嗔秤戻幣�哉膵�云利匈嬉蝕湊蛸賜�塋床四衲���萩晦編報炎嘔囚^泡仟 ̄云利匈��
訊伽慕垂 卦指云慕朕村 紗秘慕禰 厘議慕尺 厘議慕禰 TXT畠云和墮 〆辺茄欺厘議箝誓匂〇

the soul of the far east(垓叫議痩至)-及21何蛍

酔楯荷恬: 梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ○ 賜 ★ 辛酔堀貧和鍬匈 梓囚徒貧議 Enter 囚辛指欺云慕朕村匈 梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ● 辛指欺云匈競何! 泌惚云慕短嗤堋響頼���誅卒亮茂�俊彭堋響��辛聞喘貧圭 "辺茄欺厘議箝誓匂" 孔嬬 才 "紗秘慕禰" 孔嬬��



long   as   they   are   numerous�察  �representing   not   only   times�察  �but   conditions。 

There   are�察  �for   instance�察  �the   root   form�察  �the   adverbial   form�察  �the   indefinite 

form�察  �the   attributive   form�察  �and   the   conclusive   form�察  �the   two   last   being 

conjugated       through     all  the   various    voices�察   �moods�察    �and    tenses�察  �to   say 

nothing      of  all  the   potential    forms。     As    one   change     is  superposed       on 

another�察  �the   adjective   ends   by   becoming   three   or   four   times   its   original 

length。      The   fact   is�察  �the   adjective   is   either   adjective�察  �adverb�察  �or   verb�察�

according to occasion。           In the root form it also helps to make nouns�察�so 

that it is even more generally useful than as a journalistic epithet with us。 

As a verb�察�it does duty as predicate and copula combined。                         For such an 

unnecessary part of speech as a real copula does not exist in Japanese。                        In 

spite of the shock to the prejudices of the old school of logicians�察�it must 

be confessed that the Tartars get on very well without any such couplings 

to   their   trains   of   thought。   But   then   we   should   remember   that   in   their 

sentences the cart is always put before the horse�察�and so needs only to be 



                                                  50 


´ Page 51´

                                    The Soul of the Far East 



pushed�察�not pulled along。 

     The want of a copula is another instance of the primitive character of 

the tongue。      It has its counterpart in our own baby´talk�察�where a quality is 

predicated of a thing simply by placing the adjective in apposition with the 

noun。 

     That   the   Japanese   word   which   is   commonly   translated   ;is;   is   in   no 

sense a copula�察�but an ordinary intransitive verb�察�referring to a natural state�察�

and not to a logical condition�察�is evident in two ways。                 In the first place�察�it 

is   never   used   to   predicate   a   quality   directly。   A  Japanese   does   not   say�察�

;The scenery is fine�察─�but simply�察 �Scenery�察�fine。; Secondly�察�wherever this 

verb   is   indirectly   employed   in   such   a   manner�察  �it   is   followed�察  �not   by   an 

adjective�察    �but   by   an   adverb。     Not    ;She    is  beautiful�察   �but   ;She    exists 

beautifully�察─  �would   be   the   Japanese   way   of   expressing   his   admiration。 

What   looks   at   first�察  �therefore�察  �like   a   copula   turns   out   to   be   merely   an 

impersonal intransitive verb。 

     A negative noun is�察�of course�察�an impossibility in any language�察�just as 

a   negative     substantive�察    �another    name     for  the   same     thing�察  �is  a  direct 

contradiction in terms。          No matter how negative the idea to be given�察�it 

must      be    conveyed       by   a   positive     expression。        Even      a   void     is 

grammatically   quite   full   of   meaning�察  �although   unhappily   empty   in   fact。 

