Widzę, że jest to ostrzeżenie za poglądy. Nieźle. Czyli mogę siebie nazwać osobą represjonowaną. Урра!
A coby nie było offtopa:Coś z Chorego Bethisadu!
Nie jedyną, chłopie. Nie jedyną. Chyba nie lubią tu chłopaków zza wzchodniej granicy...
A tak zupełnie wracając do tematu, przerzuciłem na wiki słownik Klubu Etymologii Ludowej ze starego forum.
Te Wiki powoli się zmienia w Nonsensopedię.
The majority of these characters, Boodberg contends, are in reality SP characters. Indeed, he goes so far as to claim that apart from "a few exceptional cases " there is simply no such thing as a class of characters constructed on semantic principles (1937:345-347). This view has recently been reiterated by another scholar, William G. Boltz, who has also done significant work on early Chinese writing. He asserts: "Characters were not invented by just putting together two or more elements based on their semantic values alone. At least of one of the components must have had a phonetic function" (Boltz 1986:428).Boodberg's "few exceptional cases" include chiefly single characters of clearly pictographic origin. There are at most only a few hundred of these, and the number has not increased for some two millennia. These simple characters of pictographic origin, examples of which appear in figure 17, comprise only about one percent of the total number of Chinese characters. The remaining 99 percent, examples of which are presented in figure 18, are compound characters whose main component is a phonetic element.As an example of the need to rethink characters allegedly based on semantic principles, Boodberg cites the case of the previously mentioned character for míng 'bright.' He rejects the traditional approach which begins with a disembodied concept supposedly represented by a character formed by combining the symbols for "sun" and "moon."Instead he starts by assuming definite spoken words related to the meaning "bright." This leads him to note the existence of an earlier form of the character for míng 'bright' (Morohashi 1955-1960, 5:14, 366) that I present below in juxtaposition with the later version: 明In both cases the element 'moon' on the right-hand side of the characters is a semantic determinative. The element on the left-hand side of the first character is originally a picture of a window, with a pronunciation related to míng. In short, the present character representing míng 'bright' is simply a later variant with what is usually taken as a semantic "sun"-which has caused us to overlook an earlier version with a phonetic míng element that more closely relates the character to a spoken word (Boodberg 1937:344-345; 1940:270-274).
Wiedzieliście, że tak naprawdę chińskie znaki, które są złożeniem kilku innych znaków, i które wydają się być „rebusami”, mogą tak naprawdę pochodzić z typowych złożeń typu element fonetyczny + element semantyczny? Cycuję:źródło: http://www.pinyin.info/readings/texts/visible/
eee tam, propaganda fonetystów.
tak naprawdę chińskie znaki […] mogą tak naprawdę pochodzić
coś podobnego, że takie pochodzenie mają niektóre znaki...
Wiedzieliście, że tak naprawdę chińskie znaki, które są złożeniem kilku innych znaków, i które wydają się być „rebusami”, mogą tak naprawdę pochodzić z typowych złożeń typu element fonetyczny + element semantyczny?
CytujThe majority of these characters, Boodberg contends, are in reality SP characters. Indeed, he goes so far as to claim that apart from "a few exceptional cases " there is simply no such thing as a class of characters constructed on semantic principles (1937:345-347). This view has recently been reiterated by another scholar, William G. Boltz, who has also done significant work on early Chinese writing. He asserts: "Characters were not invented by just putting together two or more elements based on their semantic values alone. At least of one of the components must have had a phonetic function" (Boltz 1986:428).Boodberg's "few exceptional cases" include chiefly single characters of clearly pictographic origin. There are at most only a few hundred of these, and the number has not increased for some two millennia. These simple characters of pictographic origin, examples of which appear in figure 17, comprise only about one percent of the total number of Chinese characters. The remaining 99 percent, examples of which are presented in figure 18, are compound characters whose main component is a phonetic element.As an example of the need to rethink characters allegedly based on semantic principles, Boodberg cites the case of the previously mentioned character for míng 'bright.' He rejects the traditional approach which begins with a disembodied concept supposedly represented by a character formed by combining the symbols for "sun" and "moon."Instead he starts by assuming definite spoken words related to the meaning "bright." This leads him to note the existence of an earlier form of the character for míng 'bright' (Morohashi 1955-1960, 5:14, 366) that I present below in juxtaposition with the later version: 明In both cases the element 'moon' on the right-hand side of the characters is a semantic determinative. The element on the left-hand side of the first character is originally a picture of a window, with a pronunciation related to míng. In short, the present character representing míng 'bright' is simply a later variant with what is usually taken as a semantic "sun"-which has caused us to overlook an earlier version with a phonetic míng element that more closely relates the character to a spoken word (Boodberg 1937:344-345; 1940:270-274).źródło: http://www.pinyin.info/readings/texts/visible/
Cytat: Ⓐ Vilén w Sierpień 24, 2011, 00:06:56Wiedzieliście, że tak naprawdę chińskie znaki, które są złożeniem kilku innych znaków, i które wydają się być „rebusami”, mogą tak naprawdę pochodzić z typowych złożeń typu element fonetyczny + element semantyczny?Tak. Zwykle znaki złożone są tak: znaczenie po lewej, fonetyka po prawej albo znaczenie u góry, fonetyka na dole. Dlatego mama (ma: 妈) to kobieta (nv: 女) + koń (ma: 马) albo trawa (cao: 草) to radykał oznaczający roślinę (艹) + wcześnie (zao: 早). Ja się o tym dowiedziałem od Chińczyka. Wcześniej myślałem, że wszystkie części znaków mają jakieś podobne znaczenia albo cóś.
kobieta (nv: 女)
Cytujkobieta (nv: 女)I co oznacza to v? o.o
