As Americans, coming from a purposefully globally multicultural society, it's often difficult to really understand some of the cultural wariness (bordering on hatred) that even the younger Koreans and Chinese hold toward the Japanese. Looking at the cultural underpinnings compared to those other two societies, though, the reason becomes more clear.
It really disturbs the Chinese when Japan doesn't acknowledge the role it's culture played in its violent past because the impression remains that Japan can't fix the cause without admitting it first. And if the cause isn't fixed, they could revert to their past aggressions.
Looking at the cultural underpinnings compared to those other two societies, though, the reason becomes more clear.I'm not sure I follow, but it's worth mentioning that the Japanese, Chinese and Koreans were on more-or-less friendly terms from AD 500 to around the start of the Meiji Era in 1868, i.e., just after Westerners forced open Japan's borders (certainly Japan and China were buddies up to that point; relations were a little frosty between Japan and Korea, but still amiable overall.) The arrival of the west in numbers seems to mark the beginning of Japan's obsession with legitimacy on the world stage (in particular as the Meiji witnessed Japan's culture becoming increasingly marginalize as western ideas and philosophies came flooding in), which inevitably led to imperialist policies that were really more about staving off invasion than about satisfying colonial fantasies (not to sound like an apologist, of course.) I've got a book coming that is apparently the best written account of events before/during/after both the Sino-
( ... )
You have good points - just one example would be that there's a reason Japanese language still uses Kanji as one of its written forms. :-)
I believe, though, that China underwent rapid exposure to the West (Britain, France, Germany and Russia all had significant influence at various points) too, in a similar timeframe and it didn't turn against it's neighbors - it basically turned against itself. I'd also point out that when the most recent direct Western influence (well, at least for the pre-1989 era) in China pushed them to become expansionist and aggressive (USSR), China ended up destroying that alliance because they realized it wasn't really a good path to go down (among other reasons). I would think realizations like that are more a result of existing culture more than a newly imposed one. How a culture reacts to external influences is pretty important.
just one example would be that there's a reason Japanese language still uses Kanji as one of its written forms
I'm not sure I follow. At any rate, the Japanese and Koreans both used kanji as their written language from the beginning (there's still some controversy over whether it was Korean scholars who introduced kanji to the Japanese or Chinese aristocrats.) At any rate, both Korea and Japan eventually developed/expanded their own writing systems derived from kanji (and both cultures still use kanji, especially in advertising.)
China underwent rapid exposure to the West (Britain, France, Germany and Russia all had significant influence at various points) too, in a similar timeframe and it didn't turn against it's neighbors - it basically turned against itself.Leading up to the first Sino-Japanese war, the Qing Dynasty was crumbling and China was being picked apart by folks (mostly, of course, by Russia.) Meiji Japan, on the other hand, was prosperous and stable and obviously wanted to stay that way (native Japanese historians
( ... )
Hanzi is the Chinese written form that was adopted by Korea and Japan. 漢字 are the characters used, essentially unchanged, in Kanji, Hanja and Traditional-character Hanzi. Kanji is simply the Japanese pronunciation of the characters, with hanja being the Korean pronunciation.
There is really no dispute that I'm aware of that the hanzi form of writing originated in China. It is Chinese and originated near the Yellow River, which isn't especially close to Korea. Exactly how it became the form of writing in Korea and Japan carries some dispute, but that it originated in China is not in question. The accounts I tend to believe put hanzi being first brought to Japan during the Chinese Han dynasty, a few centuries after it was standardized under the Qin dynasty that lends its name to what we know as China. For Korea, hanzi flowed in initially with Buddhism but became the defacto standard only after Qianziwen (the Thousand Character Classic) exploded in popularity
( ... )
Kanji is simply the Japanese pronunciation of the characters, with hanja being the Korean pronunciation.
Right. I don't think I suggested otherwise...my use of "kanji" was certainly an oversimplification, but it was not incorrect. Japan wasn't called Japan during the periods under discussion (neither was China called China), but to keep it simple, we just call them Japan and China. ;)
There is really no dispute that I'm aware of that the hanzi form of writing originated in China.
