@Wang Weifang: “…现在,又要拿语法开刀。悲哉,悲哉!”
Amen!
A word (character) always has an original meaning. Then, it can have some acquired usages, slightly or greatly different from the original meaning. We must know these two and their differences.
For 的, its original meaning is “target”, such as, 眾矢之的 or 標的. From here, it acquired the usage to express the possessive case (我的, 你的).
For 地, it is 土 (earth) +也 (also). So, 地 is also earth, but not ‘earth as soil’. Thus, 地 points to the concept of ‘land’. 目的地, the destination is also a 的 (target). Thus, 地 was borrowed (假借) in some case to sit at 的 ‘s place.
The current use of 的 as the adjective possessive and 地 as adverb possessive is a very recent development. As language is a living force, this new usage is of course okay. But, linguistically, every place uses 地 can always be replaced with 的, as it is the original word while 地 is only a borrowed word.
“又要拿语法开刀”, this is a great understatement. Chinese grammar was already killed after the May 4th movement. A book “‘西廂記’: 漢語 ‘文法’ 大全 (
chinese-idioms/topic-t2059.html )” can give you some details on this.
@Wang Weifang & Glenda GAO:
Chinese grammar is a very big subject.
Before the May 4th movement, the Chinese language had reached the zenith height in the writings, without ever discussing the English-type grammar. That is, there is a Chinese grammar of its own. Yet, after the May 4th movement, the Chinese grammar was squeezed into the English-like grammar structure, and no one knows the true Chinese grammar anymore today.
Yet, discussing Chinese grammar in theory is not easily understood by even the native Chinese now. Thus, I have used ‘西廂記’ as the source of examples to describe the Chinese sentence ‘structure’, for two reasons.
First, it almost encompasses all types of Chinese sentences (它卻幾乎包含了 ‘漢文’ 的全部文體)。
對白 --- 白話體
詩 --- 律體
文言 --- 散體
詞 --- 詞是從詩律中, 解放出來的。不受字數限制。但仍講究音韻。
曲 ---譜成‘曲調’ 的詞
Second, it is a very short novel which has only about 50,000 words (‘西廂’ 是一本很有趣的愛情故事。篇幅也很短, 約僅五萬字) which is only about 1/20 of the length of ‘紅樓夢’ 。 That is, students can easily read it over and over.
Yet, this new book “‘西廂記’: 漢語 ‘文法’ 大全 (Chinese Grammar)” teaches ‘Chinese grammar’ to those who must already be able to read the current Chinese newspaper, as this great classic novel ‘西廂記’ is used as the example material for analyzing the Chinese sentences. I have made the entire boob of ‘西廂記’ available in this book. I also made some glossary explanations (註解) which help the reader to read the novel easier.
The earlier version of the book is available at
chinese-idioms/topic-t2059.html . Now, the pdf file of this book is available for the readers of this blog (free of charge, valued at $80), as a token of appreciation for everyone’s devotion of learning or teaching Chinese language, and it can be downloaded at
http://www.chinese-word-roots.org/Chinese_grammar.pdf . The pdf file has larger and better looking font than the web page can provide and has the latest version.
Before the May 4th movement, the Chinese language had reached the zenith height in the writings, without ever discussing the English-type grammar. That is, there is a Chinese grammar of its own. Yet, after the May 4th movement, the Chinese grammar was squeezed into the English-like grammar structure, and no one knows the true Chinese grammar anymore today.
Yet, discussing Chinese grammar in theory is not easily understood by even the native Chinese now. Thus, I have used ‘西廂記’ as the source of examples to describe the Chinese sentence ‘structure’, for two reasons.
First, …
Second, …
Yet, this new book “‘西廂記’: 漢語 ‘文法’ 大全 (Chinese Grammar)” teaches ‘Chinese grammar’ to those who must already be able to read the current Chinese newspaper, as this great classic novel ‘西廂記’ is used as the example material for analyzing the Chinese sentences. I have made the entire boob of ‘西廂記’ available in this book. I also made some glossary explanations (註解) which help the reader to read the novel easier.
The earlier version of the book is available at
chinese-idioms/topic-t2059.html . Now, the pdf file of this book is available for the readers of this blog (free of charge, valued at $80), as a token of appreciation for everyone’s devotion of learning or teaching Chinese language, and it can be downloaded at
http://www.chinese-word-roots.org/Chinese_grammar.pdf . The pdf file has larger and better looking font than the web page can provide and has the latest version.
