Proverbs & idioms – what kind of richness for the language?

[Long Pan]

In one of his book about Japan, the Swiss writer Nicolas Bouvier says (the translation is mine and definitely not as good the original; sorry for that):

“I said to a young lady «Silence is full of flowers». My friend Yuji gave me a telling-off « proverbs, we already use them too often; find something else ; anything but not a proverb ». He is right. Proverbs and idioms are perfect for those who invent them. They are still acceptable in rural surroundings, when in the evening, after a long day outside, we have no more invention, no more energy to give battle to new words. But once incorporated in popular chats, proverbs become blanks of the mind, placebos, mental droppings. We put in superseded idioms what everyone has already thought, and without any risk as common sense is there to cover you. This stands for proverbs and idioms of the culture we belong to; for instance for Japanese beating idioms over a beer. But me as a foreigner, the best proverbs make me feel by flashes a mentality which is not mine. And during the time of these flashes, I become Japanese” (extract from “Le vide et le plein” )

So is that a freedom or a jail for the mind when a language has tailor-made idioms and proverbs for any situation, any feeling, any experience you encounter. For instance in French, proverbs and idioms are not considered as a very subtle or elegant way of talking; but rather as common and with no imagination (writers as Flaubert or Joseph de Maistre made famous writings against idioms).

I wonder to what extent what Bouvier writes could be applied for Chinese 成语 and 谚语 (the so called few hundred something 成语 that any chinese SHOULD know after graduating) . Do Chinese people use them that often and in which occasion ? (my personal Chinese knowledge is to basic to get it) Are proverbs & idioms (as new words are) an added richness to the language or rather short-cuts of the mind? Does anybody knows if Chinese use proverbs & idioms more than Japanese? Maybe advanced learners could help answering this question.

----------

For further information in English about Bouvier in Japan, see this 1992 NYtimes review.

[gato]

I do think many Chinese writers use "set phrases" (aka idioms) as a crutch, particularly when they use a series of idioms in a row. Writers in English have long been taught avoid cliches, to which Chinese idioms bear a close resemblance, but the Chinese are usually not taught such rules. If anything, Chinese writers are taught to use classical phrases and sayings by famous people to increase the weightiness of their own writing. And as some Chinese critics have noted, many Chinese writers tend to favor poetic qualities (rhymes, rhythms, emotionality) at the expense of logical rigor.

There is a historical reason for this, I think. One review of idioms found that about the 70% of the phrases were from the Han dynasty (which ended 1800 years ago) or earlier. As you might know, Chinese prose before the modern period (pre-1900) were written mostly in classical Chinese, which is very different from spoken Chinese. Because of the gap between writing and speech, students learn classical Chinese by memorizing ancient texts (which tend to be closer to poetry than prose). Even today, Chinese education in the humanities is largely based on memorization. Thus, inevitably memorized texts creep into Chinese writings.

I think there may also be a linguistic reason for the proliferation of idioms in Chinese. Some of them are beneficial in enriching the vocabulary, much like the longer (Latin-derived) words in English. Other idioms are more like fillers. A good writer, I suppose, would know the difference and use idioms with moderation.

See this review of a Chinese in English translation below for a humorous example.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/HH05Cb01.html

BOOK REVIEW

The Lenovo Affair by Ling Zhijun (translated by Martha Avery) [《联想风云》]

Reviewed by Gary LaMoshi

The translation preserves the original's collection of quaint, deeply meaningful Chinese aphorisms, such as "he felt his way up the vine to find the gourd" [顺藤摸瓜] and "push the wave and assist the billows" [推涛作浪]. These aphorisms are set off by quotation marks, perhaps to ensure that readers won't mistake them for original banalities. That's not to say Ling (or translator Martha Avery) can't write. One passage that appears without quote marks states that company vice president Wang Xiaoyan "could slice through those opposing her like splitting a piece of bamboo" [势如破竹?].

[Koneko]

Even today, Chinese education in the humanities is largely based on memorization. Thus, inevitably memorized texts creep into Chinese writings.

That's so true. Not only in China, we also memorise a lot of Chinese idioms, proverbs, golden sayings in Malaysia. We start doing this from primary schools all the way up tp secondary schools, all in all a total of 12 ~ 13 years of hard work! As yuo can see, there are actually quite a lot to learn by heart.

K.

[Long Pan]

I think there may also be a linguistic reason for the proliferation of idioms in Chinese. Some of them are beneficial in enriching the vocabulary, much like the longer (Latin-derived) words in English. Other idioms are more like fillers. A good writer, I suppose, would know the difference and use idioms with moderation.

You are right Gato: in a way 成语 could be considered as long words - some of them being clichés, others being more subtle. Difficult therefore to compare with the popular and not so numerous idioms of western languages.

The question about "what is a good writer" in the West or in China is very interesting. Although the topic is definitely out of my ability, there is one point which has always amazed me: the abstract ingenuity our alphabet v.s the amazing artisitc and realistic challenge of the 汉字. In a way our alphabet is quite close to the binary language used by computers: they use 2 signs (0, 1) while we use 26 letters (+ few tones). Each letter is very abstract in itself; only rules of pronunciations create links with the spoken language, and thus with its objects. Chinese took the other way : they drawn things as they were and from these artistic and realistic point of view the 汉字 progressively become what they are, ultimately creating a giant 10 000 something alphabet. Therefore on the one side we have an abstract and ingenious set of 26 signs which enable you to write all that you want (which is magical as it is magical that our digital devices only use 2 signs to communicate); on the other side thousands and thousands of characters, with something like 300 000 combinations of them, more than anybody could learn, thus a giant system which is the result of an incredible artistic ambition to draw the whole world as it is. People often say that Chinese writing is by itself a piece of art. On the opposite our alphabet has zero artistic value in itself (it is just technical). Does that mean that western literature, starting from zero with its abstract set of 26 letters, give more place for creativity ?