Hacker News Reader

Comment by thaumasiotes | Hacker News Reader

> compared to something like middle english, which modern readers cannot read at all, you can see that the chinese language hasn't changed all that much

This is nonsense. Here's some middle english (taken from https://www.chaucermss.org/?manuscript=Dd&tale=GP&version=si... ):

    A Millere was there / dwellyng many a day
    As any Pecok / he was proud and gay
    Pipe he coude and fisshe / and nettes bete
    And trne cuppes / & wel wrestel and shete
    Ay by his belt / he bar a long panade
    And of a swerd / ful trenchaūt was the blade

Middle English is much more similar to modern English than Classical Chinese is to modern Chinese (of any variety), for the obvious reason that Middle English is separated from modern English by less than half the period separating Classical Chinese from modern Chinese.

View on HN

fair enough. i was told that by a old/english scholar and i checked wiki sample text to confirm, but i must have been mistaken.

>Middle English is much more similar to modern English than Classical Chinese is to modern Chinese (of any variety), for the obvious reason that Middle English is separated from modern English by less than half the period separating Classical Chinese from modern Chinese.

i think it depends on the specific text in question, but i'm drawing blanks because im not very informed on old lit in general. again tang poems are taught at an early age, but perhaps most text would be harder to read

Perhaps you are thinking of Old English, which really is different beyond comprehension. Here's a bit of Beowulf:

Hwæt. We Gardena in geardagum,

þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,

hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.

Oft Scyld Scefing sceaþena þreatum,

monegum mægþum, meodosetla ofteah,

egsode eorlas. Syððan ærest wearð

feasceaft funden, he þæs frofre gebad,

weox under wolcnum, weorðmyndum þah,

oðþæt him æghwylc þara ymbsittendra

ofer hronrade hyran scolde,

gomban gyldan. þæt wæs god cyning.

This is more fair. As yorwba points out elsewhere, though, some pretty large differences between Old Chinese and modern Chinese are masked by the fact that Classical Chinese is always presented with modern spelling[1]. (Other, larger differences are fully apparent.) To be more closely analogous, you'd render "þæt wæs god cyning" as "That was good king" -- and suddenly the gap from "that was good king" to "that was _a_ good king" doesn't look so large.

[1] There are good reasons for this; since Chinese writing bears very little phonetic information, we have only limited knowledge of what Old Chinese sounded like in the first place.

Applying the same cognate replacement (using Wiktionary as an etymology dictionary) to the full snippet above, I end up with

What. We gar-danes' in yore days

thede kings', thrym frained,

how the athelings ellen framed.

Often Shield Sheafing scathers' threats

many maidens, mead-seats' off-towed

eysed Eorlas. Since erst was

few-shaft found, he that frother bode,

waxed under welkin, worth-minds theed,

othat him each there umsittings'

over whale-road hear should

change yielded, that was good king.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com