Mujitsu and Tairaku's Shakuhachi BBQ

kikuday wrote:

oops no page no, the poems that begins with: Even if I were a God or a Buddha

That's part of "Day and night . . ."

I have the Stevens volume here at home, and I think I recognize the book David cites. I have seen an earlier version published at Western Washington State College in 1973. As I recall, that version was typescript with the Japanese text entered by hand. I'll try to get it and see if this edition will help.

Does not totally mean that he was actually reading and writing in Chinese but that his texts are mostly based on Kanji only. The Kanji would be read in Japanese sound and on many occasions used in a Japanese context. There is also some Kanji that only exist in Japan (Modified ones). The same thing can also be said from Korea. Many scholars of the time and today can use Kanji but that does not mean that they are versed in Chinese language also altough they will be able to read 90% of most Chinese texts.

I think that what was explained previously is somehow correct but leads to some interpetations that are not totally accurate. Most priests in Japan had to read and write classical Chinese for the main reason that all sutras are in classical Chinese. The only main fact that is interesting about Ikkyu is when we get to the writitng part is that compared to many of his clolleagues, when writing poetry he chose to write most of the times only with kanji and not a mix of kanji and hiragana like what most people would use for daily communication.

Last edited by Gishin (2007-10-04 15:14:48)

This is quite simple. What Japanese call classical Chinese means that only Kanji are used. On many occasions when a Chinese reader will try to read some of their stuff either the Kanji used are a bit strange according to Chinese taste and rule or the ones used are the Japanese modified ones.

Here is a link from Wikipedia that explains more in details what is the true meaning of classical Chinese within the Japanese context.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanbun

What Ikkyu would have been using is jun-kanbun 純漢文 but from some of his writings altough 100% Kanji on many occasions the context is totally Japanese and the usage of some of the Kanji would seem odd for Chinese readers.

Last edited by Gishin (2007-10-05 10:11:56)

The kanbun （漢文） is read up with Japanese pronunciation, though. And it is this pronunciation I am after for Roxanna Panufnik、who wants to use some of the words in the text for the choir. Once I can locate the text, I can find the pronunciation alright (I hope!).

Gishin wrote:

This is quite simple. What Japanese call classical Chinese means that only Kanji are used. On many occasions when a Chinese reader will try to read some of their stuff either the Kanji used are a bit strange according to Chinese taste and rule or the ones used are the Japanese modified ones.

Here is a link from Wikipedia that explains more in details what is the true meaning of classical Chinese within the Japanese context.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanbun

What Ikkyu would have been using is jun-kanbun 純漢文 but from some of his writings altough 100% Kanji on many occasions the context is totally Japanese and the usage of some of the Kanji would seem odd for Chinese readers.

This doesn't seem to clarify matters. The Wikipedia citation you give describes jun-kanbun as Pure/Genuine Chinese writing (so described from a Japanese perspective), using Chinese syntax and on yomi (Chinese based pronunciation).

The originals of the poems translated by Arntzen are all kanji, without any of the punctuation or annotation that would turn it into readable Japanese.

To Chinese readers, it probably would be an odd pidgin version of Chinese; Japanese readers would recognize the kanji and the concepts they represent without any of the grammatical structure needed to make it clear and effective communication.