@MyEChinese:
I have visited your MyEChinese site which is a well-designed site.
I have one and only one questions.
Can anyone in the world understand your sentence “ Měi lián chǔ shǒuwèi “nǚ zhǎngmén ”chūlú” without the Chinese characters or without someone read it out loud?
The 漢字拼音 cannot be a standalone language. It could be the auxiliary to help foreigner to learn the pronunciation of Chinese words. Yet, even many Americans realized that 漢字拼音 is of no use of any kind after they have gained the ability to read.
Of course, it was designated as the official “pronunciation standard” for Chinese characters with a political decree, but it is wrong. The pronunciation of any language must be “internal”, that is, defined by its own language ‘recursively’. The Chinese character pronunciation was defined by 反切 which is indeed a recursive operation. Later, it was defined with 注音 which is also an internal part of Chinese language. For any two languages, the meaning and pronunciation of a word can be ‘translated’ between the two but never be equal. That is, there is no way to equate Chinese phoneme with the Latin alphabets. 漢字拼音 was done by someone who knows no linguistics and was forced to Chinese people by a political decree. Language cannot be sustained by political decree. It will eventually show its power and overthrow all the unjust political force.
@Benjamin Tuck: “Pinyin is a necessary evil.”
I have all my sympathy on you for the unfortunate state you are facing which is the result of a group of ignorant people, such as, 錢玄同、陳獨秀、胡適、瞿秋白、魯迅、郭沫若、蔡元培、吳玉章、林伯渠等人. The logic is very simple.
1. For three thousand years, there was no pinyin while everyone (native Chinese and foreigners) can speak Chinese (including the mandarin) if he was not handicapped with muteness. Many great Western Sinologists before the Pinyin era could speak mandarin excellently.
2. Most of Chinese people (being not linguists or Chinese philologists), they will not know that Chinese language is much more complicated phonetic system than the Latin alphabetical system. If you are able to use 康熙字典, you will notice that the entire dictionary is based on phonetic, as the meaning of Chinese character is phonetic-based. That is, a character can have many pronunciations. When it sounds as sound-A, it has meaning-A. When the same character sounds as sound-B, it has the meaning-B. It is of course very fine for not worrying about the true knowledge if he (a native Chinese or a foreigner) is not interested in learning it, as the capability of daily conversation is all that he needs.
The current ‘evil’ you are facing is forced upon you by the political oppression force and stupidity. But, the strength of the Chinese language will never be defeated. If you are able to read Chinese, you can read some news clips (at
chinese-idioms/topic-t2059.html#p4741 ) which shows that the strength of the language is winning.
@Guó-Xún Péng:
Your three translations are indeed the commonly accepted by the general population among Chinese people. But, they are wrong. Those three translations do not truly carry the weight as a Canonical verse of Confucianism. Again, “知” can indeed be used as “智” sometimes, but not in this case.
“知之为知之,不知为不知,是知也” is the canon law for epistemology even in today’s understanding. Its true meaning is,
知之为知之: you know ‘you know’ is knowledge.
不知为不知: you know ‘you don’t know’ is knowledge.
是知也: knowing ‘both’ (what you know and what you don’t know) is true knowledge.
In this great saying, there is nothing about 智 (wise, wisdom or wise man).
There is absolutely nothing about “honest to yourself” in this sentence as this is not an issue about morality but is about the epistemology. A very honest person can still be completely ignorant about what he does not know. Aristotle was a very honest and wise man, but he did not know what he ‘did not know’. And, his ‘Physics’ is mostly wrong as physics today, but of course it is still a great literature of this humanity. Only the people after him knew what ‘he did not know’, and this new knowledge (you know ‘you don’t know’) made advancement on the human knowledge.
@Guó-Xún Péng:
It is very nice of your discussing this great saying of Confucius. As I have said that your statements are widely accepted by Chinese people, that is, you are not the one in the wrong. Yet, there is truly a big problem about the understanding of the ‘traditional Chinese thoughts’ after the May 4th movement, as most of Chinese people is unable to understand Chinese ‘grammar’ beyond the ‘verbal’ (白話) style.