What's in dispute is not where the language originated (not sure how the issue became confused here), but (as I stated in my earlier post) who introduced it to the Japanese. The reason this is in dispute is because no one knows who invaded Japan first, the Chinese or the Korean...there is evidence on both sides. Most scholars seem to believe the first invaders were Korean mostly because members of the earliest Japanese clans were of Korean descent. There is also slim evidence of Korean "horse-riders" who came to Japan during the Yayoi Period circa
( ... )
I think I did address my take on the introduction question in the second half of my response. It's tricky, too, because one invasion obviously doesn't necessarily make for a successful introduction, so we'll likely never know for sure. Viking were in North America before Columbus, but that doesn't mean they speak some form of Norwegian in Miami. ;-)
Barring strong evidence to the contrary, though, I think I'll stick by my rationale for believing hanzi was mostly, if not initialy, introduced directly from China to both Korea and Japan. :-)
I think it's highly unlikely that Korea was the source of kanji to Japan
The theory that Korea introduced Chinese characters to the Japanese is not only plausible but quite old. There are tons of great, credible sources for info on this topic outlined in A History of Japan, many of which are also referenced in this article published by the Association for Asia Research. Under the heading "Linguistics
( ... )
It really disturbs the Chinese when Japan doesn't acknowledge the role it's culture played in its violent past because the impression remains that Japan can't fix the cause without admitting it first. And if the cause isn't fixed, they could revert to their past aggressions.
Reply
Reply
I believe, though, that China underwent rapid exposure to the West (Britain, France, Germany and Russia all had significant influence at various points) too, in a similar timeframe and it didn't turn against it's neighbors - it basically turned against itself. I'd also point out that when the most recent direct Western influence (well, at least for the pre-1989 era) in China pushed them to become expansionist and aggressive (USSR), China ended up destroying that alliance because they realized it wasn't really a good path to go down (among other reasons). I would think realizations like that are more a result of existing culture more than a newly imposed one. How a culture reacts to external influences is pretty important.
Reply
I'm not sure I follow. At any rate, the Japanese and Koreans both used kanji as their written language from the beginning (there's still some controversy over whether it was Korean scholars who introduced kanji to the Japanese or Chinese aristocrats.) At any rate, both Korea and Japan eventually developed/expanded their own writing systems derived from kanji (and both cultures still use kanji, especially in advertising.)
China underwent rapid exposure to the West (Britain, France, Germany and Russia all had significant influence at various points) too, in a similar timeframe and it didn't turn against it's neighbors - it basically turned against itself.Leading up to the first Sino-Japanese war, the Qing Dynasty was crumbling and China was being picked apart by folks (mostly, of course, by Russia.) Meiji Japan, on the other hand, was prosperous and stable and obviously wanted to stay that way (native Japanese historians ( ... )
Reply
There is really no dispute that I'm aware of that the hanzi form of writing originated in China. It is Chinese and originated near the Yellow River, which isn't especially close to Korea. Exactly how it became the form of writing in Korea and Japan carries some dispute, but that it originated in China is not in question. The accounts I tend to believe put hanzi being first brought to Japan during the Chinese Han dynasty, a few centuries after it was standardized under the Qin dynasty that lends its name to what we know as China. For Korea, hanzi flowed in initially with Buddhism but became the defacto standard only after Qianziwen (the Thousand Character Classic) exploded in popularity ( ... )
Reply
Right. I don't think I suggested otherwise...my use of "kanji" was certainly an oversimplification, but it was not incorrect. Japan wasn't called Japan during the periods under discussion (neither was China called China), but to keep it simple, we just call them Japan and China. ;)
There is really no dispute that I'm aware of that the hanzi form of writing originated in China.
What's in dispute is not where the language originated (not sure how the issue became confused here), but (as I stated in my earlier post) who introduced it to the Japanese. The reason this is in dispute is because no one knows who invaded Japan first, the Chinese or the Korean...there is evidence on both sides. Most scholars seem to believe the first invaders were Korean mostly because members of the earliest Japanese clans were of Korean descent. There is also slim evidence of Korean "horse-riders" who came to Japan during the Yayoi Period circa ( ... )
Reply
Barring strong evidence to the contrary, though, I think I'll stick by my rationale for believing hanzi was mostly, if not initialy, introduced directly from China to both Korea and Japan. :-)
Reply
I am curious to know what you're basing this on. You mention "accounts you tend to believe"...I'd be interested in knowing which accounts those are.
Reply
The theory that Korea introduced Chinese characters to the Japanese is not only plausible but quite old. There are tons of great, credible sources for info on this topic outlined in A History of Japan, many of which are also referenced in this article published by the Association for Asia Research. Under the heading "Linguistics ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment