[quote=“Chris”]Sounds like the German term “duzen”, which means “to address someone as ‘du’ rather than ‘sie’”; to address in the familiar a person you would ordinarily address in the formal.
Kind of like “Ahhh, don’t call me Mr. Smith. Call me Frank!”
To be on a first name basis?[/quote]
I thought it was the other way round…
Asking someone to be MORE polite to someone who deserves respect because of his/her age.
So based on sjcma’s explanation, how about “'fail to address elders appropriately”? (or “in an appropriate, respectful way”)
[quote=“Chris”]Sounds like the German term “duzen”, which means “to address someone as ‘du’ rather than ‘sie’”; to address in the familiar a person you would ordinarily address in the formal.
Kind of like “Ahhh, don’t call me Mr. Smith. Call me Frank!”
To be on a first name basis?[/quote]
Is “duzen” is a friendly word? It so, it doesn’t quite match 沒大沒小.
沒大沒小 is an adjective that describes behaviour that disrepects one’s elders, as DB has already posted. But it’s not as broad as simply being disrespectful to one’s elders as that can include 不孝 and 無禮 as well. 沒大沒小 is limited to actions towards one’s elders (related or not) while “Duzen” sounds like it could be applied to equals. Calling one’s elders by their names only is a big no-no. Also, if one’s elder (most likely to be related in this instance) is to ask a queston and one does not respond (let’s say, due to a temper tantrum), then one is being 沒大沒小 as well. Basically, it means one is not speaking or acting properly, generationally speaking, in society.
It’s like if you were to call your mother by her first name. This may be OK for some in the younger generation in Western societies, but as I’m sure you know, is a super big no-no in Chinese societies. 沒大沒小 does not apply to equals (i.e. friends) or to those where the generational status is unclear. Thus, if I were to call Prez Chen “Yo, 阿扁”, that would not be considered as 沒大沒小. Maybe a bit disrespectful, but not 沒大沒小. If my kid were to call the Prez 阿扁 where it is clear that my kid is of a younger generation, then my kid is being 沒大沒小. If I were to call my older brother anything other than 哥 or 大佬 (which I never do), then I can also be called for being 沒大沒小.
I think this is getting long-winded, which was what I was trying to avoid. :s
[quote=“hannes”][quote=“Chris”]Sounds like the German term “duzen”, which means “to address someone as ‘du’ rather than ‘sie’”; to address in the familiar a person you would ordinarily address in the formal.
Kind of like “Ahhh, don’t call me Mr. Smith. Call me Frank!”
To be on a first name basis?[/quote]
I thought it was the other way round…
Asking someone to be MORE polite to someone who deserves respect because of his/her age.[/quote]
Age, yes, for those that are unrelated. For those related, it depends on their relative location in the family tree. It’s inapprorpriate to call one’s uncle by name only even if that uncle is younger.
I like that…almost there, just a bit shy. Disrespecting one’s elders is just a bit too broad. Perhaps somewhere in between? 
In Germany you would be 沒大沒小 if you say “Du” instead of “Sie” (both words mean “You” in English) to an adult stranger. But you usually say “Du” to elder relatives such as uncles, aunts, grandparents, etc.
Talking about the president of Taiwan, I always find it disturbing that he calls himself A-Bian, because that’s his nickname. In the West it is not really common that someone refers to himself by using his nickname. I guess the Chinese leaders avoid the word “Wo” (“I”) to appear more humble, like the former president would say “Deng-Hui thinks this or that…” but I cannot think of another leader who uses his nickname.
Same in Mexican Spanish (tu and usted).
Jimmy Carter?
The current president is an exception to the rule since he is referred to in newspaper headlines as “Bian” instead of “Chen”. Other politicians are referred to by their surnames. So a debate between Ma Ying-Jeou and Wang Jin-Pyng would be 馬王辯論, whereas a debate between Chen Shui-Bian and Ma Ying-Jeou would be 扁馬辯論. In the West, some nicknames are used, respectfully, such as FDR and LBJ.
Perhaps an example of 沒大沒小 in English would be for someone who is invited to a televised state dinner at the White House to address Bush as “George” or “Dubya” instead of “Mr. President” as protocol dictates, or calling a very strict, conservative boss or professor by his first name or a nickname like “Johnny-boy”.
So an adult addressing another adult stranger of a similar age as “Sie” would be improper? If so, I don’t think that qualifies as 沒大沒小 since there’s no 大 or 小 in this relationship. They are equals.
I guess it’s better than 朕! 
Why not use 本人 instead?
[quote=“sjcma”][quote=“hannes”]
So an adult addressing another adult stranger of a similar age as “Sie” would be improper? If so, I don’t think that qualifies as 沒大沒小 since there’s no 大 or 小 in this relationship. They are equals.[/quote][/quote]
Right, because both are 大, they are Dada. 
