Tumgik
#idk this makes sense to me in regards to my experience of english boarding schools
yackers · 2 years
Note
One thing I keep asking myself is where are the others students in the house? I assume some don't live in the house, but it's a small place for everyone to stay if there is more people. Like why we didn't a different student on the house with them during the meals or at night? Is there another house? If there isn't, why only the sibuna ones? So many questions.
okay so within the actual anubis house, only ever the 8 or 9 main characters live there as like you said they're the only ones at mealtimes they have all the house meetings just them and like room wise no one else would fit. in s3 it's shown that there's then three other houses in their year group I'm pretty sure: isis, hathor and mut. but because having four houses per year for seven year groups would be like an insane amount of houses (28 is just seems like too many to make any sense within how the school was shown to be run like it was not that big) I personally hc that two of those (per year) are houses for day boarders. (so there's 14 houses instead, that empty every 7 years)
okay so like I grew up down the road from a boarding school that some of my friends attended and you could either dayboard (fancy way of saying just attend school normally) or like live there every term and I just think a lot of the show makes more sense if you consider that not all of the kids board. coz like thats why they get more attention from teachers, why the school and classes look busy and stuff idk. so like in their year anubis and isis are boarding houses that the kids live in and the other two are just like houses in the sense of a common room and like teams for things like interhouse sports and other school competitions. these houses probably had slightly more that 8/9 too which would explain why class scenes would typically have all of anubis and then like five extras coz they had to be split up.
(disclaimer: I ignore tor as canon to inform a lot of these ideas because tor just randomly was so american in the way the school worked like they had graduation and a middle school and extra credit to finish school and stuff like it barely fit with everything we'd seen so far especially in regards to like poppy)
9 notes · View notes
pumpkinpaix · 3 years
Note
hello there, hope you're having a nice day <3
so i've been reading a lot of fics lately, uk for sanity's sake, and i've noticed that in most of them, lwj doesn't use contractions (eg., says do not instead of don't)?? and i think he doesn't in the novel either but i don't remember lol so i can't be sure but anyway that made me curious - does chinese have contractions as well? does he not use it bc it's informal?
hello there! I’m doing all right, i started to answer this ask while waiting for a jingyeast loaf to come out of the oven 😊 many thanks to @bookofstars for helping me look over/edit/correct this post!! :D
anyways! the answer to your questions are complicated (of course it is when is anything simple with me), so let’s see if I can break it down--you’re asking a) whether chinese has contractions, b) if it does, how does they change the tone of the sentence--is it similar to english or no?, and c) how does this all end up with lan wangji pretty much never using contractions in english fic/translation?
I’m gonna start by talking about how formality is (generally) expressed in each language, and hopefully, by the end of this post, all the questions will have been answered in one way or another. so: chinese and english express variations in formality/register differently, oftentimes in ways that run contrary to one another. I am, as always, neither a linguist nor an expert in chinese and english uhhh sociological grammar? for lack of a better word. I’m speaking from my own experience and knowledge :D
so with a character like lan wangji, it makes perfect sense in english to write his dialogue without contractions, as contractions are considered informal or colloquial. I don’t know if this has changed in recent years, but I was always taught in school to never use contractions in my academic papers.
However! not using contractions necessarily extends the length of the sentence: “do not” takes longer to say than “don’t”, “cannot” is longer than “can’t” etc. in english, formality is often correlated with sentence length: the longest way you can say something ends up sounding the most formal. for a very simplified example, take this progression from least formal to absurdly formal:
whatcha doin’?
what’re you doing?
what are you doing? [standard colloquial]
may I ask what you are doing?
might I inquire as to what you are doing?
excuse me, but might I inquire as to what you are doing?
pardon my intrusion, but might I inquire as to what you are doing?
please pardon my intrusion, but might inquire as to the nature of your current actions?
this is obviously a somewhat overwrought example, but you get the point. oftentimes, the longer, more complex, more indirect sentence constructions indicate a greater formality, often because there is a simultaneous decreasing of certainty. downplaying the speaker’s certainty can show deference (or weakness) in english, while certainty tends to show authority/confidence (or aggression/rudeness).
