Categories
Culture History

chá

chá (tea 茶) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

Long before drinking tea became a big part of English culture, it had been a big part of Chinese culture. As Wikipedia summarizes:

An early credible record of tea drinking dates to the third century AD, in a medical text written by Chinese physician Hua Tuo.[source] It was popularised as a recreational drink during the Chinese Tang dynasty [(618–907 CE)], and tea drinking subsequently spread to other East Asian countries. Portuguese priests and merchants introduced it to Europe during the 16th century.[source] During the 17th century, drinking tea became fashionable among the English, who started to plant tea on a large scale in British India.

Similarly, the English word “tea” and its doublet “chai” originally came from the words for “tea” in different Chinese languages. This week’s MEotW, “chá (tea 茶)”, is the word for “tea” in Mandarin.

“Tea” and its Doublet

Hold on, you may say, what’s a doublet? Here is a definition:

doublet

One of two (or more) words in a language that have the same etymological root but have come to the modern language through different routes.

So, how did “tea” and its doublet “chai” both end up in the English language after having come from the same root through different routes?

Linguists Gretchen McCulloch and Lauren Gawne discussed this on their podcast Lingthusiasm:

Lauren: One of the things I always find interesting about these loanwords that come to us in batches from particular domains is how it highlights global history, and usually global histories of trade and different power dynamics that have operated over that history. One of my absolute favourite stories is the story of tea. We’ve already talked about “chai” and “chia” in Nepali, “tea” in English. The words for “tea” in many of the world’s languages appear to be related. They’ll either have some kind of /te/ or /ti/ pronunciation or some kind of /t͡ʃ/ – “chia,” “chai” pronunciation. That’s because there were two main places in China from which tea travelled to all the different markets in the world.

Gretchen: In Mandarin, which is historically more spoken towards the centre of China, the word for tea is “cha,” but in Min Nan, which is also a variety of Chinese as spoken in the coastal province of Fujian, it’s pronounced /te/. They use the same character, but they’re pronounced differently, which is very common for how Chinese gets written. The key thing here is “coastal” because people who encountered the plant and the drink tea via the sea, via Fujianese traders, learned to pronounce it /te/ or variants on /te/. In French and German, it’s /te/. In English, it used to be /te/ until the vowel shifted. Whereas people who encountered tea through Central China, through land routes like the silk road – so through Sinitic “cha” – you get Mandarin “cha,” Korean “cha,” Japanese “ocha,” but also Hindi “chai,” Persian “chai,” Arabic “shai,” Turkish “chai,” Russian “chai,” and you’re down to Swahili “chai,” all goes through that land route, and sometimes via Persia, to get from “cha” to “chai.” The great maps that people have produced where you can tell if people encountered tea through the land route where they get “cha,” which becomes “chai,” or through the sea route, which becomes “te” and variants on “te” like “tea.”

The Development of Modern Mandarin

The mention above of historical Mandarin reminds me of a book that I read a while ago, A Billion Voices: China’s Search for a Common Language, by David Moser. Here is an excerpt:

After the fall of the Qing Dynasty and the establishment of the Republic of China in 1912, an urgent priority for the new Chinese government was the task of establishing a common language for a linguistically fractured China. When Mao took power in 1949, language unification continued to be of vital importance to the nation building agenda. Faced with the challenge of unifying a vast country populated with hundreds of ethnicities, languages, and dialects, these political leaders were confronted with some of the same linguistic problems and conundrums raised above: Is there such a thing as ‘the Chinese language’? Should the Chinese people share a common tongue? How should it be defined? How should pronunciation, vocabulary, and correct usage be determined? Should one standard language replace the numerous other regional variations, or should all other forms of Chinese continue to flourish? Should written Chinese continue to use the centuries-old character system, or should it be replaced with an alphabet, or some other phonetic system? And who, after all, is the final arbiter for such decisions?

In the PRC, the twentieth century quest for a solution to these problems has resulted in a version of Chinese called Putonghua. How did China arrive at this common language?

In what follows, I will present a brief historical overview of that process, and trace the trajectory of Putonghua as it moved into the twenty-first century.

The Cantonese Connection

Getting back to how historical words for “tea” in different Chinese languages ended up leading to the words “tea” and “chai” in English, here is some other information, that I found on the World Atlas of Language Structures website:

Most words for ‘tea’ found in the world’s languages are ultimately of Chinese origin, but they differ significantly in their form due to their coming via different routes. The differences begin already on Chinese soil. Most Sinitic languages have a form similar to Mandarin chá, but Min Nan Chinese, spoken e.g. in Fujian and Taiwan, has instead forms like te55 (Chaozhou). The Dutch traders, who were the main importers of tea into Europe, happened to have their main contacts in Amoy (Xiamen) in Fujian. This is why they adopted the word for ‘tea’ as thee, and in this form it then spread to large parts of Europe. The influence from Amoy is also visible in many languages spoken in the former Dutch colonies, as in Malay/Indonesian and Javanese teh. However, the first European tea importers were not the Dutch but the Portuguese, in the 16th century; their trade route went via Macao rather than via Amoy, and consequently Portuguese uses chá, derived from Cantonese cha.

