Eli5: Why does it seem like Japanese often translates from English phonetically (camera = カメラ ‘kamera’) while Chinese seems to translate conceptually (照相机 ‘zhao xiang ji’ is literally “photo taking machine”)
In: Other
I am doubtful of the answers being put forth in this thread focusing on the linguistic differences between Japanese and Chinese. (Fwiw I’m a native Chinese speaker and have learnt Japanese in university, but I’m by no means a linguist) While Chinese is a tonal language, I don’t see it as a limiting factor to borrowing words from foreign sources. Chinese has plenty of loanwords from various sources (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_loanwords_in_Chinese). It being tonal, and each word having a separate existing meaning, does not hinder transliteration. Chinese speakers know where a word is being transliterated and won’t look at each character in its individual form, and end up confused by the meaning.
Conversely, it’s not always the case that Japanese transliterates all their loanwards. For example, 飛行機 (hikouki) means aeroplane,
冷蔵庫 (Reizōko) means fridge, 自転車 (Jitensha) means bicycle. And these are loanwards which would have been introduced around the same time as the camera.
I suspect the answer is more cultural and historical. A lot of the loanwards in Japanese we see are relatively modern imports which would have been brought in during either the Meiji period where they were opening up to the West, or post WW2 where they were under American management and exposed to a lot of American culture. This would have led to an influx of foreign words and concepts that (perhaps against their will) would have been incorporated wholesale into the Japanese language. It perhaps also helps that Japanese has the katakana script, which iirc post WW2 was formally utilised solely for foreign loanwords. So in a sense, there is a formal categorisation to dump all the fancy new words being introduced from other countries, rather than having to put thought into translating it by into existing Japanese vocabulary.
Conversely, China in its various forms has always been more insular compared to Japan. And in its history within Asia, it has more often been the major cultural exporter rather than importer. When you look at more recent interactions between China and the West (like 1800s onwards) it has been much less open and enthusiastic than Japan’s approach. So (and a historian can correct me here) my impression is that they would rather stamp their own identity on these words by converting them into legible Chinese characters, rather than just transliterating it. There is also an added benefit that translating it into existing terms allows the loanword to be more understandable to a layperson reading it. I’ll just copy an example from wiki here:
> For instance, while the loanword for ‘penicillin’ is 盘尼西林 (pánníxīlín), a neologism that ‘translates’ the word was later coined, 青霉素 (qīngméisù), which means ‘blue/green mold extract/essence’.
In this case, the neologism helps make it more understandable at face value than a pure transliteration.
But of course, there has been a change in more recent times in Chinese, and you do see a lot more loanwards directly imported and transliterated (or sometimes just used in English letters) as the newer generations are increasingly exposed to the rest of the world and their ideas. In fact with the rapid speed of digital and internet advancements these days, I’d say aint nobody got time in China to develop a new combination of characters for every new online term that pops up. Like there’s a proper Chinese word for app (on your phone) but these days they just say app in China like the rest of the world.
Latest Answers