82 replies to this topic

[hira]

futsu? where? can you show me an example? Never saw one.
And, was the meaning the same in both readings in MC?

[nishishei]

futsu? where? can you show me an example? Never saw one.
And, was the meaning the same in both readings in MC?

不束者 futsu-tsuka-mono (which means something like idiot)

Mandarin has two pronunciations for 不, bu and fou (used in surnames now). It is very likely that the MC pu reading is actually now Mandarin fou, the MC put/pi@t reading became bu in Mandarin, while Japanese has used the pu/fou reading (Mandarin ou rhyme becomes u in Japanese). So, Mandarin bu and Japanese fu may be just a coincidence.

The fou reading of 不 in Mandarin was originally used for what is now 否 at the end of the sentence, the original MC reading for 否 is pi, but later took on the usage of the fou reading of 不, and eventually some what should be read as pi became fou also. In Japanese 否's reading is only hi.

[phoenix_bladen]

The definition of language is an universal one. What's the point of changing it because it doesn't "suit chinese". Hey, China is not Mars, its a normal country inhabitated by humans which speak as everyone else. If you intend to distort objective facts because of a political agenda, that's different.

I see the contradiction in having a single national identity (Han) with several different languages. But well, maybe it's the identity thing that would have to be addressed. But claiming that all Han speak a single language called 漢語 is a hoax as big as claiming ethnic or genetic equality.

i totally agree with you hira..... even han ethnicity in China can be debated.....because the Han ethnicity is very diverse....we have 8 major cuisines in china and stuff....
is han 1 ethnicity or is han actually a group of different related ethnic groups sorta like in europe..... english, german, dutch are all germanic.... so cantonese, mandarin, shanghainese are all separate ethnics under a han family? hey i dunno you tell me....

and i think defining the mutual intellgebility is probably one of the main things to disguish a dialect and a language.....

[tongyan]

The fou reading of 不 in Mandarin was originally used for what is now 否 at the end of the sentence, the original MC reading for 否 is pi, but later took on the usage of the fou reading of 不, and eventually some what should be read as pi became fou also.  In Japanese 否's reading is only hi.

the fou reading of 不 can be seen in characters which use 不 as the phonetic element, as in 芣 which is pronounced fou

[qrasy]

"不 is [puʔ]"
what's 不 middle chinese pronunciation? /pu/ or /put/?  or did it have both? I mean, sino-japanese has "fu", and that's supposed to be Tang era.

No, the [puʔ] I meant was not Middle Chinese, but some dialect of 北方 方言.

Edited by qrasy, 20 June 2005 - 08:21 AM.

[qrasy]

i totally agree with you hira..... even han ethnicity in China can be debated.....because the Han ethnicity is very diverse....we have 8 major cuisines in china and stuff....
is han 1 ethnicity or is han actually a group of different related ethnic groups sorta like in europe..... english, german, dutch are all germanic.... so cantonese, mandarin, shanghainese are all separate ethnics under a han family?  hey i dunno you tell me....

and i think defining the mutual intellgebility is probably one of the main things to disguish a dialect and a language.....

I don't really know what defines Han. As far as I know, Y-gene test make Han an ethnic but it comes that nothing defines Han girl.

What do you think defines an ethnic?

[phoenix_bladen]

I don't really know what defines Han. As far as I know, Y-gene test make Han an ethnic but it comes that nothing defines Han girl.

What do you think defines an ethnic?

Yea but isn't english, german, dutch all germanic and probably have the same genes too...... of not similar....

So i think politics plays a great role when it comes to defining these terms....

[qrasy]

(from Dragadze 1980, ap. Renfrew1993: 23)
"Ethnos .. can be defined as a firm aggregate of people historically established on a given territory, possessing in common relatively stable particularites of language and culture, and also recognising their unity and difference from other similar formations (self-awareness) and expressing this in a self-appointed name (ethnonym)."

What do you think about this?

Edited by qrasy, 23 June 2005 - 04:56 AM.