>From: "Felix Wan" <felixwiki@earthsphere.org> >Reply-To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org >To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org >Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Request for classical Chinese >Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:50:12 -0800 (PST) > >On Wed, March 2, 2005 7:22 pm, shi zhao said: > > > > Problem is use when of does the classical Chinese write? Ming and Qing? > > Is Tang Sung period? Or does QIN2 HAN4 is period? Or to is more early? > > Each period classical Chinese differ very greatly.The Manchu Dynasty and > > Han dynasty rise of test twice according to the custom of the ancient > > works, be for can let the then person comprehend the people of the past's > > work of classical Chinese.The ancients is still not apprehensibility more > > early the classical Chinese of the ancients, so which period classical > > Chinese we use to write worthwhile discussion.If use the MIng and Qing > > period classical Chinese writing, that is much more simple, plus some > > 之乎者也, delete 的了呢.( this and Chinese version difference not > > big)If use first Qin's classical Chinese write, having no several > > individuals perhaps can write. > > > > [[zh:user:shizhao]] > > >That is a real concern. True, even "Classical Chinese" is a blanket >term covering milleniums of evolving written Chinese style. > >Since the original proposer is a Japanese, I guess the style that is >most compatible with kanbun or other traditions known to East Asians >should be that of the Tang-Song period. That is also the period with >the richest literature for reference, and most educated Chinese should >be familiar with the style. So if we are really going to open such an >encyclopedia, let's fix the reference time frame to the Tang-Song period. > >However, my perception is that the grammar of Classical Chinese is more >or less stablized since the Tang dynasty. New ways of saying things >were introduced, but the real substantial change happens with the >introduction of Baihuawen. > >Does the Latin Wikipedia face similar problems in selecting the style? > >Felix Wan > >_______________________________________________ >Wikipedia-l mailing list >Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org >http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On the Latin Wikipedia I think we try to be as classical as possible - the style of Cicero, or Caesar, or Vergil, or that sort of era (1st century BC - 1st century AD). It's not always possible; for example if we want to write about modern people or places, we may have to use a neo-Latin construction, or ecclesiastical Latin to write about a religious topic. (Personally, I admit that I let a few medieval Latin constructions slip through once in awhile, as horrible as that may be to the purest classicists :))
Adam Bishop