No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 October 2024
1 Kaske, Elisabeth, The Politics of Language in Chinese Education, 1895–1919 (Leiden: Brill, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
2 Personal communication, July 2019.
3 In a perfect world—or, let us say, in a better world—I would like also to have been able to include Marian Münning's Sound, Meaning, Shape: The Phonologist Wei Jiangong (1901–1980) between Language Study and Language Planning (Heidelberg: Heidelberg Asian Studies Publishing, 2017), but this was not possible.
4 According to Wang Zhao 王照, as cited in Mareshi, Saitō, “Liang Qichao's Consciousness of Language,” in The Role of Japan in Liang Qichao's Introduction of Modern Western Civilization to China (Berkeley: Institute of East Asian Studies, 2004), 248Google Scholar; this is also mentioned in passing in Janet Chen's book (189) under review here.
5 Peter Perdue has argued that even contemporary China has not accepted this transition and continues to behave in many regards as an empire. See his “Where do Incorrect Political Ideas Come From? Writing the History of the Qing Empire and the Chinese Nation,” in The Teleology of the Modern Nation-State: Japan and China (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005), 174–99.
6 There are also a few odd locutions in this volume: “most unique” (p. 69), “oral speech” (p. 69), “rather profound” (p. 70), and “Beijing University” (75, 111). Concerning the last of these, technically speaking, no such place exists (in English), a point I have stressed elsewhere: Journal of Chinese of History 7.2 (2023).
7 Cited in Qingshu, Meng 孟庆澍, “‘Yong shi tiao ya tuobei’ de yifa: Wuzhengfuzhuyi yu Qian Xuantong de jijinzhuyi yuyanguan” 「用石条压驼背」的医法：无政府主义与钱玄同的激进主义语言观, Zhongguo xiandai wenxue yanjiu congkan 2 (2005), 126Google Scholar; and Li Dongmei 李冬梅 (Yi Tong-mae), “Cong Esperanto dao Shijieyu: Dong-Ya de Shijieyu yundong” 从 Esperanto 到世界语：东亚的世界语运动, Dong-Ya pinglun (2018), 205.
8 Morohashi Tetsuji 諸橋轍次, Da Kan-Wa jiten 大漢和辭典 (Tokyo: Taishūkan shoten, 1984), 3:1091c.
9 Morohashi, Da Kan-Wa jiten, 6:528d; Hanyu da cidian (Shanghai: Hanyu da cidian chubanshe, 1995), 4:1261.
10 Zhong cites not a single Japanese work. Tam cites two: Hirata Shōji 平田昌司, the author of an essay cited here in Chinese translation, finds his name missing a macron; and a work by the great Yanagita Kunio 柳田國男 has the wrong characters in its title (117, 253)—should be 鍋牛考, and the publisher should be Shōgensha. She also mis-romanizes the Japanese term for the nineteenth-century effort to merge the language of writing and speech, which should be genbun itchi 言文一致 (91, 258). And, on the Chinese front, the Chinese surname Ou 區 is mis-romanized as “Qu” (92n64). Chen takes a novel approach in this realm. She lists one Japanese article in her bibliography, but after the author's name, Morita Kenji 森田健嗣, she skips directly to the characters and kana, obviating the need to render the title of the article and journal in Latin letters. With romanization, the article is: Morita Kenji, “Sengo Taiwan sanchi shakai ni okeru gengo seisaku no tenkai” 戦後台湾山地社会における言語政策の展開, Ajia keizai アジア経済. What she renders as “Japanese ‘national language institutes’” (179) is missing one macron while misplacing another and should be kokugo kōshūjo 國語講習所. Kuzuoğlu's multi-lingual bibliography cites two Japanese sources, both incorrectly romanized: (1) the author, Matsumoto Shūji 松本秀士, is missing the macron in his given name, and the title, which is missing the tail ending and mis-romanizes the first term, should be: “Shinmatsu kankō no Chūgokubun jintai kaibōgakusho” 清末刊行の中国文人体解剖学書について. The second essay is by Murao Susumu 村尾進, and the title (also missing its tail end), 万木森々:『時務報』時期の梁啓超とその周辺, should be romanized as “Bankoku shinshin: Jimuhō jiki no Ryō Keichō to sono shūhen.”