoy' <strong>s-rəʔ-s</strong> ('one who
is sent').</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>(The verbal meaning for 使 'to be sent as an envoy' <strong>s-rəʔ-s</strong> seems to be a later development when the Old Chinese morphology alrealy broke up at it became possible to just fluidly change parts of speech, per Schuessler p. 350; same for 史 'scribe' <strong>s-rəʔ</strong>, which looks like a direct change of parts of speech from 使 'to send, to cause, to employ' <strong>s-rəʔ</strong>).</p>
<p>From these on, the current pronunciations are all directly derivable. Thus, 吏 actually <em>maintains</em> the original consonant the best of all; all the rest in the group use the valency-inclreasing <strong>s-</strong> prefix and thus obtain the initial <strong>s-r-</strong> cluster, which is quite expectedly simplified to a retroflex version of [s], that is, [ʂ].</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-10-02T09:17:02.003Z
2022-10-02T09:17:02.003Z
Alexander Z.
<p>I'm entirely unqualified to talk about phonology, but from I can tell, 吏, 史 and 事 all evolved from the same character, thus probably share the similar pronounciation in ancient times. 吏's entirely different pronounciation is likely a result of <a href="https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%A8%93%E8%AE%80" rel="nofollow noreferrer">训读</a>, where the pronouciation and the glyph of a character mismatch. Nowadays 训读 usually refers to this phenonmenon in Japanese, but it did happen in Chinese as well. Also see <a href="https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%96%87%E7%99%BD%E5%BC%82%E8%AF%BB" rel="nofollow noreferrer">文白异读</a>（<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literary_and_colloquial_readings_of_Chinese_characters" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Literary and colloquial readings</a>）</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-10-05T04:31:28.987Z
a related explanation:  The characters 史 (history), 吏 (government official), 使 (cause; use; instruct), and 事 (matter; work; affair) are all etymologically related and all derive from the same ancient character, depicting a hand (又) holding a container for writing utensils. 事 and 史 were originally written the same, but later an extra mark was added to distinguish them. (https://www.dong-chinese.com/wiki/%E4%BA%8B)
envs_h_gang_5
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-10-02T05:18:52.457Z
2022-10-02T05:18:52.457Z
EEQ
<p>Words that look similar do not always share the same origin or phonic element.</p>
<p>e.g.</p>
<p>人 and 入; 全 and 金; 赤 and 亦</p>
<p>木，林， and 森 all sound different from each other</p>
<p>Sometimes, two different parts from two different characters would evolve into the same form</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-10-02T01:14:59.503Z
2022-10-02T01:14:59.503Z
Tang Ho
<p>The pronunciation of 吏 (lì) is frustratingly hard to remember since it's different to two similar-looking characters 史 (shǐ) and 使 (shǐ).  Sometimes learning the etymology, and the reason why a character is pronounced a certain way, can make it easier to remember how to pronounce.  Googling gave me <a href="http://qiyuan.chaziwang.com/etymology-9848.html" rel="noreferrer">this</a>, but I didn't immediately find anything about pronunciation.</p>
<p><strong>Question</strong>: Why is 吏 (lì) pronounced differently to 史 (shǐ) and 使 (shǐ)?</p>

<characters><etymology><pronunciation>
Why is 吏 (lì) pronounced differently to 史 (shǐ) and 使 (shǐ)?
# Why is 吏 (lì) pronounced differently to 史 (shǐ) and 使 (shǐ)?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-10-02)

The pronunciation of 吏 (lì) is frustratingly hard to remember since it's different to two similar-looking characters 史 (shǐ) and 使 (shǐ). Sometimes learning the etymology, and the reason why a character is pronounced a certain way, can make it easier to remember how to pronounce. Googling gave me [this](http://qiyuan.chaziwang.com/etymology-9848.html), but I didn't immediately find anything about pronunciation.

**Question**: Why is 吏 (lì) pronounced differently to 史 (shǐ) and 使 (shǐ)?

**Tags:** characters, etymology, pronunciation

---

## 3 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2022-10-02. Score: 13

Let us look at the reconstructions (specifically, at Baxter-Sagart):

* 吏 (lì) 'officer' is **[r]əʔ-s**;
* 史 (shǐ) 'scribe' is **s-rəʔ**;
* 使 (shǐ) 'to send, to cause' is **s-rəʔ**;
* 使 (shì) 'to be sent as an envoy; envoy' is **s-rəʔ-s**.

I will append also the probably basic etymon, even though it is written with an unrelated character:

* 理 (lǐ) 'envoy' is **m(ə).rəʔ** (or probably just **rəʔ** for this word).

The relation between all the words is clear:

1. we have a basic root **rəʔ** 'to serve' (which, per Schuessler, is the same as 理 'to regulate, to administer'; Baxter-Sagart p. 144),
2. from which we get 吏 'officer' **rəʔ-s** with the ordinary
   nominalizing suffix **-s**,
3. with the valency-increasing prefix **s-** we move to 使 'to send, to
   cause' **s-rəʔ**,
4. and finally nominalize the latter as 使 'envoy' **s-rəʔ-s** ('one who
   is sent').

(The verbal meaning for 使 'to be sent as an envoy' **s-rəʔ-s** seems to be a later development when the Old Chinese morphology alrealy broke up at it became possible to just fluidly change parts of speech, per Schuessler p. 350; same for 史 'scribe' **s-rəʔ**, which looks like a direct change of parts of speech from 使 'to send, to cause, to employ' **s-rəʔ**).

From these on, the current pronunciations are all directly derivable. Thus, 吏 actually *maintains* the original consonant the best of all; all the rest in the group use the valency-inclreasing **s-** prefix and thus obtain the initial **s-r-** cluster, which is quite expectedly simplified to a retroflex version of [s], that is, [ʂ].


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2022-10-02. Score: 2

I'm entirely unqualified to talk about phonology, but from I can tell, 吏, 史 and 事 all evolved from the same character, thus probably share the similar pronounciation in ancient times. 吏's entirely different pronounciation is likely a result of [训读](https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%A8%93%E8%AE%80), where the pronouciation and the glyph of a character mismatch. Nowadays 训读 usually refers to this phenonmenon in Japanese, but it did happen in Chinese as well. Also see [文白异读](https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%96%87%E7%99%BD%E5%BC%82%E8%AF%BB)（[Literary and colloquial readings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literary_and_colloquial_readings_of_Chinese_characters)）

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: a related explanation:  The characters 史 (history), 吏 (government official), 使 (cause; use; instruct), and 事 (matter; work; affair) are all etymologically related and all derive from the same ancient character, depicting a hand (又) holding a container for writing utensils. 事 and 史 were originally written the same, but later an extra mark was added to distinguish them. (https://www.dong-chinese.com/wiki/%E4%BA%8B)  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2022-10-02. Score: 1

Words that look similar do not always share the same origin or phonic element.

e.g.

人 and 入; 全 and 金; 赤 and 亦

木，林， and 森 all sound different from each other

Sometimes, two different parts from two different characters would evolve into the same form


---

