寫真 for photograph?

[Mugi]

HashiriKata,

I'm sorry to be rude, but you're clearly out of your depth. 粵 and 越 are established variants of each other that anyone studying Chinese history or classical Chinese knows; to oversimplify things, this is as basic as knowing "centre" and "center" are the same word, or for English language historical linguists that "shirt" and "skirt" were originally one and the same, or that "church" and Scots "kirk" are the same. Any intermediate learner of Chinese knows that in the function of the copula, 是 and 系 are identical - it's fundamental knowledge. There is no "typo" - the two characters are simply classical variants. Yes, Vietnam is not rendered as 粵南, but that's just due to established orthography, in the similar way that "photo" is not written "foto" in English, or that "England" is no longer rendered "Engelond". I believe that 越 was the original character to refer to the historical area and people in question (hence "bai yue" is usually rendered 百越), and that 粵 is a later variant - why it came about, I do not know.

(Take a look at the Kangxi dictionary entry for 越 )

It's also noteworthy that to my knowledge the two characters are pronounced identically (tone as well) in every extant Chinese dialect (this is certainly true of the dialects I'm familiar with: 普通話, 廣州話, 台灣閩南話, 四縣客家話) as well as languages that have historically borrowed the characters - Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese.

You're right in pointing out that I haven't stated my sources - but that's because I'm putting forward the accepted (academic) explanation, particularly from the Chinese perspective. To oversimplify things again, your suggestion is the equivalent of suggesting that Japanese is directly derived from Old Chinese - not entirely out of the question, but counter to accepted understanding based on the body of evidence. However, I will endeavour to provide you with some evidence in the next few days that 越南 means "South of Yue" (although I would suggest that you reread some of your links first!) If you don't accept that 越 = 粵 though, then there is no point in going on until you've done a little more relevant study in Chinese historical phonology, character etymology and reading of Chinese and Vietnamese history with repsect to 百越 and southern China/nothern Vietnam. I don't profess to be an expert in these areas, but it's clear from your responses that you know even less.

Historical political and cultural situations aside, naming one's country in relation to another geographical location is by no means unusual - I'm from New Zealand, a case in point!

To play on one of your comments, it confounds me when I see people who know little about a subject spout their so-called knowledge thereof.

[HashiriKata]

I'm sorry to be rude, but you're clearly out of your depth.

You don’t need to say sorry, I’m quite used to to rudeness & insults when (some) people running out of steam

Of course, as someone who is still learning Chinese, I have no shame in not knowing the relation between 粵 and 越. I therefore openly asked for help on this and duly acknowledged the help that was offered. And yet, you’re trying to attack me for this, what a hero you are!

In fact, if you’ve got some sense, you should have detected my reluctance (quote: “take it or leave it is up to you, sorry!”) in carrying on with a discussion that I saw pointless, for two obvious reasons:

- I don’t argue with people on topics I know that they don’t even have a background knowledge to start with.

- As a genuine article, I don’t feel any obligation to prove myself. I pursue discussions only when I consider it’s worth doing.

So, please count me out of this thread from now, ok?

(But if you’ve got some genuine questions relating to Vietnam (including the matter under discussion!) and sincerely need help, then ask politely and I may be there for you, honestly! )

[Mugi]

I don’t argue with people on topics I know that they don’t even have a background knowledge to start with.

HashiriKata, I think this refers more to you than anyone else in this instance - a little humility wouldn't go amiss.

Although I feel a little guilty in having hijacked the thread, I would like to make one last post to set a few things straight.

Someone mistranslated the meaning of 越南 in an earlier post, and I made a brief and polite correction, which is the accepted (although not categorically definitive) explanation of the meaning of the country's name.

You then came along and condescendingly negated my explanation, offering a different, and for me unheardof, explanation. As someone who has a near native level grasp of Mandarin and an intermediate level of Vietnamese, I found your explanation to be suspect, but not entirely implausible. Hence I politely asked for you to back up your unusual claim.

At which point you continued your antagonistic line and supplied some interesting, yet inclonclusive, reference pages.

I find it amusing that you put forward what is at best a questionable theory and acuse others (myself) of not having the necessary background to discuss the point (without knowing what my background is) when you yourself clearly don't have the requisite knowledge.

I am in no way "running out of steam" - merely losing interest in communicating with someone who is antagonistic and seems to be too proud to admit he's out of his depth. I must admit that I'm a little disappointed too - although I think I've seen you lose your cool occasionally in other threads, my overall impression of you until now was that you were a helpful and perceptive forum member. But in this instance I think you've made the right decision in desisting from participating in this thread.

For what it's worth, I do intend to post additional information regarding the origin of the name 越南, whatever it may be, when I find enough time (although I think I should start a new thread).

[HashiriKata]

@leeyah: Thank you!

@Mugi: Although I asked you to leave me out but you seem to be still intent on going on in this very irrelevant direction and provoking me for response. So take this reply as my last to please you:

I’m quite surprised with your claim of possessing an intermediate level of Vietnamese. If that is genuine, I would have thought you would be able to make good use of the Vietnamese references I left you earlier, and would have immediately realised that you were way off-track. (Or shall we be honest: Did Google and Barbel Fish internet translation services let you down? )

I do intend to post additional information regarding the origin of the name 越南, whatever it may be, when I find enough time

That is good, but before spending your valuable time in a fruitless direction, first try to understand the following (and don’t forget to say ”Thank you!” ):

Năm 1802, Nguyễn Ánh đăng quang, mở đầu thời Nguyễn và cho đổi tên nước là Việt Nam, Quốc hiệu Việt Nam được công nhận hoàn toàn về mặt ngoại giao để trở thành chính thức vào năm 1804. Tuy nhiên, hai tiếng "Việt Nam" lại thấy xuất hiện từ khá sớm trong lịch sử nước ta. Ngay từ cuối thế kỷ 14 đã có một bộ sách nhan đề Việt Nam thế chí do trạng nguyên Hồ Tông Thốc biên soạn. Cuốn Dư địa chí của Nguyễn Trãi (đầu thế kỷ 15) nhiều lần nhắc đến hai chữ "Việt Nam". Ðiều này còn được đề cập rõ ràng trong những tác phẩm của trạng Trình Nguyễn Bỉnh Khiêm (1491-1585), chẳng hạn ngay trang mở đầu tập Trình tiên sinh quốc ngữ đã có câu: "Việt Nam khởi tổ xây nền". Người ta cũng tìm thấy hai chữ "Việt Nam" trên một số tấm bia khắc từ thế kỷ 16-17 như bia chùa Bảo Lâm (1558 ) ở Hải Phòng, bia chùa Cam Lộ (1590) ở Hà Tây, bia chùa Phúc Thành (1664) ở Bắc Ninh... Ðặc biệt bia Thuỷ Môn Ðình (1670) ở biên giới Lạng Sơn có câu đầu: "Việt Nam hầu thiệt, trấn Bắc ải quan" (đây là cửa ngõ yết hầu của nước Việt Nam và là tiền đồn trấn giữ phương Bắc). Về ý nghĩa, phần lớn các giả thuyết đều cho rằng từ "Việt Nam" kiến tạo bởi hai yếu tố: chủng tộc và địa lý (người Việt ở phương Nam).

( http://vysa.jp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1063&Itemid=93 )

By the way, there is no need to refer to my relation with other threads or members. Are you trying to stir up old wounds or trying to recruit allies? You’ll be disappointed, Mugi, since everybody here would know that with the quantity of my posts, it’s natural that there will be occasional disagreements, but it’s low life of you to attempt to use this as a weapon in a discussion .