This example expressively points out this big problem. ‘Most’ of Chinese sentence does not subject to any ‘interpretation’ as its grammar provides a definite meaning to the sentence. When we remove all punctuation marks out from the Shakespeare, it will be very difficult to get his original writing by simply reading it. Only Chinese essays need no punctuation marks, and every essay can be read as the ‘same’ essay by zillions of people. No other language of any kind has this capability.
No, most of Chinese sentence does not need any ‘interpretation’ if one understands the Chinese ‘grammar’ which is on a much higher ‘rank’ than the one of English-type of grammar. If you are interested in Chinese ‘grammar’, you could read “The accurate Chinese grammar (at
http://chineselanguageetymology.blogspo ... ammar.html )”.
In addition to the ‘grammar’, the context provides some helping clues to the meaning.
Most people (Chinese or Western sinologists) view Confucianism is a moral philosophy. It is not entirely wrong but is not true neither. This is a big subject, and I will not discuss it here. Yet, in this special case, it is not about morality but is about epistemology. So, your saying “be honest to yourself towards acquiring knowledge” is ‘kind of’ a part of epistemology, but it is not. Anyone who truly wants to acquire knowledge while not honest to himself does nobody harm but to himself. When someone knows that he does not know while pretend to know is cheating or fraudulent, and this is not a part of epistemology. Only when someone ‘not knowing’ that he does not know, he could then take any un-true answer as the right answer for that ‘not knowing’ issue, and this will result to his true ‘ignorance’ . When everyone in the society becomes ignorant, that society will suffer the consequence of falling behind all other societies.
@Bashir Nawa: "I ask my students not to use ballpoint-pens when practicing writing characters. Instead I ask them to use ink-pens which is also called fountain pens."
Amen!
Not many people will know the difference between the two pens. Yet, the subtle difference is indeed great. The ink of ballpoint-pen flows much slower than the ink (fountain) pen. The most important part of Chinese language (characters, phrases, sentences and essays) is all about the ‘chi’. Today’s Chinese language teacher no longer teaching about ‘chi’, as they themselves do not know about that ‘chi’ is the backbone of the Chinese language while only believing that it is for the kungfu.
For the great calligrapher, he must ensure a firm stance (standing up) with balanced ‘chi’ before his work while most of us sits on a comfort-chair doing the writing, and we did not deliver the ‘chi’ into our characters.
There is a commonly accepted pen-stroke sequence for characters. Yet, the over-arching rule is about the ‘chi’ for the pen (ink) ‘flow’. When you teach your students about the pen-strokes, you should not just show the accepted sequences but explain the flow of the ‘chi’ during the pen-strokes; how to complete a character without the flow of pen (or ink) is in any awkward motion (not smooth chi).
@Bashir Nawa:
The Chinese Chi-cosmology is based on Yijing which is a very big subject. If you or anyone else is interested in it, I will discuss it more in due time.
For the Chi-application in the ‘language’, my new book ‘西廂記’: 漢語 ‘文法’ 大全 (Chinese Grammar) gives a good description on it. It is a 200 page book and is all written in ‘Chinese’. It has two parts, the entire book of ‘西廂記’ (a great classic of Chinese novel) and my discussion of Chinese grammar (by using the ‘西廂記’ as examples). For the Chi-grammar, you can just read the first and the last chapter of the book. That book is now available with the pdf file, and I am giving it to the members of this group free (a $80 value). It can be download at (
http://www.chinese-word-roots.org/Chinese_grammar.pdf ).
@Guó-Xún Péng
Excellent!
The phrase of itself is indeed from 三十六计, and it is now used to mean “sheer fabrication” or “sheer nonsense”. Yet, its original meaning is different, and it was and still is the most important Taoist's Cosmology, that is 無 中 生 (begets) 有, as 有 is the child of 無. See Chapter one of 「道 德 經」 (Tao Te Ching),
tao-te-ching-f23/tao-te-ching-t154.html .
無 名 天 地 之 始 ﹔ 有 名 萬 物 之 母 。
故 常 無 , 欲 以 觀 其 妙 ﹔ 常 有 , 欲 以 觀 其 徼 。
此 兩 者 , 同 出 而 異 名 , 同 謂 之 玄 。 (Chapter one)
有 物 混 成 , 先 天 地 生 。
寂 兮 寥 兮 , 獨 立 而 不 改 ,
周 行 而 不 殆 , 可 以 為 天 地 母 。
吾 不 知 其 名 , 強 字 之 曰 道 , (Chapter 25)
道 生 一 , 一 生 二 , 二 生 三 , 三 生 萬 物 。 (Chapter 42)
Thus, the Taoist’s cosmology is very clear.
