Following is a hastily compiled
Chinese part of a proposed universal
language. It is from
someone who only has a 2nd-grade level of Chinese writing
ability. So, please help out.
100
CHINESE CHARACTERS
情義直正健康文武孝敬道德
视死如归男婚女嫁养兒育女
传宗接代修身齐家
静和良心共天忍耻牺容无空
贤忠礼责因魂聖仙
2.
bad stuff – from least bad to
worst
公才安乐美爱果脑法诚信功
名利贪争权强
势理科学民主
自由平等人权经
济政治金錢
鬼妖神军火制
霸恶
情=emotion
is the linking of hearts pure as blue sky
義=righteousness
requires sacrifice myself as a lamb
直=straight
with
people, especially yourself
正=standing
square can
do no wrong
健康=fitness
and health
文=scholarship,
as
examplified by confucius
武=kungfu
principles,
as examplified by kuankung(can be seen in the little shrine often found
in
chinese restaurants.it's the red-faced guy with a big sword)
孝=respect
parents
unconditionally
敬=respect
elders and
teachers as a habit
道=way of
life as
described by lao tzu(kind of teacher to confucius) in a way no
westerners,
including me, can understand
德=a lot of
goodness
or something
视死如归=regarding
death
as returning home(go talk to a terrorist)
男婚女嫁=man
marrying,
woman marrying to
养兒育女=raised
sons and
cultivate daughters
传宗接代=pass
down and
receive from generation to generation
修身齐家=cultivate
oneself , then raise a family
静=calmness
和=friendliness
良心=benevolent
conscience
共=commune
and sharing
天=sky and
heaven
忍=endure
with a knife
on the heart
耻=know
shame
牺=sacrifice
容=tolerance
无=nothingness
空=emptiness
贤=competence
忠=loyalty
礼=politeness
责=duty
因=cause(chinese
care
more about the cause of things, while westerners,
effect)
魂=wondering
soul
聖=saintliness
仙=carefree
soul
i just
learned to write these words about 6 months ago. so
this is only a start, and may also be an
end if someone knowledgeable dont step in and help carry the ball from
now on.
i v
been browsing on liquistic purism and primodialists.
it almost appears people go to wars
defend
their sacred languages. unless we come
up with an earth language quick, the earth is
not
safe.
http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian/exhibition/605/page31.html
better
access to
To the Japanese today, the Japanese language is not simply the way they talk and write. For them, it has assumed the dimensions of a national myth of vast proportions (Miller 1982:4-5).
Since
primordialism is a vague and non-rational
`attachment' rooted in sentiment and other poorly defined and difficult
to
quantify notions, it is also perhaps difficult, or even dangerous, to
identify
or label groups that would seem to exemplify primordialism par
excellence. This
despite the need for examples from language loyal groups that have
already been
identified, such as those given by Geertz. Some groups, however, do
stand out,
and seem even proud to be noted for their intense attachment to their
language.
The Tamils are one of these, and by some measures, perhaps among the
strongest;
the Japanese are another, and the French are not far behind. I have
dealt with
various expressions of what might be called primordialism par
excellence
in my 1996 book; in addition to the Tamils, Japanese and French, I cite
passages written about Arabic and Navajo.Here are quotes that assert
strong
evaluations of the special characteristics of the languages in
question,
especially their first-order characteristics, in particular, how the
languages
originated, or how they came to assert their dominance over others:
On Arabic:
Muslims
consider the Koran to be holy scripture only in
the original Arabic of its revelation. The Koran, while it may be
translated,
is only ritually valid in Arabic. This is connected with the notion of
Arabic
as a ``sacred language". Language itself is sacred, because of its
miraculous power to communicate and to externalize thought. In this
sense,
language is essentially the same as the Divine power of creation. In
order to
create, God speaks a Word in the Spirit; similarly, man externalizes
what is
within his mind by formulating words with the breath, by giving breath
``form" in sound. The power of words to transmit to another
consciousness
the knowledge of the speaker lies in the fact that true words are
themselves what they mean, or were at their origin; they are the object
itself
in sound. (Glassé 1989:46).
Thanks to the
relationship of words to their roots, as if
to a supraformal archetype, a deeper and more universal sense often
superimposes itself upon a particular meaning in a phrase in classical
Arabic.
Simple statements, which are the rule in the Koran, open, under the
right
conditions of receptivity, into astonishing and vast horizons; the
world is
reduced to ripples in consciousness. These and other qualities make
Arabic an
imcomparable medium for dialogue between man and God in prayer
(Glassé
1989:47).
On Japanese:
For modern
In modern
On Navajo:
To the Navajo,
man can think only with symbols, so some
symbols must have existed before thought. The first few sentences of
the first
paragraph of the emergence myth read: ``The one that is called `water
everywhere'. The one that is called `black earth'. The one that is
called
`first language.' ...These phrases are significant in that they
indicate that in
the beginning were the word and the thing, the symbol and the object.
...Symbol
is word, and word is the means by which substance is organized and
transformed.
Both substance and symbol are primordial, for in the beginning were the
word
and the element, the symbol and the symbolized. (Witherspoon 1977:46)
For the Navajo
the world was actually created or
organized by means of language. The form of the world was first
conceived in
thought, and then this form was projected onto primordial unordered
substance through
the compulsive power of speech and song. (ibid. 1977:47).
What then might
be the metric by which we measure primordialism? If it
exists, how is it manifested? Are there varying degrees of
primordialism? If it
is gradient, what is the grading scale? As Johnson and Lakoff point
out,
however, things that are not quantifiable, such as sentiments (love
is
their prime example) are almost always described in metaphorical terms:
love is
a physical force (akin to electromagnetism or gravity), a patient
(especially a
mad one), or it is magic, or war. Even the supposedly measurable one
(physical
force) however, is not, in the case of love, described in terms of MHz
or G's,
and the others are described only in terms of further metaphoric
devices
(Johnson and Lakoff 1980:49).
Given the
well-known reluctance, nay inability of the social sciences to
quantify primordialism, or even to touch it with a ten-foot pole, do
the
linguistic primordialists's themselves have ways to assess it? Since
the social
scientists consider it impossible, should it not also be an impossible
task for
the the culture bearers themselves? The answer is no; the primordial
bond is
ineffable, it is not to be quantified, but this is in fact its special
allure.
It can, in fact be qualified, i.e. qualities can be ascribed to
it, and
various expressions of it can be assessed. What can be measured
is the
level of devotion to the object of their admiration, and
primordial
linguistic cultures come readily equipped with ways to measure it.
Though many
cultures refer to the native language as the `mother tongue'
(an appelation that may have originated in France during the French
Revolution)
the Tamils also have the notion of tamir taay (`Tamil as
mother') who is
pure, virginal, immutable, quasi-divine; she gives us life, nourishes
us with
her milk; we must protect her with our lives if need be:
...Tamilttay
...the apotheosis of the language as
goddess, queen, mother, and maiden. Indeed in the discourses of Tamil's
devotees, there is ready slippage between tamil; Tamilttay; taypal,
`mother's milk'; tay, `mother' and taymoli, `mother tongue,'
all of
which over time come to be synonymous with each other. (Ramaswamy
1997:17).
But we (the
outside observers) do not measure her
primordial qualities; they are to be measured by the devotion of her
devotees,
because the strength of her qualities is seen in the strength of
devotion she
inspires. Even this can only properly be measured by a culture bearer,
an
insider to the linguistic culture. Only an insider can tell if the
devotee is
pure in his/her devotion, and pure in his/her service to the language.
If
his/her heart is pure, Tamilttay will speak to him/her, and s/he will
speak a pure
Tamil as well.