Thus, as in other aspects, it seems that the first contact between the West and China when it comes to tea involved the Cantonese.

Categories
Current Events Theocratic

shìjiè mòrì

shìjiè (shì·jiè {generation → [world]} · extent’s → [world’s] 世界)
mòrì (mò·rì end · {sun → [day]} 末日) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

[Notes: Tap/click on a Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expression to reveal its “flashcard”; tap/click on a “flashcard” or its Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) expression to hide the “flashcard”. 📖 📄 📘 icons mean 📖 Reveal All, 📄 Reveal Advanced, and 📘 Reveal None re all the “flashcards” in the heading, paragraph, etc. that they are placed at the beginning of.]

At the time of this writing, jw.org was featuring the article “Politicians Warn of Armageddon—What Does the Bible Say?”. Where the English version of this article uses the word “Armageddon”, the Mandarin version often uses this week’s MEotW, “shìjiè (shì·jiè {generation → [world]} · extent’s → [world’s] 世界) mòrì (mò·rì end · {sun → [day]} 末日)” (which basically means “the end of the world”), with the first occurrence of “Hāmǐjíduōdùn (Armageddon 哈米吉多顿 哈米吉多頓)”, the direct Mandarin translation of “Armageddon”, occurring in parentheses after an occurrence of “shìjiè (shì·jiè {generation → [world]} · extent’s → [world’s] 世界) mòrì (mò·rì end · {sun → [day]} 末日)”.

This shows that the expression “Hāmǐjíduōdùn (Armageddon 哈米吉多顿 哈米吉多頓)” is not considered by the organization to be commonly known by householders in the Mandarin field. The English word “Armageddon”, which refers to something mentioned in the Bible, may be relatively well known in the English-speaking world, but compared to the English-speaking world, the Mandarin-speaking world is significantly less familiar with the Bible and the things mentioned in it.—Revelation 16:14, 16.

[Not taking for granted that Mandarin-speaking people are familiar with the Bible includes not taking for granted that they are familiar with Bible characters and Bible stories. In this regard, some publishers find it helpful to refer their Mandarin-speaking Bible students to publications like the Learn From the Bible (lfb) book. (Mandarin-learning publishers may find it helpful to follow along with the resources at the following links: official CHS+Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) 🔗; unofficial Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) Plus 🔗).]

Related Expressions

The “shì (generation [→ [life; lifetime | world | age; era; epoch]] 世)” in “shìjiè (shì·jiè {generation → [world]} · extent → [world] 世界)” has an original meaning of “generation”, from which is often derived the meaning “world”, since the current generation of people makes up the current world of people. “Dài ({take the place of}; replace; subsitute | replacing; substituting → [acting; substitute | generation [→ [period; era; age]]] 代)”, a past MEotW, is also used to mean “generation”. So, it is no surprise that “shìdài (shì·dài generation · {replacing → [generation]} [→ [generation | generation after generation | period; epoch; era; age]] 世代)”, which could mean “generation”, is a thing. “Shì (generation [→ [life; lifetime | world | age; era; epoch]] 世)” also occurs in past MEotWshìsú (shì·sú {generation’s → [world’s]} · customs | {(of the) generation → [world]} · secular | {generation → [world]} · {secular (world)} 世俗)”, which is used in 1 Corinthians 3:1 (Mandarin NWT (nwtsty)) to effectively mean “fleshly”, “worldly”, or “secular”.

The “ (tip; end [→ [last/final stage]] 末)” in “mòrì (mò·rì end · {sun → [day]} 末日)” also appears in “mòqī (mò·qī end · period 末期)”, and indeed, in “mòshì (mò·shì {end of → [last stage/phase of]} · {generation → [world | age; era]} 末世)”. Some who have been in the Mandarin field for a while may also remember the expression “mòhòu (mò·hòu end · last 末后 末後) de (’s 的) rìzi (rì·zi {suns → [days]} · [suf for nouns] 日子)”. However, note that in the current version of the Mandarin New World Translation Bible (nwtsty), this expression has been replaced with “zuìhòu (zuì·hòu most · afterwards → [final] 最后 最後) de (’s 的) shíqī (shí·qī {(particular) time} · period 时期 時期)” in scriptures such as Ezekiel 38:16.

