Question about Chinese unity

[Captrek]

There was a period when China consisted of several warring states before being united by the Emperor Qin. (This provides the dramatic backdrop for the incredible martial arts epic Hero.) The states had their own identities, dialects, writing systems, measures, currencies, laws... It sounds to me a lot like Europe.

The idea of a 2nd-century Emperor uniting Europe into a single nation lasting for thousands of years is laughable. In China, dynasties have risen and fallen, foreign occupiers have come and gone, there have been revolutions and civil wars... yet the concept of a single China seems unshakeable. Even when there are actually two, as ROC and PROC look from here like two countries, they both agree there is only one China and disagree about the legitimate government, an ongoing civil war minus the war.

With China covering such a vast area and experiencing so much turmoil, how has the idea of a single Chinese national identity endured for so long?

 

[Rosalind]

Interesting question, I wonder if the writing system gives it the unity that wouldn't exist in Europe. For the purpose of this post, I'd leave out all the lands that weren't part of the "central land", that is, south of the Great Wall, and east of the Tibetan plateau, land that has been nourished by the Yellow and Yangzi Rivers, as many Chinese poetry like to say. Now, in these lands, even though every region has its own dialect, many very different from each other, they all have the exact same characters for the same thing, different pronunciations, but the same characters. Further, the writing is unique among all writing systems in the world, there isn't anything else like it. Might these characters give the Chinese people a sense of identity that does not exist in Europe? To give the Chinese a sense that the different people in different parts of the land are the same people?

 

[iguana_tonante]

The idea of a 2nd-century Emperor uniting Europe into a single nation lasting for thousands of years is laughable.

I'm not so sure. The Romans held a pretty large swat of western Europe for almost a millennium (500 BCE-500 CE), and the Eastern Roman Empire lasted until about 1500 CE. Since then, all powers trying to establish their rule on the continent have thought themselves as heir to the Roman Empire. In a sense, there was always an Empire centred in Central-Western Europe, it just waned and waxed with the tides of history. Even the current EU is as much an inheritor of it: a vast part of the body of laws is based on Roman Law, the various languages owe a large part of their lexicon to Latin, and the culture is not so different across the continent. In fact, I would say that Europe is much more culturally homogeneous than we are accustomed to think. Before the age of the nation-states, the idea of what we would call today an "European identity" was actually quite widespread: the unfortunate consequence was that this identity was incarnated in aggressive Kingdoms-Empires competing for dominance of the continent, but that's human history for you.

In fact, if we were to observe European history from an outside point of view I'd say that, mutatis mutandis, it's not much different from Chinese history (to the point that the USSR was not so far away from establishing a communist "empire" in Europe, not so different from the People's Republic of China).

So maybe for a Chinese scholar, the history of Europe is just a a bunch of European dudes warring for the control of the European Empire, just like we see a bunch of Chinese guys struggling for control, instead of the Han nation establishing its empire over the other Chinese nations. We see the differences in our backyard only because we are so close to the theatre of operation that we lose sight of the big picture.

 

[Holdfast]

With China covering such a vast area and experiencing so much turmoil, how has the idea of a single Chinese national identity endured for so long?

Coincidentally enough, I'm just reading The Romance of the Three Kingdoms at the moment. Its first line is: "The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide".

This pervasive, popular, cyclical view of the greater Chinese nation appears to be one answer to how they maintained a single supra-regional identity despite regional warlords and a vast territory. It's an interesting exercise to contrast this with the very different regional/national identities of Europe, for example, where individualism (and by extension, nationalism) holds more sway (the precise regions/names vary, but the idea of a genius loci remains constant). Even more interesting is to see how the USA managed to square the circle of individual exceptionalism vs a broad national identity (a long, remarkably bloody, economically-crippling but ultimately clearly decisive war goes a long way...)

 

[EmoBorg]

The People Republic of China is 92 % ethnic Han Chinese. which means most chinese provinces have a han chinese majority. That is one factor that helps Chinese unity. The Chinese do have problems with muslim majority Xinjiang and Tibet, whose main ethnic group the Tibetans are of a different background compared to the Han Chinese.

One interesting thing to note is that while the Chinese have one written language, They have different dialects among the Han Chinese themselves and those dialects are often incomprehensible to other dialect speakers.

In Southern China, they have Cantonese, Hokkien, Teochew, Hakka and other dialects and in Northern China, they have Shanghainese and Mandarin, which was the dialect spoken at the Chinese imperial court at Beijing ( a northern chinese city) for centuries and hence it became the lingua franca for China in recent times.

