[HN Gopher] The Invention of Chinese
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Invention of Chinese
        
       Author : Thevet
       Score  : 26 points
       Date   : 2021-12-10 22:34 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.historytoday.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.historytoday.com)
        
       | ncmncm wrote:
       | Primarily Mandarin speakers I have known were taught, and
       | believed, that the "dialects" were basically the same as
       | Mandarin, just with different pronunciation.
       | 
       | They sincerely believed that when Cantonese speakers read and
       | wrote, they were not wholesale translating from and to Mandarin,
       | but simply, when writing, transcribing Cantonese using the
       | universal ideographic calligraphy.
       | 
       | In fact, writing in dialect languages is not taught. The
       | extremely elaborate system dictating which of usually several,
       | often many syllabary characters that sound identical must be used
       | in writing a word in Mandarin (very commonly mistaken for
       | ideographic writing) cannot work for the other sinitic languages.
       | 
       | (Sinitic languages admit about 1200 distinct syllables, but the
       | syllabary writing system uses many times that number, so many
       | necessarily sound alike. Mandarin speakers are taught that the
       | characters are not merely syllables with attached historical
       | rules, but ideograms that represent distinct thoughts. (Numerous
       | just-so examples are used to support the notion.) This has often
       | led to belief that ancient documents using the characters could
       | be read and understood without deep knowledge of the actual
       | language and world of the writer, resulting in, at best, comical
       | translations.)
        
       | dwohnitmok wrote:
       | There's a lot of complexities and politically-motivated reasons
       | behind calling various varieties of Chinese "dialects" but this
       | article swings way too far the other direction.
       | 
       | There has been a single lingua franca across all of China since
       | at least the Han Dynasty, perhaps even the Warring States period
       | or earlier. It has variously been called Tong Yu  (the
       | mass/common/omnipresent/intelligible language, Tong  is a bit
       | difficult to translate here), Guan Hua  (the official language),
       | potentially Ya Yan  (elegant speech, this is more controversial
       | and earliest mention) and now Pu Tong Hua  or Guo Yu .
       | 
       | > Indeed, before the 20th century the idea of a singular, spoken
       | Chinese language was a foreign concept
       | 
       | Matteo Ricci explicitly talks about a single language he can use
       | to talk with everyone in every province (in his time this was the
       | Guan Hua ). And indeed he used the same language as he made his
       | way across the entire coast of China. There is an entire Han
       | Dynasty compendium of the vocabulary of various regions that
       | compares it against the official lingua franca. Indeed the title
       | of this work is exactly Fangyan!
       | 
       | > But while Chinese thinkers frequently mentioned 'official
       | languages', this was by no means synonymous with a 'national
       | language' - a language unified in its sound and script used by
       | and representative of a Chinese nation.
       | 
       | These "official languages" were exactly unified in sound and
       | script and representative of a Chinese nation! The language Ricci
       | encountered was the descendent of one whose pronunciation was
       | explicitly codified (there are some asterisks here I can
       | elaborate on if people are interested) in the 14th century Hong
       | Wu Zheng Yun  (Hongwu Proper Sound), and was passed to
       | neighboring kingdoms as the official language (and is e.g.
       | preserved in Korean rime books on the Chinese language).
       | 
       | The difference in the last 100 years has been a difference in
       | degree rather than kind. With the advent of near-universal
       | education and literacy and the technological tools offered by
       | mass media, the PRC, ROC, and to a lesser extent places like
       | Singapore and Malaysia can more effectively carry out the
       | language programs that have been attempted in the millennia past.
       | 
       | Granted the difference in degree is vast: the tools at the
       | disposal of political regimes today absolutely dwarfs those of
       | the past. This also means the effects of standardization are far
       | more keenly felt. However, the motivation and policy is one with
       | a long and winding history.
       | 
       | It follows a standard story of varying unification and disunity
       | both linguistically and politically that has played out many
       | times in China's history.
        
         | justicezyx wrote:
         | Nice summary!
         | 
         | As a Chinese native and Han people, I have no idea of these
         | historical records! Just to say how rich and complex the
         | Chinese history is and how profound is this legacy and
         | heritage.
        
       | KhoomeiK wrote:
       | Related [1] [2]: the Han race was really only constructed in the
       | last 100 years, along with the national mythos of several
       | millennia of uninterrupted dynastic civilization.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.hrichina.org/en/content/4573
       | 
       | [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhFPZL2L8uM
        
         | seanmcdirmid wrote:
         | The concept of Chinese medicine was also created and promoted
         | by Mao since they couldn't afford much real medicine after the
         | revolution. It simply didn't exist as a unified thing before
         | then.
        
           | justicezyx wrote:
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compendium_of_Materia_Medica
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghan_Lun
           | 
           | https://zh.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%B8%A9%E7%96%AB%E8%AE%BA
           | 
           | What's the reasoning behind this theory that Mao invented
           | Chinese medicine, which has been in existence for more than a
           | thousand years? Are you a fan of Mao, or are you mocking his
           | inability to create modern medicine out of thin air? Or his
           | manipulation of Chinese culture?
        
         | justicezyx wrote:
         | > an ethnically integrated China is, in fact, a modern
         | invention linked to the rise of nationalism at the end of the
         | nineteenth century.
         | 
         | This idea is a very sensible one in the context of China being
         | forced to open up to the world. It's like a man, living in
         | wild, has assume he was alone, and have no idea he was actually
         | a male. Until one day he run into a similar creature that is a
         | female.
         | 
         | The undernote of this is that Chinese society is extremely
         | complex. Easily orders of magnitude more complex. Comparing to
         | the US continental, the geographical diversity and the cultural
         | heritage shows such a vast range of changes that one should
         | feel US is probably culturally only equivalent to a typical
         | province in China! They eat differently, speak different in
         | accent and words of expression, have different customs in
         | almost every aspects of the life (child birth, birthdag,
         | marriage, funerals etc etc)...
         | 
         | China is indeed a humongous collective of diverse human
         | communities that defies any singular or universal
         | interpretation.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-12-11 23:00 UTC)