1. 有 物 先 天 地 生 。
2. This 先 天 地 生 is the 常 無 (the eternal Nothingness) and is named as Tao (強 字 之 曰 道).
3. Then, 道 (常 無) 生 … 萬 物 (the 有).
A similar cosmology is also the foundation of the Confucianism, and it is very clear described in 太極圖説:
無極而太極。太極動而生陽;… ,兩儀立焉。… 太極本無極也。… 乾道成男,坤道成女。二氣交感,化生萬物,萬物生生而變化無窮焉。For the original article, see
post4745.html#p4745 .
As 無 中 生 有 is the foundation of the Chinese (both Confucianism and Taoism) cosmology and philosophy, why does it become “sheer fabrication” or “sheer nonsense” in today’s usage? This is from the respect of the Heaven, the Almighty. That is, 無 中 生 有 can only be done by the Almighty, not by any human. Any human who claims to have such a power of 無 中 生 有 is “sheer fabrication” or “sheer nonsense”. In Yijing, the number 9 is the highest yang-number on Earth. The 10 (perfection) and 100 are heavenly numbers and must not be used by humans. Thus, Chinese does not celebrate 100th birthday, only have a great celebration for the 99th birthday. The phrase of ‘百年’ is to mean the end of one’s life.
“但是本子的量词只能是 ‘个’,即一个本子。对吗?"
No, 一本本子 is just fine.
@Bill wilson:
It is very nice to know that you are interested in learning Chinese language.
There is a major difference for learning a second language between a kid and an adult. For kids, we immerse them without showing them the reasoning and logic of the language. Yet, the handicap of any adult for the second language is that he is no longer a good sponge which can soak up the juice by drowning him in water. However, adult does have a strong suit, the reasoning and logic comprehension.
Most languages are tightly woven with their cultures, and this is especially significant in Chinese language. If you just want to be a street talker, you can go with the most street talking programs which are available all over the place. If you want truly learn the Chinese language, you should start with learning the backbone of that language. That is, you should get to know, at least, three canons.
a. Confucius – the Analects.
b. Tao De Jing
c. Yijing
Anything which goes beyond the simple street talks (such as, how are you? Good weather, etc.) is somehow gotten its meaning from those books. Thus, you can read those books in their English translation first. After you get some ideas about the Chinese ways of thinking by reading those translated books, you can then try to read the original text side by side with the translations. If you pick up the Chinese language in this way, it will give you a true foundation on Chinese language.
Unfortunately, most of the translations of those canons are not very good, if not simply wrong. By reading a wrong translation will do you more harm than any good. Fortunately, this site (
http://yigen.us/ ) provides 7 best translations of Yijing at one place. That is, there is a chance for you to check out the difference among the translations. By doing so, you will get a solid foundation for your Chinese language. Of course, do learn the street talks.
@Bill wilson:
As a teacher of a very difficult language (English) yourself, you will appreciate that language is much beyond of learning vocabulary and grammar. Thanks for agreeing with me.
@Manuel Mavinga:
If you are an English speaking person, you can pick up 'speaking mandarin' 10 times easier than a Chinese speaking person to pick up 'speaking English'. The speaking part of mandarin is one of the simplest language in the world.
Yet, the Chinese written language was viewed as one of the most difficult language in the world. It was so bad, and it was ready abandoned by the Chinese people themselves. The simplified system was the interim measure before that total abandonment.
Yet, the discovery of 'Chinese Etymology' in 2006 stopped that abandoning movement. Now, the Chinese written system can be mastered in 90 days, without any immersion needed. The following page will give you a rough idea of what it is all about (
http://chineselanguageetymology.blogspo ... -easy.html ).
@Derong Gu:
“I write a book on it, unfortunately, nobody wants it to be published.”
This is because that your saying is simply wrong.
Your first example “寿 :< --- 丰 寸 abundant time-->longevity” is terribly wrong.
First, 寿 is a simplified character, that is, it is no longer following the etymology of the Chinese system.
