User Comments - tingyun

Posted on: The Left-handed Child

I'd guess she said 换手 rather than 还手 (so forth tone rather than second) but I might be wrong.

Posted on: Substitute Teacher

bababardwan is definitely right on the meaning - as for the grammar, I'd take it as a topic/comment type of structure (alot of Chinese is probably better understood that way as opposed to subject/verb, which often breaks down), you could choose to punctuate it 家里的事,有我呢 (if you wanted to really draw out that structure - I wouldn't punctuate it that way for normal purposes) and translate the first part with 'As for household affairs, ...'. I would take the 有我呢 more as a 'I am around/available to help you' with the 有 functions in its 'to exist' type role, though perhaps you could also take it as there being an implied 你 to make for a 你有我 (to do those things)...I'm not sure whether native speakers understand it specifically as one sense or the other, though I'd lean more towards the first interpretation (it might be that it's really understood in a murky combination of both senses, and forcing people to choose one or the other would lead to different choices from different people). As for the 呢, here I think its just filling a chatty particle type role, without any specific meaning, but it might also be indicating a slightly exaggerated tone. These particles have so many different uses, and some of the time they don't have any exact meaning.

Posted on: Tea Refill

Also, I think in many cases they can actually surgically correct it directly, meaning that they can they can participate in the input process as well as the output.

Posted on: Tea Refill

Hi guys,

You know, I wasn't even aware of the alternate possibility until Zhenlijiang mentioned it. I skimmed through most of the Baidu encyclopedia entry, and from everything written there I became convinced it generally refers to a condition that prevents intercourse (at least in the standard manner). Here's one of the quotes (which I like because its talking about the meaning 'among the people' 民间'): "石女，也称为石芯子、实女，民间一般用这个词来称呼先天无法进行性生活的女性。原因一般是因为男性无法正常将生殖器官进入女性体内。"

In the case, it was definitely that sense, based on how it was discovered in the case. Haha, bababawarden, I wasn't just reading it for the pleasure (though looking back on my post it reads that way) - my research is on Ming Dynasty criminal law, specifically reasons for punishment (deterrence of future crime, incapacitation, reform, and retribution). I already did the work on the main code, and an example regulation, and now what's left is judges application, which means getting into the case decisions. The only complete colleciton of 判词 (final opinions) that survives is from a late Ming official 李清, the collection is called 折狱新语. Actually, his stuff is some of the most difficult I've ever read, far more difficult than say 史记, 资治通鉴, even budhist texts from Dunhuang don't compare - as he follows the rule of 'never say something directly when you can use a literary or historical allusion', and often doubles or triples up the allusions in a single sentence. Hence, it takes me an absurdly long time just to work through a little paragraph, and sometimes I'm still not understanding a large part of it.

Posted on: Tea Refill

Hi bababardwan,

Can't say I've done much comparing - as I've pretty much only used Baidu encyclopedia - let me know if you end up finding any particular strengths or weaknesses between the two.

Yah, though I'd guess the people 'in the know' are probably only experts, and even well educated people probably only have a few subtypes of a given animal in their vocab. Then again, there are alot of things that influence what words people are aware of, some of it hard to predict across cultures. A few days ago I was reading some Ming dynasty court opinion on rejection of a marriage contract, and I was confused by what the word 石女 meant (http://www.nciku.com/search/zh/detail/%E7%9F%B3%E5%A5%B3/37579 ) , as the english translation was a completely unknown term to me (and I wasn't even aware there was such a medical condition) - then I was chatting with a friend about the case, and we came across the word, and he was shocked I wouldn't have recognized the english version of it, as he explained he was fairly certain every Chinese person knows of that condition and word. I asked why would this be such a commonly known term, and he thought for awhile, and then said 'oh, its because there is this famous story...(I forgot the name)'. And then there is how often the proper names of, say, famous individual ancient horses get thrown around (纤离xian1li2 (I think lived in the Qin dynasty, though I don't remember what it was involved in), 的卢di4lu2, (刘备's) 赤兔马chi4tu4ma3 (吕布's,then 关羽's)), and famous individual weapons (干将 gan1jiang1, 莫邪mo4ye2 (both swords, and from warring states period), and you wonder why the name of so many particular horses or some scraps of metal survive as well known terms...though I guess in English we have Excalibur...still, there's a difference in quantity. ;)

Posted on: Tea Refill

I think Baidu encyclopedia is a good place to go if you want to get specific about such things -here's the link for 兔: http://baike.baidu.com/view/27770.htm . Scroll down to the 下属类别 , and you'll have a nice list of 40 or so different types and their technical names. Also, many have their own pages (some of the names are themselves links, which is convenient, but some of the others you can also find by plugging in the name to the encyclopedia search manually). I imagine that's how the vets and such get by - though probably relatively few non professionals would recognize those words. Actually, in English I don't know the difference between a Hare and a Rabbit, much less any more technical distinctions.

As a general note, this is one of the many places where I think Baidu encyclopedia is much better than a normal dictionary - I love it for looking up animal and plant terms. Not because I'm trying to get specific about subtypes, but rather because I usually find the included pictures much more helpful way to get a sense of what the plant or animal is (my english vocab in animals and plants is too limitied for translations to be helpful, and generally reading a detailed chinese dictionary description proves a bit dry). That, or google image search.