I have heard Cantonese before and it sounds quite similar to Vietnamese while Mandrain has some Mongol and Manchu influences.

 

[Gul Re'jal]

Cantonese, Mandarin, or Hakka are not "dialects," they are different languages.

 

[EmoBorg]

Cantonese, Mandarin, or Hakka are not "dialects," they are different languages.

In singapore,where i work, they are classified as dialects by the singaporean government. I am not sure how the PRC government classifies them though?

 

[Hound of UIster]

It's the same in the PRC I believe. Different dialects

 

[iguana_tonante]

The difference between "dialect" and "language" is often political. Here in Italy regional languages are classified as dialects, but they are no less different from standard Italian than, say, Spanish or French. I'd have more success understanding Spanish than Friulan or Sardinian. They even belong to different branches of Romance languages family tree.

At the same time, even if they are classified as a single ethnic group by the PRC government, it seems from my reading about the subject that the Han are actually very diverse: they even speak mutually non-intelligible languages, usually a sign of a cultural divide. There is Mandarin (885 millions), Wu (77 millions), Yue (66 millions), Min (60 millions), and a bunch of others.

In fact, as I'm not familiar with the Chinese language, I wonder about the level of intelligibility between them. So, for Chinese speakers: if your native tongue is Mandarin, would you be able to understand spoken "Shangainese", Cantonese, or any other of the Han languages?

 

[Beagleman]

^^^
I'm certainly no expert on the matter, but I have seen the diversity of the Chinese language family, and the intelligibility between it's main languages compared to that of the Romance language family.

 

[horatio83]

With China covering such a vast area and experiencing so much turmoil, how has the idea of a single Chinese national identity endured for so long?

I do not understand your point, why should time and area have a negative impact upon national identity?
The US is fairly large and sparsely populated yet people own flags, something which somebody like me who lives in a smaller, more densely populated country which has not existed for very long would never do.

 

[Rosalind]

In fact, as I'm not familiar with the Chinese language, I wonder about the level of intelligibility between them. So, for Chinese speakers: if your native tongue is Mandarin, would you be able to understand spoken "Shangainese", Cantonese, or any other of the Han languages?

^^^
I'm certainly no expert on the matter, but I have seen the diversity of the Chinese language family, and the intelligibility between it's main languages compared to that of the Romance language family.

I am not an expert, but I am a native speaker, and I speak Mandarin, Shanghainese (btw, Shanghai is *not* Northern China), Cantonese (though that's rusty), bits of Hokkan (which is the main Taiwanese dialects), and I can understand most of the various Wu dialects, the dialects in Northern China, bits of Hakka, and a couple more other dialects.

So, the short answer to the "if your native tongue is one Han dialect, can you understand another one" is no, you can't. The long answer is, it depends. And I think the main reason is the written language, it doesn't take much time to learn to understand a different pronunciation, if you are keen.

As for the question of language vs. dialects, I agree that it is more political in this case. The different pronunciations are as different as the European languages, and they all have slightly different grammar too. I have said that the Japanese pronunciation of kanji (Chinese characters in Japanese writing) can be thought of as a seperate dialect, because sometimes, they are more similar to the northern dialects than the southern ones. OTOH, most Chinese will think of them as dialects, so there you go.

Coincidentally enough, I'm just reading The Romance of the Three Kingdoms at the moment. Its first line is: "The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide".

How do you find the book?

Interesting how it's translated. The first part of that sentence, if translated literally is "Speaking of all the major situations under the heavens," instead of "the empire". Of course, it was written at a time when 'the empire' is the main land under the heavens.

 

[iguana_tonante]

I am not an expert, but I am a native speaker, and I speak Mandarin, Shanghainese (btw, Shanghai is *not* Northern China), Cantonese (though that's rusty), bits of Hokkan (which is the main Taiwanese dialects), and I can understand most of the various Wu dialects, the dialects in Northern China, bits of Hakka, and a couple more other dialects.

So, the short answer to the "if your native tongue is one Han dialect, can you understand another one" is no, you can't. The long answer is, it depends. And I think the main reason is the written language, it doesn't take much time to learn to understand a different pronunciation, if you are keen.

First of all, let me say I'm impressed by your language skills.

Thanks very much for the insight: that's pretty much in line with what I guessed from my readings, but of course all the reading in the world could not replace the insight of a native speaker.