Second, if a radical (or root) means X in a system, it should mean X in all other words. If 寸 means ‘time’, it should mean ‘time’ in all other words too, such as, 付 (人-time), 対 (文-time), 討 (言-time), 封 (圭-time), 村 (木-time), 寺 (土-time). Obviously, all the above are nonsenses.
You are obviously not a Chinese philologist and do not have any basic training in linguistics. You are just making up stories arbitrary. And, this does not do the public any good.
@Derong Gu:
Good job. You got most of them correct this time. But, it is not difficult to do that after those words were listed out, as anyone can find out the right answers from (康 熙 字 典).
“You are friendly to your friends, and you are not that good toward your enemies.”
No, I don’t really know you, and you are not my enemy. I am friendly to those who are learned and right and will not give praise to those are in the wrong.
Indeed, Chinese written language is the only ‘perfect’ language in terms of linguistics;
a. Able to read the meaning of ‘every’ word (character) from its ‘face’.
b. Able to read the pronunciation of ‘every’ word from its face.
c. Able to construct all words (unlimited numbers) from a ‘finite’ set of symbols (alphabets, radicals or roots).
English-like language is able to do the b) and c), but not a). Chinese written language is the only language in the word capable of accomplishing all three. But, no one in the history knew about this before the publication of the “Chinese Etymology” in 2006. If anyone knew about this before 1960, there would not have had the simplified characters which grossly destroyed the Chinese etymology system, changing the perfect system to the most stupid one. This is an iron historical ‘fact’ and cannot be argued in any way. The following is a short list about that history.
i. 魯 迅 wrote, 漢 字 不 廢, 中 國 必 亡 (without abandoning Chinese character system, China will surely vanish).
ii. 錢 玄 同 one of the greatest Chinese philologist in 1930s (the top authority of 說 文), even promoted the replacement of Chinese with Esperanto.
iii. 胡 適 and 林 語 堂 agreed with Dr. Northrop that Chinese words are denotative and solitary -- no logical ordering or connection the one with the other.
(See,
http://chineselanguageetymology.blogspo ... ology.html )
王 安 石 (one of the greatest authority on 說 文) and his book 字 說 turned out to be a laughing-stock.
With the history here, do not pretend that that the Chinese ‘written’ language is the easiest one in the world to learn was something known long ago. By using the system of etymology, all Chinese characters (about 60,000) can be learned in 90 days from a beginning of knowing not a single character. Yet, both in China and in Taiwan, the kids are still learning Chinese characters via the old way (as a set of symbols without logic). Thus, you are welcome to this new era. But, without knowing the true system, one can just make a bad name to this new knowledge.
@Derong Gu:
"Actually we are 诤友, ..."
Yes, I like this.
"... though fast food is not that nutritious, as your original Chinese."
Good metaphor, but you have missed the point. If the Chinese system was a total trash as described by those (錢玄同、陳獨秀、胡適、瞿秋白、魯迅、郭沫若、蔡元培、吳玉章、林伯渠 , etc.), I will be the first one to advocate its total abolishment. But, the fact is that Chinese written system is the only ‘perfect’ language system in the entire linguistics. The simplified system is not a fast food by all means, as only the original system allows a student to learn it with logic, not by brutal memorization. After mastering the logic and system (needs only 90 days), students can read the meaning and pronunciation of all characters which he did not know before, and no other language in the world can achieve this.
In the 5,000 years of Chinese history, this simplified system which transforms the only perfect language into the most stupid one in the world is the only greatest “shame” to Chinese history, Chinese culture and to Chinese people.
No, my support on the original Chinese system has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Taiwan is still using it. By the way, Taiwan does not appreciate this great wisdom of our ancestors thus far neither. Taiwan is not doing much better than those people who (see the above list) had done great harm and wrong to Chinese people (the ancestors and the future generations).
@Bill Wilson:
Thanks for such a moving comment.
“I am a simple man of simple means, Within the world and the multitude of things I am but a simple speck of dust.”
Yes, we are just a speck of dust in the physical sense. But our will and spirit have the power to move the entire universe, regardless of our simple means.
“The Chinese system of communication has changed, it has evolved, yet it is still the Chinese communication system, to study "simplified Chinese" is like studying the intermediate system, before moving on to the advanced system (Traditional), Like the great Yin and Yang there is room for both, and indeed if you open your eyes and look, you can see each has a part of the other within.”