Ezekiel 38:16 (WOL CHS+Pinyin Parallel Translations)

Usage Examples

Here are a couple of examples of “shìjiè (shì·jiè {generation → [world]} · extent’s → [world’s] 世界) mòrì (mò·rì end · {sun → [day]} 末日)” in use, taken from the above-mentioned article:

English:

Politicians [warn] that we may be facing Armageddon.

Mandarin:

📖 📄 📘 Zhèngzhì (Zhèng·zhì political · governing → [political] 政治) lǐngxiù (lǐng·xiù leading · sleeves → [leaders] 领袖 領袖)fāchū (fā·chū sent · out 发出 發出) jǐnggào (jǐng·gào warning · declarings → [warnings] 警告), shìjiè (shì·jiè {generation → [world]} · extent → [world] 世界) jiāng ({is going to}) miànlín (miàn·lín {be facing} · {be drawing near to} 面临 面臨) mòrì (mò·rì end · {sun → [day]} 末日).

English:

Will the possible use of nuclear weapons lead to Armageddon? What does the Bible say?

Mandarin:

📖 📄 📘 Shǐyòng (using 使用) ({pit (of a fruit)} → [nuclear]核/覈) wǔqì (wǔ·qì military · instruments → [weapons] 武器) huì (will) dǎozhì (dǎo·zhì lead · {to extend to} 导致 導致) shìjiè (shì·jiè {generation → [world]} · extent’s → [world’s] 世界) mòrì (mò·rì end · {sun → [day]} 末日) ma ([? ptcl for “yes/no” questions])? Shèngjīng (Shèng·jīng (the) Holy · Scriptures → [the Bible] 圣经 聖經) zěnme (zěn·me what · [suf] 怎么 怎麼/麽) shuō ({does say}說/説)?

Categories
Culture Theocratic

zuì’è

zuì’è (zuì’·è {crime | sin} · evil 罪恶 罪惡) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

Appendix A2 of the English New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (Study Edition), entitled “Features of This Revision”, discusses vocabulary changes that have been made in the current revision, words that have been translated differently than before. As noted in various entries in the excellent resource Referenced Theo. Expressions (RTE), Appendix A2 of the current Mandarin version of the New World Translation Bible (nwtsty) correspondingly discusses words that have been translated differently in the current revision of the Mandarin NWT Bible, compared to how they had been translated before.

Since we base what we say in Jehovah’s service on his Word the Bible, the vocabulary used in it—and the way those vocabulary words are translated—should be reflected in how we speak in our ministry, at our meetings, etc. So, it is beneficial for us Mandarin field language learners to be familiar with the latest thinking from the organization on how Bible terms should be translated into Mandarin.

Different “Sins” in Mandarin

As Appendix A2 of the current Mandarin version of the New World Translation Bible (nwtsty) points out, this current version builds on the previous version’s efforts to avoid expressions that could easily be associated with false religious concepts.

One example that it points to is that in scriptures such as Psalm 103:10 (English, Mandarin), “zuì’è (zuì’·è {crime | sin} · evil 罪恶 罪惡)” is now used instead of “zuìniè (zuì·niè {sin | crime} · evil [→ [wrongdoing that brings retribution]] 罪孽)” to correspond with the word “sins” that is used in the English version:

Psalm 103:10 (WOL CHS+Pinyin Parallel Translations)

A Buddhist Concept?

So, what’s the deal with “zuìniè (zuì·niè {sin | crime} · evil [→ [wrongdoing that brings retribution]] 罪孽)”? A dictionary of Chinese Buddhist terms that is available to be installed in the Pleco app contains an entry for “zuìniè (zuì·niè {sin | crime} · evil [→ [wrongdoing that brings retribution]] 罪孽)”, with the following sparse definition:

Sins, crimes.

Pleco’s own built-in dictionary lists “wrongdoing that brings retribution” as one of the definitions of “zuìniè (zuì·niè {sin | crime} · evil [→ [wrongdoing that brings retribution]] 罪孽)”. If that definition is connected to the Buddhist concept of “zuìniè (zuì·niè {sin | crime} · evil [→ [wrongdoing that brings retribution]] 罪孽)”, then presumably the retribution that “zuìniè (zuì·niè {sin | crime} · evil [→ [wrongdoing that brings retribution]] 罪孽)” supposedly brings is supposedly brought about by humans, or by some abstract force of justice, since Buddhists do not believe in a God who is a Person.

Anyway, if the expression “zuìniè (zuì·niè {sin | crime} · evil [→ [wrongdoing that brings retribution]] 罪孽)” makes some people think of some Buddhist concept, instead of, for example, the sins referred to in Psalm 103:10 that Jehovah God—not some abstract, impersonal force—would be justified to deal out punishment for, then that seems like a good reason not to continue to use that particular expression in the Mandarin version of the NWT Bible.