I’ve recently been considering studying a little Classical Chinese on the side. I’m interesting in reading some classical literature, but I have also heard it can help give some insight into current language use. Has anyone had any experience learning Classical Chinese and could offer any insight into it? Does it help you understand modern Chinese better or is it just too different? And, did you start studying while at a basic, intermediate, or advanced level of Mandarin?
Studying it a bit has helped me when I read inordinately literary writing by musty academics. I don’t recommend trying it until you reach an advanced level. YMMV. You might also be interested in these threads:
Classical Chinese learning resources?
Studying Classical Chinese in Taipei
I’ve been studying Chinese for some years, and at my best I would say I am at an intermediate level (I feel like being generous to myself tonight). I also took a Classical Chinese class in college. It was probably the hardest Chinese class I have ever taken. We used the “Language of the Dragon: A Classical Chinese Reader” textbook. I knew Classical was going to be tough but I didn’t think it was going to be THAT tough.
Here is the first text of the book: 李白少讀書 ，未成棄去 。道逢老嫗磨杵，白問其故，曰：“作鍼。”白感其言，遂卒業。
It looks easy because it is a short passage but my classmates and I joked that it ruined our Chinese. We kept trying to use Classical grammar structure with modern Chinese and it A) made no sense and B) sounded silly.
I found the class fascinating, while incredibly tough. You literally have to read the text one word at a time because there are just some things that are weird, “曰” like in the passage above. That’s not 日 (ri4), it’s 曰(yue1). The definition of yue1 is: 1) to say or 2) said or thus spoke. There isn’t a noun telling who is speaking.
I’ve done two years of Classical Chinese before formally learning Mandarin. I did some informal Mandarin before taking Classical Chinese. (i.e. I picked up a Mandarin textbook and read it.) The idea of doing Mandarin informally was to have some clue about character structure and also a bit what to expect linguistically speaking.
I read Mencius during the first semester of Classical Chinese because that’s pretty much what everybody beings with. Then everything else was Buddhist texts, either sūtra or śāstra (scholastic treatises).
I found that formally studying Mandarin was helpful for my Classical Chinese. The reason for this is that in Classical Chinese classes, I was never required to memorize characters. I would eventually remember characters but I was not forced to systematically remember them. In Mandarin class, we were tested on all four language skills. I was required to produce (instead of just reading) so I had to memorize characters. This helped me with reading the classical language.
However, learning Classical Chinese was not very helpful for my Mandarin. One reason the classical language has not been helpful with Mandarin is that Buddhist Classical Chinese is pretty peculiar. I think the classical phrases which find their way into Mandarin are more from the Confucian or Daoist classics than from Buddhist texts.
I don’t know what scholars say about Buddhist Classical Chinese, but in my experience it’s peculiar partly because it seems like it was an attempt to force Indo-European grammar (in this case Sanskrit/Pali), with its precise tense and number, onto tenseless, numberless Chinese.
Example: using 諸 as a pluralizer
That’s pretty standard stuff in classical. You see stuff like “子曰” (Confucius said) or “或曰” (some say) all the time. The reason learning some classical IS useful in advanced Mandarin is that you still see some scholars using characters like 曰 and 或 this way. Just not often. But I came across both in perfectly normal modern writing just last week. Classical ability is also VERY useful (indispensable, really, IMO) if you want to be able to read Chinese philosophy, or history, or etymological sources.
Classical is SOOOO hard (mine still sucks, frankly) that I really wouldn’t recommend you attempt it unless you already have a background in Chinese. But it’s cool because it is hard, and archaic, and mysterious. Those things float my boat. YMMV.
Yes, sometimes it’s a problem with tense and number. Sometimes it is a problem with trying to be too literal like using 如是 to translate the Sanskrit “iti”. “Iti” literally means “thus” but it is most often used to mark the end of a quotation in Sanskrit. Some early Chinese translations of Indic texts (we’re not always sure whether they were Sanskrit or some Prakrit) are filled with 如是 everywhere there’s a quotation. Later translators decided it just looked stupid and dropped it in most cases. Sometimes there are problems with expressing long Sanskrit compounds into Chinese.
[quote=“Dragonbones”]Classical ability is also VERY useful (indispensable, really, IMO) if you want to be able to read Chinese philosophy, or history, or etymological sources.[/quote]I’ve never formally studied Classical Chinese but of the litte that I know, it has definitely helped, especially when reading at a very high level where the author prefers to be concise yet eloquent rather than accessible and vernacular. It also helps because the author invariably ends up quoting some 某某子 or historical text to prove his point.
I found learning classical was a great help in doing everyday things like reading newspapers. It helped with some vocab, but mostly how to properly parse words. If you want to go read pulp fiction like 鹿鼎紀 (which is great fun to read), or 書劍恩仇錄, knowing classical will make it a lot easier.
I strongly agree with those who say that it will help your ability to read more sophisticated modern Chinese. I think you should start studying after you can get through newspaper articles and the vernacular readings in the junior high school textbooks here.
I’ll add to the yes chorus. You can pick up some very cool classical texts with the modern Chinese translations and explanations from San Min publishing. I think. They’re all a weird blue colour and in all good Taiwan bookshops.
