Chapter 20 A letter to Mr. Cao Juren

Mr. Juren [2]: The question of popular language has been raised for a long time. I have never studied it, so I have never opened my mouth.However, some of the current articles feel that many of them are "high theory". Now write a little bit of my simple opinion here: First, Chinese characters and the public are irreconcilable. 2. Therefore, in order to promote popular language, it is necessary to use Romanized Pinyin (3) (that is, Latinization. Now some people divide it into two things. I don’t understand why), and how many districts must be divided into each district? Divide it into districts (for example, a place in Shaoxing can be divided into at least four districts). At the beginning of writing, the dialect of the place is used purely. words, even grammar.However, in places where the traffic is busy and the language is mixed, there is another kind of language, which is relatively common. It has adopted a new vocabulary. I think this is the prototype of "popular language". Its vocabulary and grammar can be imported. Go into the backcountry.No matter what, Chinese people will have the destiny of knowing several Chinese languages ​​in the future. This matter can be done through education and communication.

Third, Latinization should be popularized when the masses are in charge of their own education.What we can do now is: (a) study the Latinization method; (b) try Cantonese and other languages ​​with a large number of readers, and make things to see; (c) try our best to make the vernacular so that More and more people understand it, but the sophisticated so-called "Europeanized" language should still be supported, because if the speech is to be precise, the original Chinese grammar is not enough, and the Chinese popular language will never contain nonsense forever.For example, the Europeanization mentioned by the opponents of Europeanization is not an inherent Chinese character. Some new words and new grammar must be used sometimes.

Fourth, although the popular language taught in rural areas should be purely dialects, there is still room for improvement.For example, the word "Damn" has many meanings in the country, sometimes scolding, sometimes admiring, sometimes admiring, because he can't say anything else.The task of the pioneers is to give them many words that can express a more definite meaning and at the same time understand a more precise meaning.If it still says "this fucking weather is really fucking, if it's like this again, everything will be damned", then what good will it do for the public?

Fifth, as for the rudiments of the common language, I think it can be improved on the basis of this, and there is no need to use the local language that is too remote.For example, in Shanghai, "fighting" is called "eating life", which can be used in Shanghainese dialogues, but it does not have to be used in the author's narrative, because workers can also understand "fighting".Some people think that words such as "like something serious" have already been used, but they are not accurate. The understanding of this sentence by northerners is different from that of Jiangsu people.

Chinese and spoken language cannot be exactly the same; when speaking, you can insert a lot of "this", "that", etc., which are actually meaningless. When writing, for the sake of time, paper economy, and clear meaning, they must be deleted separately. Yes, so the article must be more concise than the spoken language, but it is clear and somewhat different, which is not the disadvantage of the article. So what can be implemented now, I think it is (1) formulate the Roman alphabet (Zhao Yuanren's [4] is too complicated to use); However, as for ideas, it goes without saying that they should be "progressive"; (3) European grammar should still be supported as a backup.

There is another level, the protector of classical Chinese, and now there are people who have taken the banner of Dazhongyu. On the one hand, he is making extremely high arguments, leaving Dazhongyu hanging in the air, and cannot do it; on the other hand, he uses this to attack his enemy in the face --vernacular.This point must also be noted.Otherwise, we would have disarmed ourselves.Dedicated to the reply, that is, to praise Shisui. Hurry up.August 2nd. CC [1] This article was originally published in the third issue of the first volume of the Shanghai "Society Monthly" in August 1934.

In May 1934, Wang Maozu published the article "Prohibition of Learning Classical Chinese and Compulsory Reading of Classics" in the No. 110 issue of "Times" Weekly in Nanjing, advocating classical Chinese and reading scriptures.At that time, Wu Yan rebutted it by publishing the article "Refuting Elementary School Teaching Classical Chinese Middle School Reading Mencius" in Nanjing and Shanghai newspapers at the same time.So the debate on classical Chinese and vernacular was launched in the cultural circle.On June 18 and 19 of the same year, "Shen Shen Free Talk" successively published Chen Zizhan's "Classical Chinese - Vernacular - Popular Language" and Chen Wangdao's "On the Construction of Popular Chinese Language", and proposed relevant language reforms. Afterwards, various newspapers and periodicals successively published many articles, and started discussions on the issue of popular language.On July 25, Cao Juren, the editor of the "Social Monthly" at that time, issued a letter seeking opinions on the popular language. The letter raised five questions: "First, the movement of the popular language, of course, inherited the vernacular movement and the national language movement. Is it necessary to divide a new stage and promote popular language now? Second, why did the vernacular movement stagnate? Why do new literati (literati after the May 4th Movement) have a faint tendency to go back to the old? Third, vernacular has become The exclusive tool of a special class (intellectuals) has nothing to do with the general public; how can the vernacular become a tool for the public? Fourth, the construction of a popular language is to first set a standard for the unitary national language, gradually promote it, and make dialects Gradually disappear? Or should we first build a diverse popular language based on the dialects of the major regions, and gradually concentrate to form a unified national language? Fifth, what methods should be used to write works in popular languages? How can we abandon the methods that the people are accustomed to? "Although Lu Xun's answer is divided into five points, it does not address the questions raised in Cao Juren's letter.He answered these five questions in another letter to Cao Juren on July 29 of the same year (see "Lu Xun's Letters Collection").

〔2〕Cao Juren (1900-1972) was born in Pujiang, Zhejiang, and was a writer. 〔3〕Pinyin of Roman characters generally refers to the pinyin of Latin letters (ie Roman letters).In 1928, the Ministry of Education of the Kuomintang government (then known as the University College, with Cai Yuanpei as its dean) announced the "French Style for Pinyin of Mandarin Chinese".This text reform plan was formulated by some members of the "Guoyu Romaji Research Committee" and Liu Fu and others, and Zhao Yuanren was the main producer.This scheme uses spelling changes to represent tones, and has complicated spelling rules, which are difficult to learn.In 1931, Wu Yuzhang and others drafted the "Latinized New Character", which was relatively simple without tones; since 1933, various groups have been established in various places to promote it.

[4] Zhao Yuan was born in Wujin, Jiangsu, and a linguist.He has successively served as a professor of the Department of Chinese Literature of Tsinghua University and a full-time researcher of the Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.He is the author of "Research on Modern English", "List of Commonly Used Roman Characters in Mandarin Chinese", etc.