different words also carry different implications of formality—in the example, I switched “excuse me” to “pardon me” during one of the step ups. pardon (to me at least) feels like a more formal word than “excuse”. Similarly, “inquire” is more formal than “ask” etc. I suspect that at least some of what makes one word seem more formal than one of its synonyms has to do with etymology. many of english’s most formal/academic words come from latin (which also tends to have longer words generally!), while our personal/colloquial words tend to have germanic origins (inquire [latin] vs ask [germanic]).
you’ll also notice that changing a more direct sentence structure (“may I ask what”) to a more indirect one (“might I inquire as to”) also jumps a register. a lot of english is like this — you can complicate simple direct sentences by switching the way you use the verbs/how many auxiliaries you use etc.
THE POINT IS: with regards to english, more formal sentence structures are often (not always) longer and more indirect than informal ones. this leads us to a problem with a character like lan wangji.
lan wangji is canonically very taciturn. if he can express his meaning in two words rather than three, then he will. and chinese allows for this—in extreme ways. if you haven’t already read @hunxi-guilai’s post on linguistic register (in CQL only, but it’s applicable across the board), I would start there because haha! I certainly do Not have a degree in Classical Chinese lit and she does a great job. :D
you can see from the examples that hunxi chose that often, longer sentences tend to be more informal in chinese (not always, which I’ll circle back to at the end lol). Colloquial chinese makes use of helping particles to indicate tone and meaning, as is shown in wei wuxian’s dialogue. and, as hunxi explained, those particles are largely absent from lan wangji’s speech pattern. chinese isn’t built of “words” in the way English is—each character is less a word and more a morpheme—and the language allows for a lot of information to be encoded in one character. a single character can often stand for a phrase within a sentence without sacrificing either meaning or formality. lan wangji makes ample use of this in order to express himself in the fewest syllables possible.
so this obviously leads to an incongruity when trying to translate his dialogue or capture his voice in English: shorter sentences are usually more direct by nature, and directness/certainty is often construed as rudeness -- but it might seem strange to see lan wangji’s dialogue full of longer sentences while the narration explicitly says that he uses very short sentences. so what happens is that many english fic writers extrapolated this into creating an english speech pattern for lan wangji that reads oddly. they’ll have lan wangji speak in grammatically incoherent fragments that distill his intended thought because they’re trying to recreate his succinctness. unfortunately, English doesn’t have as much freedom as Chinese does in this way, and it results in lan wangji sounding as if he has some kind of linguistic impediment and/or as if he’s being unspeakably rude in certain situations. In reality, lan wangji’s speech is perfectly polite for a young member of the gentry (though he’s still terribly rude in other ways lol). he speaks in full, and honestly, quite eloquent sentences.
hunxi’s post already has a lot of examples, but I figure I’ll do one as well focused on the specifics of this post.
I’m going to use this exchange from chapter 63 between the twin jades because I think it’s a pretty simple way to illustrate what I’m talking about:
蓝曦臣道:“你亲眼所见?”
蓝忘机道:“他亲眼所见。”
蓝曦臣道:“你相信他?”
蓝忘机道:“信。”
[...] 蓝曦臣道:“那么金光瑶呢?”
蓝忘机道:“不可信。”
my translation:
Lan Xichen said, “You saw it with your own eyes?”
Lan Wangji said, “He saw it with his own eyes.”
Lan Xichen said, “You believe him?”
Lan Wangji said, “I believe him.”
[...] Lan Xichen said, “Then what about Jin Guangyao?”
Lan Wangji said, “He cannot be believed.”
you can see how much longer the (pretty literal) english translations are! every single line of dialogue is expanded because things that can be omitted in chinese cannot be omitted in english without losing grammatical coherency. i‘ll break a few of them down:
Lan Xichen’s first line:
你 (you) 亲眼 (with one’s own eyes) 所 (literary auxiliary) 见 (met/saw)?
idk but i love this line a lot lmao. it just has such an elegant feel to me, probably because I am an uncultured rube. anyways, you see here that he expressed his full thought in five characters.
if I were to rewrite this sentence into something much less formal/much more modern, I might have it become something like this:
你是自己看见的吗?
