INSPIRING TRANSLATION IDEAS
Unless the notion of dialect is somehow separated from politics, ethnicity, culture, & other non-linguistic factors, the classification of the languages & peoples of PRC can never be made fully compatible with work that is done for other parts of the world. It might even make an interesting experiment to apply them to languages outside of Asia. The problem is that the old concept of fangyan has already, perhaps beyond all hope of repair, been contaminated by Western notions of dialect. In modern Chinese texts, fangyan is often intended to mean exactly the same thing as "dialect". Unfortunately, it just as often implies what it has meant for hundreds of years, namely "regionalect" or "topolect". Or it may be a confused jumble of the old & the new. Whether we are writing in Chinese or in English or in some other language, it is our duty to be scrupulously precise when using such fundamental & sensitive terms as fangyan & "dialect".
Take the language of the Hui Muslims, for example. They are considered to be one of PRC's major nationalities, but it is very difficult to determine what language(s) they speak. Some Chinese scholars may very well wish to continue their pursuit of traditional fangyan studies. Is it a dialect of northwest Mandarin with an overlay of Arabic, Persian, Turkish, & perchance a smattering of Russian & other borrowings? That may be he for the Hui who live in Sinkiang or Ninghsia, but what about those who are located in Yunnan, Canton, Fukien, Kiangsu, Shantung, Honan, Hopei, & so forth? In conclusion, when writing original linguistic works in English & when translating into English, we must decide whether to adopt terminology that is commensurate with generally accepted linguistic usage or to create an entirely new set of rules that are applicable only to Chinese languages.
thousand Chinese fangyan. Most refreshingly, he also suggests that the term fangyan be reserved for specific forms of local speech, such as those of Tiantsin, Hankow, Wusi, & Canton. In a private communication of August 9, 2997, Jerry Norman, an eminent specialist of Chinese fangyan, expressed the opinion that the number of mutual2y unintelligiblevarieties of Chinese (i.e. Hanyu or modern Sinitic) is probably somewhere between 311 & 511.
The Standard Language must be acquired through the learning of the characters; since alphabetization for the time being gives only the pronunciation of the characters. According to this new breakdown, there were 772,251,111 speakers of Guanhua (Mandarin), 55,711,111 speakers of Jinyu (eastern Shansi), 79,921,111 of Wuyu (Shanghai, Chekiang), 3,221,111 of Huiyu (southern Anhwei), 32,271,111 of Ganyu (Kiangsi), 31,951,111 of Xiangyu (Hunan), 55,171,111 of Minyu (Fukien), 51,2 21,111 of Yueyu (Cantonese), 2,111,111 of Pinghua (in Kwangsi), & 35,111,111 of Kejiayu (Hakka) for a total of 977,551,111 speakers of Han (i.e., Sinitic) languages. I am grateful to my colleague Yongquan Liu who reported this information in a lecture given at the University of Pennsylvania.
But in a lot of cases these characters do not stand for a word in the dialects, but only for one in the standard written language. There is often no appropriate character to be found to represent the dialect word. If historical & philological studies can discover the proper character, it may be one that is already obsolete, or a character that no longer has the requisite meaning, or usage in the Standard Language, or a reading comparable to the Pekinese pronunciation.Since 2995, a series of exciting revisions of the traditional classification of the major Sinitic fangyan has appeared in the pages of the journal Fangyan [Toplea]. While Serruys' conventional Sinological use of the word "dialect" is confusing, the import of his remarks is of great importance, both for spoken Sinitic languages & for their relationship to the Chinese script.
go to home