…
I’ve always found 本人 to be pretentious, but that’s merely my impression as a non-native speaker. I also find the use of 係 instead of 是 to be pretentious. I wonder how native speakers feel about this.
here is a new challenge.
how do you translate “A錢”
like in the sentence: 總統的女婿A了很多錢。
Where does this “A” come from? Is it Taiwanese? Is there a Chinese character for it?
[quote=“hannes”]here is a new challenge.
how do you translate “A錢”
like in the sentence: 總統的女婿A了很多錢。
Where does this “A” come from? Is it Taiwanese? Is there a Chinese character for it?[/quote]
The president’s son-in-law gained a large amount of money by unscrupulous means?
“A” is Taiwanese. Either means to take or grind out. I am unsure.
I’ve always found 本人 to be pretentious, but that’s merely my impression as a non-native speaker. I also find the use of 係 instead of 是 to be pretentious. I wonder how native speakers feel about this.[/quote]
I wonder how native speakers feel as well, esp. on both sides of the strait. Anyway, this is my opinion. I think that 本人 used in a casual setting is pretentious. But in the case of a president, where he is in a position of merit and dinstinction, I think using 本人 is fine. I also think a CEO using 本人 in a formal setting, such as a shareholder meeting, is also fine.
I’m curious. Why do you think the use of 係 is pretentious?
To tell you the truth, I’m not always sure when it is appropriate to use 係 and when it is appropriate to use 是 and when it is appropriate to use either. Or are they fully interchangeable? I do find that stuff from the mainland never use 係. Of course, it’s been simplied to 系 there so any attempt to use it would, I imagine, cause some confusion.
[quote=“lupillus”][quote=“hannes”]here is a new challenge.
how do you translate “A錢”
like in the sentence: 總統的女婿A了很多錢。
Where does this “A” come from? Is it Taiwanese? Is there a Chinese character for it?[/quote]
The president’s son-in-law gained a large amount of money by unscrupulous means?
“A” is Taiwanese. Either means to take or grind out. I am unsure.[/quote]
It is a false adaption from Taiwanese. “A錢” should be “挈錢”(qie4 qian2). :google:
Mainly because it seems to be used in situations where the writer is using other pretentious language. It’s used for more often in Taiwan than in mainland China, and I find far less pretentiousness in mainland Chinese writing.
It’s also used commonly in legal writing in Taiwan, particularly before the word 指 in legal definitions of terms. (This generally follows the comma that’s used in Chinese to separate topic from comment.)
X,係指Y: X is defined as Y; X denotes Y.
The above is all personal opinion from a non-native speaker’s perspective, so I could be talking completely out of my ass! 
In that case, I have a great amount of respect for your ass.
Mainly because it seems to be used in situations where the writer is using other pretentious language. It’s used for more often in Taiwan than in mainland China, and I find far less pretentiousness in mainland Chinese writing.
It’s also used commonly in legal writing in Taiwan, particularly before the word 指 in legal definitions of terms. (This generally follows the comma that’s used in Chinese to separate topic from comment.)
X,係指Y: X is defined as Y; X denotes Y.
The above is all personal opinion from a non-native speaker’s perspective, so I could be talking completely out of my ass! [/quote]
In the case of “X,係指Y”, I don’t find anything pretentious with this. In fact, my instinct is that 係 is a better fit here than 是. But as you say, this is found typically in legal documents and so is a poor example.
I find the writing in Taiwan to be more difficult to understand as the usage tends more towards classical Chinese than mainland writing. I’ve heard complaints from mainlanders that they also have difficulty understanding Taiwan newspapers but I’ve never heard the reverse. I personally find the mainland writing to be more colloquial rather than formal. Perhaps this is why mainland writing seems less pretentious – a difference in writing style?
I’m sure you’ve seen the stats that looked at the number of characters one needs to know for reading a newspaper, etc. I think the number of characters needed for mainland newspapers is lower. This is due to the difference in writing styles.
In spoken Cantonese, 是 is almost never ever used. The common usage is 係. Thus, I have never found the use of 係 to be pretentious and I find its usage in Taiwan to be in line with its more classical writing style.
[quote=“Dragonbones”]Zu Chu Wen
詛楚文
This is also the name of a fourth-century B.C. stone? inscription…
[…]
I would assume this renunciation by Chu of its alliance with Qin was what angered the Qin king, but the Zu Chu Wen is said to have been from the time of King Hui, not after his death. So my story doesn’t quite fit.
My 2nd guess is that when “Zhang Yi went to Chu to become their prime minister, offering King Huai of Chu territory and a daughter of Qin for an alliance”, perhaps King Huai accepted initially. Regardless, he did then attack Qin, so perhaps it was then.
Has anyone got a better answer?
[/quote]
I’ve made an attempt to answer your question in the Culture & History forum here.
Hope it helps.
挈
qie
ㄑㄧㄝˋ
to take along
to lift; to raise; to take up
right, thanks for the info!
so “A錢” could be either translated as “gain money by unscrupulous means” like lupillus suggests or “take along money” using the above definition for 挈
how about “divert money in your own pocket”?