Difference between revisions 17132210 and 17134767 on enwiktionary

< previous diff
next diff >
Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/cane
==''[[cane]]'' and ''[[can]]'' in [[w:consilience|consilience]] ==

{| align=center
| width=50% |
 eng:	{{l|en|cane}}
 esp:	{{l|es|caña}}
 fre:	{{l|fr|canne}}
 ita:	{{l|it|canna}}
(contracted; show full)7;d never argue "these are all the same," especially both {{l|ja|管}} and {{l|ja|罐}} that definitely differ much more than English {{term|cane}} and {{term|can}} that are etymologically quite confused in concert hence a remarkable ''consilience''! This is not my subjective thesis or theory at all but an objective note or report. It's up to you or us how to interpret this unusual concert. Cheers. --[[User:KYPark|KYPark]] ([[User talk:KYPark|talk]]) 06:07, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
⏎
⏎
* As an addendum, {{l|ja|管}} in JA carries more connotations of {{term|lang=en|pipe}} or {{term|lang=en|tube}}, with additional senses of {{term|lang=en|shuttle|pos=as for weaving}} and {{term|lang=en|spindle|pos=as for spinning thread}}; the JA word for {{term|lang=en|cane}} is {{l|ja|杖|tr=''tsue''}}, a word deriving from {{etyl|ojp|-}} rather than from {{etyl|zho|-}}.
: But then, the meanings of kanji in modern JA are largely irrelevant as evidence of ancient use -- modern Japanese is most definitely '''''not''''' ancient Chinese, '''''nor''''' is it ancient Japanese.  By way of example of semantic drift, modern JA {{l|ja|手紙}} means {{term|lang=en|letter}}, {{term|lang=en|epistle}}; apparently, in modern Mandarin, this same word means {{term|lang=en|toilet paper}}.  Modern JA {{l|ja|卵}} means {{term|lang=en|egg}}, but I've had Chinese students laugh at Japanese labels, because it apparently means more specifically {{term|lang=en|fish}} {{term|lang=en|egg}}, {{term|lang=en|roe}} in modern Mandarin.  So mentioning the semantic similarity between {{term|sc=Hani|缶}} and {{term|sc=Hani|罐}} in modern JA as somehow significant to the meanings of the words in ancient Chinese suggests a profound confusion.
: [[File:Arrowred.png|15px]] Put more simply, in order to even begin to find linguistic relationships on the level of PIE <-> Chinese, you would need to look at the ''oldest attested forms'' of the languages.  -- Cheers, [[User:Eirikr|Eiríkr&nbsp;Útlendi]]&nbsp;│&nbsp;<small style="position: relative; top: -3px;">''[[User talk:Eirikr|Tala&nbsp;við&nbsp;mig]]''</small> 16:52, 24 July 2012 (UTC)