你 (you) 是 (to be) 自己 (oneself) 看见 (see) 的 (auxiliary) 吗 (interrogative particle)?
i suspect that this construction might even be somewhat childish? I’ve replaced every single formal part of the sentence with a more colloquial one. instead of 亲眼 i’ve used 自己, instead of 所见 i’ve used 看见的 and then also added an interrogative particle at the end for good measure (吗). To translate this, I would probably go with “Did you see it yourself?”
contained in this is also an example of how one character can represent a whole concept that can also be represented with two characters: 见 vs 看见. in this example, both mean “to see”. we’ll see it again in the next example as well:
in response to lan xichen’s, “you believe him?” --> 你 (you) 相信 (believe) 他 (him)? lan wangji answers with, “信” (believe).
chinese does not do yes or no questions in the same way that english does. there is no catch-all for yes or no, though there are general affirmative (是/有) and negative (不/没) characters. there are other affirmative/negative characters, but these are the ones that I believe are the most common and also the ones that you may see in response to yes or no questions on their own. (don’t quote me on that lol)
regardless, the way you respond to a yes or no question is often by repeating the verb phrase either in affirmative or negative. so here, when lan xichen asks if lan wangji believes wei wuxian, lan wangji responds “believe”. once again, you can see that one character can stand in for a concept that may also be expressed in two characters: 信 takes the place of 相信. lan wangji could have responded with “相信” just as well, but, true to his character, he didn’t because he didn’t need to. this is still a complete sentence. lan wangji has discarded the subject (I), the object (him), and also half the verb (相), and lost no meaning whatsoever. you can’t do this in english!
and onto the last exchange:
lan xichen: 那么 (then) 金光瑶 (jin guangyao) 呢 (what about)?
lan wangji: 不可 (cannot) 信 (believe)
you can actually see the contrast between the two brothers’ speech patterns even in this. lan xichen’s question is not quite as pared down as it could be. if it were wangji’s line instead, I would expect it to read simply “金光瑶呢?” which would just be “what about jin guangyao?” 那么 isn’t necessary to convey the core thought -- it’s just as how “then what about” is different than “what about”, but “then” is not necessary to the central question. if we wanted to keep the “then” aspect, you could still cut out 么 and it would be the same meaning as well.
a FINAL example of how something can be cut down just because I think examples are helpful:
“I don’t know” is usually given as 我不知道. (this is what nie huaisang says lol) It contains subject (我) and full verb (知道). you can pare this straight down to just 不知 and it would mean the same thing in the correct context. i think most of the characters do this at least once? it sounds more literary -- i don’t know that i would ever use it in everyday speech, but the fact remains that it’s a possibility. both could be translated as “I do not know” and it would be accurate.
ANYWAYS, getting all the way back to one of your original questions: does chinese have contractions? and the answer is like... kind of...?? but not really. there’s certainly slang/dialect variants that can be used in ways that are reminiscent of english contractions. the example I’m thinking of is the character 啥 (sha2) which can be used as slang in place of 什么 (shen2 me). (which means “what”)
so for a standard sentence of, 你在做什么? (what are you doing), you could shorten down to just 做啥? and the second construction is less formal than the first, but they mean the same thing.
other slang i can think of off the top of my head: 干嘛 (gan4 ma2) is also informal slang for “what are you doing”. and i think this is a regional thing, but you can also use 搞 (gao3) and 整 (zheng3) to mean “do” as well.
so in the same way that you can replace 什么 with 啥, you can replace 做 as well to get constructions like 搞啥 (gao3 sha2) and 整啥 (zheng3 sha2).
these are all different ways to say “what are you doing” lmao, and in this case, shorter is not, in fact, more formal.
woo! we made it to the end! I hope it was informative and helpful to you anon. :D
this is where I would normally throw my ko-fi, but instead, I’m actually going to link you to this fundraising post for an old fandom friend of mine. her house burned down mid-september and they could still use help if anyone can spare it! if this post would have moved you to buy me a ko-fi, please send that money to her family instead. :) rbs are also appreciated on the post itself. (* ´▽` *)
anyways, here’s the loaf jingyeast made :3 it was very tasty.
Tumblr media
1K notes · View notes