How wonderful this saying truly is! My translation of 「道 德 經」 (Tao Te Ching) is widely used in the Taoist’s community around the world. Both the original text and the translation are available at
tao-te-ching-f23/tao-te-ching-t154.html . For 99% of Chinese college graduates, they will still have the hard time to truly understand the original text, as they did not truly learn Chinese ‘language’ at that level. Thus, the English translation becomes a helping cane for them to wade across that difficult language. Of course, reading them side by side will be a great way for someone who is learning Chinese as the second language.
Of course, there is enough room for simplified. But, there is one important issue in linguistics, the capability of a language.
For a denotative type language, its lexicon are arbitrary assigned without any logic connection between words, that is, a chaotic system. Thus, those assignments must be memorized with brutal efforts. English is 80% denotative although most of its words have etymology, such as, no one will know why ‘book’ means book from its face.
For an axiomatic type language, its lexicon are derived from a finite set of symbols (roots) together with a handful of rules. Thus, the meaning and the pronunciation of every word can be derived from that small set which can be learned easier than 5th grade algebra. A total denotative language will be the stupidest one in the world.
A total (100%) axiomatic language system ‘was’ the far-out (impossible) dream in linguistics. Yet, the Chinese original system [not understood before] is such a system, the ‘only’ such a system in linguistics. So, the issue now is not about encompassing a simplified, but why? Why gives up the only perfect system while adapting a total denotative system (the stupidest one). In addition to this stupidity, it is an act of insulting to the wisdom and the greatness of my ancestors.
@Bill wilson:
"As long as there are people like yourself with passion in their hearts for the Chinese Language, who painstakingly work out the meaning and etymology of these wonderful words then there will be people like me who really appreciate your work and the amazing insight it gives us to your history and culture."
How wonderful of such a heart-warming saying this is! We all need a friend like you. Thanks.
@Derong Gu:
“Traditional form of Chinese doesn't help much to take HSK, which is the main subject of this discussion.”
There are only about 2,000 simplified characters while the HSK will cover about 3,000 different words. That is, the students are still needing to learn about 1,000 traditional characters for his HSK test. For an educated Chinese, he needs know about 6,000 Chinese characters, that is, the knowledge on the Chinese system will be helpful for him for 4,000 words.
“The tough part are the idioms and traditional expressions, which are so many need to be memorized.”
Very sorry, you are wrong again. As a 诤友, I will give a very, very short discussion on this issue here. There are, at least, two types of system.
Type one --- tree-like system, with root, trunk and leafs. These three parts are of course tightly bound among them but are obviously different. English-like language is having this type of system. Its syntaxes are inflectional, that is, having the parts of speech. Then, at the sentence level, it was ‘driven’ to have tense, numbers, voices, etc. . It is a ‘cause-result’ relationship.
Type two --- a fractal system which was discovered only ‘40 years ago’. You can google ‘fractal’ or look it up at Wikipedia. The key feature of it is the ‘similarity transformation’, not ‘cause-result relationship’. The easiest example is ---
A family --- composed of people
A society (higher tier than family) --- composed of people
Humanity (higher tier than society) --- composed of people
In a fractal system, the rules at one tier (root level) is ‘similarly’ repeated at the higher tiers. And, the Chinese language is a fractal system, totally different from the English-like language.
At tier one --- the root/character system, the characters are composed of roots. And, the meaning of the character is read out from its parts together with some inferring rules. At this level, it has 9 dimensions (described by 井), as there are 9 spots for those parts to sit in. The two same roots which sit at different places can become two different words, such as, [暈 (dizzy) and 暉 (halo)], [忙 (busy), 忘 (forget)],… The commutative laws at tier one are precisely defined while I cannot go into its details here.
At tier two --- word phrases (idioms and expressions) can only be layout ‘linearly’, that is, much simpler than the tier one. If we can read out the meanings of characters in tier one, why are we not able to read the meanings out directly for those word phrases?
As 錢玄同、陳獨秀、胡適、瞿秋白、魯迅、郭沫若、蔡元培、吳玉章、林伯渠 did not know about these, there was no chance for you to know them. Confucius said, “…不知為不知 ….” Those people above did not know their ignorance on Chinese language because that no one taught them, that is, they can be forgiven. Yet, people today who insists to stay ‘ignorant’ cannot be forgiven.
