Critical edition and commentary on the Gōngsūnlóngzǐ by Chén Zhù, completed in the early 1930s and published in 1937. Drawing together the accumulated results of Qīng philology and early Republican scholarship, it collates textual variants, reviews earlier interpretations and provides substantial historical and philosophical commentary. Rather than advancing a radically new interpretation, it established a reliable scholarly foundation for the modern study of Gōngsūn Lóng and the School of Names.

 A lost seventeenth-century work by Chéng Zhì that attempted to develop the philosophy of Gōngsūn Lóng into a systematic body of thought. According to Quán Zǔwàng, Chéng took the Gōngsūnlóngzǐ as his principal authority and organised his account under sixteen headings, while also interpreting it through ideas drawn from Buddhism and Daoism. Only a brief summary and fragments quoted by Quán survive. The work is important less for any recoverable logical theory than as evidence of an otherwise easily overlooked episode in the reception and creative reconstruction of the School of Names.

‘explaining graphs and analysing characters’, a dictionary compiled by Xǔ Shèn in the Later Hàn dynasty, traditionally regarded as China’s first systematic dictionary. Organised according to graphic radicals, it became foundational for Chinese philology and historical lexicography. Modern scholarship commonly consults Duàn Yùcái’s influential commentary Shuōwén jiězì zhù. It is often used in the interpretation of difficult vocabulary in the Mòjīng and related pre-imperial texts

(1603–1651) was a late-Míng and early-Qīng thinker whose philosophy combined study of the Yìjīng with elements drawn from Confucian, Buddhist and Daoist thought. Of particular importance to the history of Chinese logical thought was his lost Shǒubáilùn, which took Gōngsūn Lóng as its principal authority and developed his doctrines into a scheme of sixteen topics. The work is now known chiefly through Quán Zǔwàng’s summary and quotations. Although too little survives for its arguments to be reconstructed confidently, it is remarkable evidence that Gōngsūn Lóng’s thought could still serve as the basis of an ambitious and apparently systematic philosophical project in the seventeenth century.

 (1889 - 1961), scholar from modern China, coauthored the Zhōngguó Sīxiǎng Tōngshǐ, which discussed the development of pre-Qín logic.

(1895–1957) Chinese scholar whose Mòjīng de luójí chūbù yánjiū (1957) was one of the earliest systematic studies of Mohist logic after the Republican revival of interest in the Mòjīng. Rather than concentrating primarily on textual recovery or broad historical interpretation, Luán examined the forms of reasoning employed by the Mohists, particularly inference and argument. His work helped bridge the transition from the historical and comparative studies of Liáng Qǐchāo, Hú Shì, Wǔ Fēibǎi, and Tán Jièfǔ to the more comprehensive logical reconstructions of Shěn Yǒudǐng.

(1730–1797) Qīng scholar and official whose Mòzǐ zhù (1784) marks the beginning of the modern philological study of the Mòzǐ. Drawing on evidential scholarship and textual criticism, he was among the first scholars to confront the structural problems posed by the Mòjīng, including the relationship between the canons and their explanations. His arrangement of portions of the text in parallel rows (pángháng) anticipated later attempts to reconstruct the organisation of the Mòjīng and influenced subsequent scholars such as Sūn Yíràng.

‘Disputants’ or ‘debaters’, figures known for skill in disputation and paradoxical argument. Later sources often associate them with the míngjiā and with the suspicion of sophistry.

‘The study of disputation’ or ‘argumentation studies’. A modern term emphasising techniques and theories of argument rather than naming or classification. Republican-period scholars often used it when comparing Chinese traditions with Western logic and Indian yinming. Compared with míngbiàn, it places greater emphasis on debate and reasoning; compared with míngxué, it excludes many broader discussions of names, realities, and knowledge. In the early twentieth century the boundaries between these terms were fluid, and individual scholars often used them differently.

Qīng scholar active in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and author of Mòzǐ jiān (1906). Although little is known about his life, surviving evidence suggests that he was active in scholarly and publishing circles associated with the late-Qīng revival of interest in classical learning. His commentary belongs to the first generation of Mohist scholarship following Sūn Yíràng’s reconstruction of the Mòzǐ and forms part of the transition from Qīng philology to twentieth-century studies of Mohist logic. 

Chinese logician whose studies of Mohist logic helped consolidate the modern interpretation of the Mòjīng after the pioneering work of Shěn Yǒudǐng. His Mòbiàn luójíxué (1979) and Mòbiàn luójíxué xīntàn (1996) present the logical doctrines of the Mòjīng in a clear, systematic, and pedagogically accessible form, drawing together earlier textual and logical research into a coherent exposition. These works became standard introductions to Mohist logic and influenced a generation of later Chinese scholars, including Yáng Wǔjīn.