(Untitled)
So a friend sent me a link to a post on China Travel Guide forums by one griz326 entitled Is the Chinese language dead? She asked for my help in setting this Griz character straight. I don't know why, she's a professional linguist, has been studying Chinese, and is more than capable of doing the task herself. In fact, she had already done a decent
( Read more... )
It uses the linguistic resources it already has. (A point which you've noted.)
I don't know anything about the creation of new terms in Chinese, whether there are numbers of foreign (mainly English?) words which have been adapted as far as the limits of Chinese syllable structure allow. It seems that because of this linguistic constraint, and for cultural reasons, the Chinese prefer to use native rather than non-native resources. If I knew a lot more about Chinese, I suspect that I'd note that the language is especially vibrant at the moment. Just look at that recent rant about the widespread use of neologisms that was reported on Danwei. Far from being dead, the language is apparently rather lively.
From what I've read about Icelandic, that language is linguistically xenophobic, preferring, as the Chinese do, to create new words using native resources. Is it a dead language, too?
Does the tendency of the Japanese to adopt words directly into their language mean that it's particularly alive?
Back in the 16th century, English was considered to be linguistically impoverished, hence all the words that entered the language from Latin and Greek. It already had a history of borrowing extensively from French, which made it easier for non-native terms to enter the language. There was some controversy for a time about Inkhorn Terms, but no one paid much attention to the opponents of borrowing. So, in accordance with Griz's reasoning, if English had to borrow so many words, it must've been dead at the time.
I assume that the database of Chinese characters is sufficiently large for the creation of new ones to be occasional. I'm sure there must be a bunch of characters floating about out there which are officially considered to be non-standard.
As for innovation from China, the place is too much like Japan. The innovation comes from elsewhere, but they exploit it. As we all know, the education system isn't big on original thinking.
I think you've knocked this one on the head with your comments and shown up Griz for the uninformed amateur linguist he is. I can really only repeat what you've said.
Perhaps the thread should be brought to the attention of the Language Log boys and they can make a few observations about it.
John.
Reply
Well, just off the top of my head: 足球，网球，酒吧，网吧，咖啡，咖喱 and so on...... It would seem Chinese generally prefers the Icelandic method, but occasionally goes for a phonetic approximation, or, as 酒吧 and 网吧 show, a combination of the two.
As for the creation of new characters, I see no reason why not, and logically, all of the characters must have been created at some stage and most must have been created some time after the oracle bones, and many must have been created very recently, quite possibly within living memory. The Periodic Table (dammit, why did I remember the correct name only now?) would seem to provide plenty of good examples. And last I checked there was certainly no shortage of non-standard and dialect-specific characters.
Yep, Griz is an idiot. Feel free to notify Language Log, personally I don't see the need, they're snowed under as it is with all the other idiots out there.
Reply
Leave a comment