HG
[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]I’ll add to the yes chorus. You can pick up some very cool classical texts with the modern Chinese translations and explanations from San Min publishing. I think. They’re all a weird blue colour and in all good Taiwan bookshops.
HG[/quote]
I think the book (or books) your talking about is called 古文觀止. I’d say it’s an awesome resource for studying classical Chinese since it includes explanations of the texts as well as Bopomofo next to the classical texts.
I agree, though with the caveat that your advantage will be limited mostly to the realm of writing coming from Taiwan and the older generations of the Chinese diaspora. Aside from the ubiquitous four-character sayings, mainlanders don’t use classical terms or constructions in their writing much at all.
In light of this, and somewhat to my chagrin, I’ve found that I’ve become so accustomed to the simplified Chinese from the mainland that makes up 95% of my Chinese to English translation work, that I find texts coming from Taiwan to be more taxing on my noggin. I think you simply cannot underestimate how debased the literary calibre of writing in mainland China has become under Communist rule and especially following the Cultural Revolution. Aside from differences such as the standard phrase/clause reversals relative to English, and topic stating at the beginning of sentences, I find mainland writing to be more accessible to my Western way of parsing syntax than Taiwanese writing.
But when I get a contract or news article or descriptive piece of writing from Taiwan, look out! All of a sudden “baihua” goes out the window, literary references get ratcheted up, and my dictionary gets a real workout.
[quote=“rousseau”]Aside from differences such as the standard phrase/clause reversals relative to English, and topic stating at the beginning of sentences, I find mainland writing to be more accessible to my Western way of parsing syntax than Taiwanese writing.
But when I get a contract or news article or descriptive piece of writing from Taiwan, look out! All of a sudden “baihua” goes out the window, literary references get ratcheted up, and my dictionary gets a real workout.[/quote]
In over 15 years of translating Chinese originating from Taiwan, I have found that the quality of writing has deteriorated over the years. Whereas on the occasion that I come across something from the mainland, it’s usually refreshingly clear and well written.
I think it may depend on what kind of simplified material you are working on. After all, there is so much of it. Here is the Sanmin series that HCG was referring to: Classical Texts in New Translation with Modern Annotations ( Guji jinzhu xinyi 古籍今注新譯). As you will see if you click through the link, there is far more on offer than just the Guwenguanzhi. Please note that the scholarly apparatus that supports them is generally very conservative and is far from reflecting the state of the art. This is especially true of pre-Qin works. Nonetheless, these are an great resource.
There is another, newer series that was even more extensive distributed (I think) by Jianhong Books on Chongqing S. Rd. about 10 years ago. I can’t find any references online. I’ll have to rummage up one of my copies. This one was even better and made a good attempt to use some of the more modern scholarship.
[quote=“Feiren”]I think it may depend on what kind of simplified material you are working on. After all, there is so much of it. Here is the Sanmin series that HCG was referring to: Classical Texts in New Translation with Modern Annotations ( Guji jinzhu Xinyi 古籍今注新譯). As you will see if you click through the link, there is far more on offer than just the Guwenguanzhi. Please note that the scholarly apparatus that supports them is generally very conservative and is far from reflecting the state of the art. This is especially true of pre-Qin works. Nonetheless, these are an great resource.
There is another, newer series that was even more extensive distributed (I think) by Jianhong Books on Chongqing S. Rd. about 10 years ago. I can’t find any references online. I’ll have to rummage up one of my copies. This one was even better and made a good attempt to use some of the more modern scholarship.[/quote]
At any rate 古文觀止 is a nice comprehensive book to start with if your having trouble navigating through the myriad of options.
It’s certainly a favorite of conservative Chinese teachers in Taiwan.
Wang Li’sGudai Hanyu or one of Beida’s updated textbooks would be a much sounder choice.
[quote=“Feiren”]It’s certainly a favorite of conservative Chinese teachers in Taiwan.
Wang Li’sGudai Hanyu or one of Beida’s updated textbooks would be a much sounder choice.[/quote]
Assuming that the purpose of learning classical Chinese in the first place is to improve your reading than 古文觀止 is obviously the best starting point since most high school students in Taiwan must study this book for college entrance examinations. If your worried about what sort of classical Chinese that Taiwanese writers would actually incorporate into their writing than you will find this book the most useful and practical. However, if you are worried about the politics of a certain teacher, then I suppose you could go with buying 10 books instead of 1 like feiren has suggested.
And why would Taiwanese students have to study the guwenguanzhi for their entrance exams? It’s often recommended as outside reading material, but it’s not actually tested.
Gudai hanyu is a series of four or six volumes depending on which edition you use.
My information is coming from actual Taiwanese students that say that material from this book is, in fact, tested. I have been recommended this book on multiple occassions by real-life Taiwanese saying quote: “it is a much faster approach to a better understanding of Classical Chinese.” You can argue this back and forth, but ultimately the most useful would obviously be one comprehensive book. Asking someone to choose one of six volumes is not really giving them advice. It’s like sending them to the library’s history section and saying “Wanna learn history? Here pick a book.” Advice that seems a bit more daunting than helpful if you ask me.