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��
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
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��