Posted on: Bringing Pets into China

Hi babardwan,

I think the use of a fairly multipurpose/often colloquial verb 打, combined with a pretty concrete object 针, makes me think its the less formal version - and for 注射, I think its the structure of doubling up the two component verbs to make a combined meaning that pushes me to think more formal/more likely to be used in forming technical terms. Not that either is overly formal or informal, just speaking in relative terms. Of course this line of reasoning isn't 100 percent, and perhaps is in error even here (I really am guessing). I suppose creative google searching for examples could be used to check things, but I'm not very good at that.

I wish I could offer a better generalized process - about all I can think of that isn't already said above, is that formal likes coming in chunks of 2s and 4s, and likes certain characters (that you can get a feel for), so ie 不屑一顾 bu2xie4yi2gu4 (not even disdain to cast even a single glance), but you would not see 不屑看 in formal writing (at least not writing paying attention to 韵律). 使用, 运用，应用, probably more formal than 用. Though its hard to tell, because many 2 word expressions are perfectly colloquial ie 开始, and the above 3 words using 用 are perfectly fine in somewhat colloquial use, so its probably more above having potential to be formal. And then, often more formal words will contract longer expressions.

As for word choice sometimes you can get a feel for such things over time, ie 犬quan3 is more formal than 狗 gou3 usually for dog - but then you've got expressions like 画虎不成反类狗 and 画虎不成反类犬 (attempt to draw a tiger and fail, on the contrary ending up resembling a dog (take dog as bad and tiger as good, and then apply it as a broad analogy)), where you might think the 犬 version is the older more formal and proper one (they are both technically correct chengyu), but actually the 狗 one I think appeared first, and was used far more often in the literary tradition. Though I remember once I used the 狗 one and a friend suggested that its not correct, because (paraphrasing) '狗 is modern, 犬 is the older term, so since its a chengyu'...so even very well educated native speakers sometimes have trouble with these kind of judgments. but usually, things like 无 being more formal than 没有, 所 generally finding its way into formal expressions, 为wei2 and 以 appearing much more often in formal, 之 instead of 的, can give such hints.

And then of course there is the trend of taking ancient expressions and using them as a sort of exaggerated joking sort of expression, ie 孟子's quote '心有戚戚焉', ('our thinking is similar') which originally probably should count as too ancient/formal to use, basically ever, but now probably can be freely used, but only in informal conversations when you intend the joke. But of course that's sort of selective as to what can be used or not, I remember I tried to use, in that same joking tone, 朝乾夕惕zhao1qian2xi1ti4 (a chengyu from 易经, meaning close to the modern 起早贪黑 qi3zao3tan1hei1 in that it implies that sort of morning and evening hard working), and was greeted with blank stares, as noone knew what it meant (a good example of 画虎不成反类狗 on my part, and a lesson well learned).

Anyway, I've probably ranted off topic at this point - I'm in an exhausted state at the moment and not terribly coherent.

Haha, yah, though on your last point - such materials do have some use, as I have become quite familar with useful names of medication like 桃花岛's 九花玉露丸. Should I find myself trapped in a 金庸 novel at the demise of the 金代, I'm all set. ;)

Posted on: Bringing Pets into China

Hi bababardwan

I think a major difference (in addition to what was said above) is probably in that 注射 is more formal, and so is going to find its way into more proper names for various things, and and statements that have a more technical/formal sense to them, and 打针 is more colloquial, and so is going to be what ends up getting used when you talk in a more normal manner about what you plan on ending, etc.

Thus I think your sense is correct regarding the later examples. Also, I think they are nouns, not verbs, so I think you'd actually drop in a 打 at the front and say 打肌肉注射 or something to make it a verb (not that 注射 can't be a verb in its own right, it can, its just I think its describing the noun here). But really I'm mostly guessing from a general sense of grammar, as this topic doesn't really come up often in my preferred study materials (武侠 tv shows and novels, and modern politics and economics), so entirely possible I've got something wrong. ;)

Posted on: Chinese Baijiu and the Best of the Worst

And if you want to complete the triangle, 俺们an3men for 'we' not including the person being spoken to (actually, 俺 an3 can also be used alone for the plural in this meaning, and 咱 zan2 also can indicate the plural with or without 们). It's northern dialect (so you might want to restrict use accordingly), but it found its way into both 水浒传 and 红楼梦, so its got a good literary pedigree. ;) Though for some reason I'd feel odd using it...maybe because the big tough guys in all the costume dramas seem to use it.

Posted on: Of Kings, Emperors, and Presidents

Hmm, I think it may be helpful to note the implication of 首相 - it has 相xiang4 in it, and thus it is indicating a certain type of minister (臣chen2) under a monarch (emperor, king, etc). The same is true of the host of other ranks that played the rotating game of being top dog through ancient times - 宰相，相国，丞相,.... You need a monarch in order to have 相xiang4, and of course that also applies to the head (首) minister (相).

So then it becomes the technically correct choice for countries with monarchs - Japan has an emperor, so they count, England has a queen, so they count. But when you get to countries like Thailand, and especially the British commonwealth, I think people tend to not think of them as having a monarch as much (for whatever reason), and the generic not-necessarily-minister-of-a-monarch term 总理 starts to be used, and then gains in popularity (and in some cases to the point where it would be weird to use 首相, despite its technical correctness). And this custom of using 总理 is not an error at all - monarchs can also have 总理, many Chinese dynasties did (though often back then it was a much lower authority rank) - and really its no different than how you can refer to President Obama as 总统 or as 领导,首脑,领袖 or any other more general term meaning leader, mixed in with everyone using it often enough that you should really switch to that term too (ok, well, 总理 has acquired a lot more of a narrowing in its meaning than those, but its still broad enough to encompass the cases we are discussing).