Although both ancient and modern Chinese are mostly written with the same characters, the modern daughter languages have become very different from the ancient one.
Although both ancient and modern Chinese are mostly written with the same characters, the modern daughter languages have become very different from the ancient one. One of the most conspicious differences is just that the terse, monosyllabic nature of Classical Chinese --"old writing," or"literary language" -- has shun wai essay writer way to many more particles, polysyllabic words, and periphrastic idioms.
The following story, given in both Classical Chinese and a translation into modern Mandarin-- or the"colloquial speech, vernacular" -- illustrates the difference. This is also a salutary example for one's view of government, as Confucius indeed makes clear to his students [I am unaware of the provenance of this text].
The modern Mandarin pronunciation is given for the Classical characters because the ancient pronuncation, indeed the pronunciation before the T'ang Dynasty, is unknown. Even that of the T'ang is reconstructed and uncertain.
The extreme simplification of Mandarin phonology, which would render the Classical language ambiguous if used as a spoken language today too many words now being pronounced the sameexplains the polysyllablic character of the modern language and the reduction of many characters to morphemes.
The same Classical text that can today be read as Mandarin could as well be read with Korean, Vietnamese, or Japanese versions of the Chinese words, or the Korean, Vietnamese, or Japanese translations of the words.
None of those languages is even related to Chinese, but since mediaeval, or even modern, Koreans, Vietnamese, and Japanese often wrote in Chinese, without, however, really speaking the language, their own renderings of the characters was customary.
Since the ancient pronunciation of the Classical language is unknown, Sino-Korean, Sino-Vietnamese, and Sino-Japanese reading are really just as "authentic" for Classical Chinese as a Modern Mandarin reading. Indeed, much of our evidence for the T'ang pronuncation of Chinese is from the Korean, Vietnamese, and Japanese readings, which were contemporary borrowings.
For example, the character for "mountain," now read shan in Mandarin, turns up as san in Korean, in Vietnamese as so. The Cantonese word is, of course, cognate to the Mandarin.
The Korean, Vietnamese, and Japanese are all borrowings from Chinese, pronounced in the local manner. Native words for "sun" are hae in Korean, ma. The Japanese borrowed word for "sun" in isolation is nichi, but this is just the pronunciation of niti, where the final i as been added because Japanese syllables cannot end in t.
At that point different things can happen. The t can be lost in assimilation to the h, getting us Nihon, OR the h can revert to its original p, with the t getting assimilated and doubled with it, getting us Nippon.
Another example concerns the present capital of Japan. The Vietnamese version preserves more of the Chinese consonants, but both Japanese and Vietnamese versions reveal that "capital" originally started with a k, which has become palatalized to a j in Mandarin.
The k is also preserved in early modern Western versions of Chinese names, like "Nanking" and "Peking" themselves -- whose use the politically correct now have rejected because of the idea that they are "wrong" and that the local pronunciation of place names must be used -- despite such people generally being unable to correctly pronounce Nanjing or Beijing and thoughtlessly continuing to say "Rome" instead of Roma, which has been the local pronunciation of the name of that city in Italian and Latin for more than two thousand years.
Chinese departments in colleges sometimes expect students to learn Mandarin even though they only want to read Classical Chinese or Sino-Korean, Sino-Vietnamese, or Sino-Japanese. This imposes a vast unnecessary burden on them, but even some teachers and scholars of Chinese sometimes have trouble accepting that the ancient language is not the modern one and that the ancient language is part of the civilization of Korea, Vietnam, and Japan as much as of modern China.
It is as though students of Latin were told they would have to learn Italian as well, even if they were Spanish or French. The curious idea that something like Mandarin was already an ancient spoken language and that Classical Chinese is some sort of abbreviation or code derived from it can be found in various sources.
For instance, Joanna C.
Lee and Ken Smith, in their translations from the Analectsassert: First of all, Confucius almost certainly didn't "say" these things, since written Chinese is scarcely a direct transcript of spoken language but a fundamentally different system with its own inner logic and grammatical structure.
Indeed, I have heard people say that Classical Latin could never have been a spoken language, because it is too difficult. This should give Russian, let alone Georgianspeakers a good laugh. Now, Classical languages undergo their own development over time and diverge from their oral sources.
But when this happens, we usually have texts attesting the original language and can follow the changes. Thus, Classical Sanskrit can be distinguished from Vedic Sanskrit, which has more in common with Old Persian and thus was certainly the original spoken language, although we cannot rule out some garbling in transmission, since documentary sources are late.
Mediaeval Latin slowly evolved from Classical Latin, but the preservation of the older literature, like Cicero, made it possible to write a "purified" Latin prose during the Renaissance.Download-Theses Mercredi 10 juin Jango is about making online music social, fun and simple.
Free personal radio that learns from your taste and connects you to others who like what you like. is and in to a was not you i of it the be he his but for are this that by on at they with which she or from had we will have an what been one if would who has her.
When they are tied to a protein, glycosaminoglycans yield proteo-glycans. Because surgicalresection is the at best curative modality exchange for pancreatic cancer and because only % to %of patients contribution with resectable contagion, the diagnosis, point, and running are basedon resectability.
Yin & Yáng and the I Ching. In India the theory of the three elements in the Chândogya Upanishad led to the theory of the three forces, the torosgazete.com, and to the later theory of five torosgazete.com China, the theory of five elements coexisted early with the theory of two forces: torosgazete.com can also simply be called the "two forces," (where ch'i,, is the "breath" or vital energy of the body, but.
About “Bleak Night” you are so correct. Why don’t more people talk about this film?
It’s genuinely a masterpiece. The tone, the acting, the directing, every beat, its truth, all superb.