No, there is no need to memorize the characters and word phrases with ‘brutal’ efforts. This is the ‘wonder’ about Chinese language.
Great news! Great news!
Now, ‘the annual Central Government policy meetings, 中共两会 (人大 and 政协),’ are now on session (from March 3 to March 13, 2014). The greatest news is that the returning to the Traditional character and the abolishing the simplified (which is the stupidest and the most shameful in Chinese entire history) was discussed today. After a single-hand fighting for 10 years, I have won this war, a bit early than my expectation. After all, no one (Chinese or Communists) can keep oneself continuing to be stupid and shameful (especially to his ancestors).
@Bill wilson: Thank you for so many your kind and encouraging words. For a Chinese who has learned about 3,000 characters in the old school, he will be very difficult to learn this ‘new Chinese etymology’ as his old knowledge is a huge baggage which he cannot toss off. Thus, it might be a great opportunity for you to become one of the greatest linguist in history if you take this new Chinese etymology (which no one knows before 2005) as a big part of your career portfolio. I will definitely encourage you to do so.
@Bill wilson:
“…as teachers we have an obligation to teach our students correctly, …”
Amen! This is also the gold standard in American school.
“… as I only have maybe 8 or 900 words mastered in Chinese, then my baggage is not to heavy yet, I am very keen to learn by your methods, if you can point me in the right direction then I will do my utmost to do the rest and I hope be a worthy student to your system.”
No baggage, excellent! For a twelve year old American kid who begins with knowing zero Chinese word starts by learning the system ‘only’ in my class, he can dissect all new meet (not known before) words correct and can decode them correctly 70% of the time after 30 days of hard study. For a highly educated and intelligent adult while unable to attend the in class lessons, I would suggest to read this web page (
chinese-idioms/part-three-the-new-chinese-etymology-t229.html ) first, as it will give him a good background info and good perspective on the correct Chinese written system. If you are still interest in knowing more about it after reading it, you can start a new thread at the LinkedIn to discuss some issues and any comments about it. I will work with you from there.
@Derong Gu:
“(in ancient time, ten people is already a big number 十口 古 ten people talked about, then the thing is very old).”
I tried, truly tried not to right this wrong for not wanting to put you down. Yet, if I don’t do it, your wrong will harm the public who has no knowledge to know that you are wrong. No, absolutely no, 古 does not mean ‘old’. The old man who is still with me, he is still my contemporary. 古 means ‘ancient’ exactly, no other denotation or connotation. For the ancients, the 口 has two functions.
a. For eating, and the side effect is ‘as a gate for ills into the body [病 從 口 入]’.
b. For speaking, the bad point is ‘as a gate for running into troubles [禍 從 口 出]’.
Yet, there is a ‘perfect’ 口 which will no longer cause trouble and say anything ‘not good’. Thus, if you check the word 古 in 康 熙 字 典, it says that 十 (perfect) 口 is 古. This is from 康 熙 字 典, not from me. You obviously did not look it up in that dictionary. The original meaning for 十 is ‘perfect’, not ten. In Yijing, 9 is the highest yang number and the 10 is a Heavenly number. Thus 十 (denoting ‘perfect’) was borrowed for the number 10.
Although the ‘Chinese etymology’ was not known before 2005, the simplifying process by all means is not ad hoc or arbitrary. The committee did set up a set of ‘rules’. You obviously did not study those rules. No, the ‘composite/decoding’ structure is not one of their rules. No, 听 cannot be decoded as 口 斤 although it can be dissected as that. “Listening to ax's edge for its sharpness”, a total nonsense.
Although 錢玄同、陳獨秀、胡適、瞿秋白、魯迅、郭沫若、蔡元培、吳玉章、林伯渠 and 王 安 石 did not know about the correct ‘Chinese etymology’, their knowledge on the Chinese language is 10 thousand times (萬 倍) of any average Chinese. Although I do not know you in person, I now know that you are far below their level, as you just make up stories without any academic discipline. Please, don’t do this. It is not good for you and is very harmful to the public.
听. this is the ax' edge (斧头的刀口).
People judge's the ax's sharpness, the work tool's quality by listening
to ax's edge.
so that is why it means LISTEN.