Most of what you say is true for most "related" European languages, too (Romance, Germanic, Slavic). Friends of mine who relocated to France were able to pick up a heavily accented but decent French in just a couple of months. Same could be true for my French friends who worked in Italy for some time, if they only allowed themselves to speak in Italian instead of insisting that we learned French.

 

[clint g]

The difference between "dialect" and "language" is often political. Here in Italy regional languages are classified as dialects, but they are no less different from standard Italian than, say, Spanish or French. I'd have more success understanding Spanish than Friulan or Sardinian. They even belong to different branches of Romance languages family tree.

At the same time, even if they are classified as a single ethnic group by the PRC government, it seems from my reading about the subject that the Han are actually very diverse: they even speak mutually non-intelligible languages, usually a sign of a cultural divide. There is Mandarin (885 millions), Wu (77 millions), Yue (66 millions), Min (60 millions), and a bunch of others.

In fact, as I'm not familiar with the Chinese language, I wonder about the level of intelligibility between them. So, for Chinese speakers: if your native tongue is Mandarin, would you be able to understand spoken "Shangainese", Cantonese, or any other of the Han languages?

My girlfriend is Chinese (from Hong Kong) and can speak Cantonese fluently but doesn't understand mandarin at all. It seems to be a recurring theme among the Chinese people I know. The ones who do speak multiple dialects state that they are significantly different, with mandarin having 4 tones and Cantonese having 7.

 

[Holdfast]

Coincidentally enough, I'm just reading The Romance of the Three Kingdoms at the moment. Its first line is: "The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide".

How do you find the book?

Interesting how it's translated. The first part of that sentence, if translated literally is "Speaking of all the major situations under the heavens," instead of "the empire". Of course, it was written at a time when 'the empire' is the main land under the heavens.

I'm really enjoying it. It's really witty in places, artful in others, and still manages to tell a sweeping story that feels surprisingly modern in places, especially when discussing politics or warfare.

Part of that may be the translation; I'm reading the unabridged Moss Roberts version which I think is the most recent major translation. It probably takes a few occasional liberties but it "feels" appropriate to me.

The only slight frustration I have is that the Notes on the Translation are all at the end of the second volume, and I don't always have that near me when I reading the first, so occasionally I miss out of some of the depth, allusions, puns, etc. It would have been better to separate the Notes out between the two volumes.

I'm only about 20-25% of the way through and occasionally I lose track of which character is which, especially when a character is called by their style instead of their usual name (eg Mengde for Cao Cao, Xuande for Liu Bei, etc, etc). By the way, mayeb you can help me out on this: I assume there's some significant difference in when one name is used versus another; the style seems more like a informal casual name? Is that right?

Overall, I'm delighted to be reading it; it's lovely blend of the grand and the personal, the epic and the petty.

 

[Rosalind]

First of all, let me say I'm impressed by your language skills.

Thank you.

Most of what you say is true for most "related" European languages, too (Romance, Germanic, Slavic). Friends of mine who relocated to France were able to pick up a heavily accented but decent French in just a couple of months. Same could be true for my French friends who worked in Italy for some time, if they only allowed themselves to speak in Italian instead of insisting that we learned French.

Yep, that's what I get from travelling in Europe and picking up tiny bits of the European languages. It's especially the case when English is my second language, you can see where all the words come from. I also did French in school, so when I was in Spain or Italy, I noticed a lot of similarities, and when I was in Germany I noticed a lot of words that are now in English. Language is an ever evolving thing, as people travel and get mixed up, languages evolve to mix in new things. It's the same everywhere in the world.

I'm really enjoying it. It's really witty in places, artful in others, and still manages to tell a sweeping story that feels surprisingly modern in places, especially when discussing politics or warfare.

Part of that may be the translation; I'm reading the unabridged Moss Roberts version which I think is the most recent major translation. It probably takes a few occasional liberties but it "feels" appropriate to me.

Cool, a good translation is very very important. It's why I can't get into the English translation of Chinese books, or vice versa, I always find things lacking. Probably because I would always seek out the original.

The only slight frustration I have is that the Notes on the Translation are all at the end of the second volume, and I don't always have that near me when I reading the first, so occasionally I miss out of some of the depth, allusions, puns, etc. It would have been better to separate the Notes out between the two volumes.

I'm only about 20-25% of the way through and occasionally I lose track of which character is which, especially when a character is called by their style instead of their usual name (eg Mengde for Cao Cao, Xuande for Liu Bei, etc, etc). By the way, mayeb you can help me out on this: I assume there's some significant difference in when one name is used versus another; the style seems more like a informal casual name? Is that right?