So much is common to all tongues�察�but Japanese carries its positivism yet 

further。     Not only has it no negative nouns�察�it has not even any negative 

pronouns nor pronominal adjectives�察�those convenient keepers of places 

for    the   absent。     ;None;       and    ;nothing;     are   unknown       words     in   its 

vocabulary�察�because the ideas they represent are not founded on observed 

facts�察  �but   upon   metaphysical   abstractions。         Such   terms   are   human´born�察�

not   earth´begotten   concepts�察  �and   so   to   the   Far   Oriental�察  �who   looks   at 

things from the point of view of nature�察�not of man�察�negation takes another 

form。 Usually it is introduced by the verbs�察�because the verbs�察�for the most 

part�察�relate to human actions�察�and it is man�察�not nature�察�who is responsible 

for the omission in question。           After all�察�it does seem more fitting to say�察 �I 

am ignorant of everything�察─�than ;I know nothing。; It is indeed you who 

are wanting�察�not the thing。 

     The question of verbs leads us to another matter bearing on the subject 



                                                 51 


´ Page 52´

                                    The Soul of the Far East 



of   impersonality�察  �namely�察  �the   arrangement   of   the   words   in   a   Japanese 

sentence。      The Tartar mode of grammatical construction is very nearly the 

inverse   of   our   own。     The   fundamental   rule   of   Japanese   syntax   is�察  �that 

qualifying      words     precede    the   words     they   qualify�察   �that  is�察 �an   idea   is 

elaborately   modified   before   it   is   so   much   as   expressed。        This   practice 

places the hearer at some awkward preliminary disadvantage�察�inasmuch as 

the story is nearly over before he has any notion what it is all about�察�but 

really it puts the speaker to much more trouble�察�for he is obliged to fashion 

his whole sentence complete in his brain before he starts to speak。                       This 

is largely in consequence of two omissions in Tartar etymology。                         There 

are    in  Japanese     no    relative   pronouns      and   no   temporal      conjunctions�察�

conjunctions�察  �that   is�察  �for   connecting   consecutive   events。          The   want   of 

these    words     precludes     the  admission      of   afterthoughts。      Postscripts     in 

speech      are  impossible。       The    functions     of  relatives    are   performed      by 

position�察    �explanatory      or   continuative     clauses    being     made    to   precede 

directly the word they affect。           Ludicrous anachronisms�察�not unlike those 

experienced by Alice in her looking´glass journey�察�are occasioned by this 

practice。     For    example�察   �The      merry   monarch       who   ended      by   falling  a 

victim   to   profound   melancholia;   becomes   ;To   profound   melancholia   a 

victim     by   falling   ended    merry     monarch�察─     �and   the   sympathetic      hearer 

weeps      first  and   laughs    afterward�察    �when    chronologically       he   should    be 

doing precisely the opposite。 

     A like inversion of the natural order of things results from the absence 

of    temporal     conjunctions。      In    Japanese�察    �though    nouns     can   be  added�察�

actions cannot�察�you can say ;hat and coat�察─�but not ;dressed and came。; 

Conjunctions   are   used   only  for   space�察  �never   for   time。   Objects   that   exist 

together can   be   joined in   speech�察 �but   it   is   not   allowable  thus   to   connect 

consecutive   events。   ;Having   dressed�察  �came;   is   the   Japanese   idiom。            To 

speak otherwise would be to violate the unities。                 For a Japanese sentence 

is a single rounded whole�察�not a bunch of facts loosely tied together。                     It is 

as much a unit in its composition as a novel or a drama is wi
卦指朕村 貧匯匈 和匯匈 指欺競何 壘��3�� 家��3��
酔楯荷恬: 梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ○ 賜 ★ 辛酔堀貧和鍬匈 梓囚徒貧議 Enter 囚辛指欺云慕朕村匈 梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ● 辛指欺云匈競何!
梁椣戻幣�� 梁心弌傍議揖扮窟燕得胎��傍竃徭失議心隈才凪万弌誌育断蛍�輌臆惨軼僑〃�燕慕得珊辛參資誼持蛍才将刮襲潜��範寔亟圻幹慕得 瓜寡追葎娼得辛參資誼寄楚署衛、持蛍才将刮襲潜填��