This is a single-session event
Details about the full course "Chinese linguistics: The basics" are in the Leiden e-Prospectus
1. Read the assigned texts and consult the additional information in the Reading notes.
2. Note down about any questions or difficulties you may have in reading these texts, and bring your notes to class.
We will discuss these questions in class on a page-by-page basis.
Please prepare your answers to the following assignments in writing.
You will not need to hand in these assignments, but you will be asked to read from your notes in class.
The following items refer to Baxter (1992)
3. On p. 1, mention is made of "the European bias of much modern linguistics".
Please demonstrate how this bias may affect the analysis of a concrete example – i.e. a word, phrase, clause or sentence in a language of your choice.
4. After the inventory of resources for Old Chinese, it is mentioned on p. 3 that the "oracle-bone inscriptions of the Shāng 商 dynasty (sixteenth to eleventh centuries B.C.) are earlier, but present more problems".
(a) Check whether the dates in parentheses refer to the inscriptions, to the dynasty, or to both.
(b) What do we know about the relationship between oracle-bone inscriptions and the available evidence for Old Chinese? Are these two related in terms of language, script, or both?
5. Also on p. 3, make sure you have a clear understanding of relevant language names and dates mentioned here. Also compare pp. 14-15 of this text.
(a) Write down the dates, alternative English terms and corresponding Mandarin terms for Middle Chinese and Old Chinese.
(b) How about Modern Chinese? How does this notion compare in terms of dates, status, and use? – In this connection, als compare what Baxter has to say on p. 8.
6. "Karlgren saw himself as reconstructing phonetics, not phonology" (p. 3).
(a) Write down the difference between these two fields of study in your own words in one or two short sentences.
(b) To illustrate this difference, provide examples from two languages: Mandarin and your native language. If you are native speaker of Mandarin, take English as the second language.
(c) Also provide an example, in a language of your choice, of the "symmetry and pattern which are typical in the phonological systems of natural languages" (pp. 3-4).
7. Spot and correct the typo at the bottom of p. 4; also compare p. 13.
8. "The phonological system of Middle Chinese is described in Chapter 2" (p. 5)
Describe in your own words why it makes methodological sense to devote a chapter on Middle Chinese in a book on Old Chinese.
9. Consider the overview of Chinese languages on pp. 9-11.
Can you spot differences in the rate of phonological change in the history of the languages mentioned here?
10. This work takes "a new approach to the use of evidence from the Chinese script" (p. 4). Some examples are given on pp. 11-13.
Similar attention to details from the Chinese script is presented by the author and his colleague Laurent Sagart from CNRS (Paris) in their forthcoming book Old Chinese: a new reconstruction.
The historical linguistic study of the Chinese writing system has been revolutionized in recent years. For another example, see the overview of Imre Galambos' projects on Chinese manuscripts. His Orthography of early Chinese writing (2006) is available online.
(a) What is the technical name for the study of writing systems in the broadest sense?
(b) Please provide two examples of a graphical shape of a Chinese character which would be "anachronistic" (p. 5) to use in reconstructing phonology.
(c) Also provide two examples where the graphical shape of a Chinese character has been adapted to keep up with phonological change.
11. On p. 13, a number of traditional Chinese dictionaries are mentioned.
Among these sources, the Shuōwén is often given pride of place in terms of lexicography. Can you find out why?
The following items refer to Coblin (2000)
Page numbers followed by a slash and the letter L or R (e.g. "p. 537/L") indicate the left or right column on the page.
12. In this article, you may find more new technical details than in the previous one.
Be sure to identify and look up linguistic terms as well as historical names and events you are unfamiliar with, and/or to brush up your knowledge on these items.
13. Provide your own English translations for each of the book titles mentioned on p. 537/R.
In the remainder of the article, keep checking that you understand the titles of all works discussed.
14. As mentioned in Four tones (Chinese), the 入 rù tone (p. 538/L) is labeled as "entering AKA checked" in English. Can you explain the etymology of the Chinese term and the source of the English labels?
15. Please summarize the conclusion at the bottom of p. 538/R in your own words.
16. On p. 540/L, the Arte de la lengua mandarina and Vocabulario de la lengua mandarina by Francisco Varo are mentioned.
Check if modern editions of both these works are available – and if so, who are the editor(s).
17. On p. 542/R, it is explained that "the zhèngyīn system of ca. 1450 was based not on the pronunciation of a single dialect or area but was instead a composite entity".
(a) What could be the reason that a purported linguistic standard is in fact composite in nature?
(b) Cite both advantages and drawbacks of a standard of this nature for its speakers;
and for linguists of later generations.
(c) Can you cite other (historical and/or modern) examples of composite linguistic standards in China?
18. As noted on p. 543/L, Jiǎng Shàoyú 蔣紹愚 has pointed out that for historical stages of Chinese, "spoken material has [...] been accessible only indirectly through the medium of the literary sources".
(a) Please paraphrase this statement in your own words, and/or give an example.
(b) Compare this state of affairs with the status of spoken materials in the description of the modern standard language as it arose in the twentieth century. What sources for spoken Mandarin were linguists using in, say, the 1950s?
19. Please give a (short!) summary of the etymology of the modern perfective particle le as described on p. 548.
20. In the short abstract of this article (p. 537), it is explained that the text exposes a "flawed" view about the provenance of standard Mandarin.
In linguistics as in any other branch of scientific research, flawed views are problematic only inasfar they cannot be falsified; otherwise, their very falsification helps science progress.
(a) Is there a difference in meaning between the terms Modern Chinese in assignment 5b and standard Mandarin as used here ("in its oldest sense", p. 537/L)?
If so: please indicate the difference(s).
And if not: check if these terms differ in other way (e.g. style, user base, varieties of English)?
(b) Give examples of flawed views in the field of language reconstruction (not necessarily Chinese) which have since been falsified.
(c) Give examples of views in linguistics which cannot be falsified.
laatste wijziging: 10 november 2013 | home
Index