Overall, I'm delighted to be reading it; it's lovely blend of the grand and the personal, the epic and the petty.

Ah, the ancient Chinese names, aren't they jolly fun.

Style is a name you are given as a sign of adulthood, which is at 20 years of age. As I understands it, it's usually given by your teacher, but sometimes you can come up with it yourself. It is a name usually used as a sign of respect, and friends will call each other by style names. As it is given by the teacher, most people in ancient china don't have a style name, because going to school is not affordable by most. A given name is given by parents, and for people who do have a style name only families would be using your given name, and if you want to disrespect someone. The practise only died out less than a century ago. Does that make some sort of sense?

Edited to take out the wrong info about Mao's names, see posts below.

I'm surprised the translation included the style names. In the English translation of the movie Red Cliff, for example, they left out all the style names, even though the Chinese dialogue had them.

Does the translation include the poems in the book? My book on the poems of Three Kingdoms is as thick as my version of the actual book.

I'm glad you're enjoying the book, it is a classic, it's one of these books every Chinese would know the stories, even if they haven't read the actual book.

 

[Captrek]

Mao Zhedong, for example, is the style name.

Wikipedia, and other sources I have hastily checked, say that Zedong is his given name and his style name is Runzhi.

 

[Rosalind]

Mao Zhedong, for example, is the style name.

Wikipedia, and other sources I have hastily checked, say that Zedong is his given name and his style name is Runzhi.

You're right. Which begs the question, why? Because only your family and your elders can call you by your given name. If others call you by your given name it's a sign of disrespect. (To doubly make sure, I went and checked a few sources.) So this is really interesting. Because in China, Chiang Kai-shek (the guy who lead the KMT to Taiwan) is known as the style name (which is Kai-shek), whereas in Taiwan, they call him by his given name. That's why I always assumed Zedong is Mao's style name, and vice versa for Chiang.

 

[Holdfast]

It's why I can't get into the English translation of Chinese books, or vice versa, I always find things lacking. Probably because I would always seek out the original.

For those of us without your language skills, the translation will have to do.

Actually, the translation seems very good to me, and the accompanying brief Notes add a little extra depth and explain some of the cultural motifs/allusions being played upon sometimes.

Style is a name you are given as a sign of adulthood, which is at 20 years of age. As I understands it, it's usually given by your teacher, but sometimes you can come up with it yourself. It is a name usually used as a sign of respect, and friends will call each other by style names. As it is given by the teacher, most people in ancient china don't have a style name, because going to school is not affordable by most. A given name is given by parents, and for people who do have a style name only families would be using your given name, and if you want to disrespect someone. The practise only died out less than a century ago. Does that make some sort of sense?

It does; thank you!

So in the scenes where a character chooses to use a person's style when talking to them, they're demonstrating a blend of respect and trust. That makes sense because characters switch how they call someone depending on whether they're trying to charm them or not. I figured the style was just a nickname used between friends, but your explanation adds more meaning to those scenes as it flags up some characters' two-faced nature (eg. Cao Cao).

I'm surprised the translation included the style names. In the English translation of the movie Red Cliff, for example, they left out all the style names, even though the Chinese dialogue had them.

I'd always meant to read Three Kingdoms, but it took a recent viewing of Red Cliff to finally give me the kick up the backside to finally read it. I thought it was a very enjoyable movie, though I understand that the English cut is about half the original movie's length. Still, it gave enough flavour to persuade me to read the book!

Does the translation include the poems in the book? My book on the poems of Three Kingdoms is as thick as my version of the actual book.

Yes, it includes the poems (at least, as far as I've read, it has the relevant poems). Translating poetry is, I think, much harder than translating text and I must admit that not all of them resonated with me as much as the prose. Sometimes I get the emotion and points being made, sometimes they feel a bit abstract. Maybe part of that is that I've never had as much affinity with poetry compared to prose, even in English.

I'm glad you're enjoying the book, it is a classic, it's one of these books every Chinese would know the stories, even if they haven't read the actual book.

So I'm given to understand. Which of the other four great novels would you recommend next? I'm tempted to go with Journey to the West, largely because I liked watching Monkey...

 

[Mooch]

I'd always meant to read Three Kingdoms, but it took a recent viewing of Red Cliff to finally give me the kick up the backside to finally read it. I thought it was a very enjoyable movie, though I understand that the English cut is about half the original movie's length. Still, it gave enough flavour to persuade me to read the book!

The full version is available as well.