| Project/Area Number |
03610232
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for General Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Research Field |
中国語・中国文学
|
|---|
| Research Institution | KYOTO UNIVERSITY |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
TAKATA Tokio Kyoto Univ., Inst.for Res.in Hum., Assoc.Prof., 人文科学研究所, 助教授 (60150249)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
1991 – 1993
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 1993)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥2,500,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,500,000)
Fiscal Year 1993: ¥200,000 (Direct Cost: ¥200,000)
Fiscal Year 1992: ¥700,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000)
Fiscal Year 1991: ¥1,600,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,600,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | Dunhuang / Tibet / bilingualism / Chinese / History of Chinese Language |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
In general very few source materials exist for the study of the language in society in Ancient China. Dunhuang manuscripts form a rare exception. They are abundant in such firsthand sources as to reconstruct the language in society. Tenth century manuscripts show a particular variety and most useful for our study. We aimed to compile "A Corpus of Dunhuang Chinese Texts for the study of the language in society", and completed a small database as a temporary tool.
Bilingualism of Chinese and Tibetan in tenth century Dunhuang is an important phase of the problem. There are but a good few materials for the study of this phase. By an analysis of these materials, we could find out the existence of a Tibetanized Chinese society in the background and its prominent role in the buddhism. A detailed study of the Chinese Long Scroll constitutes a valuable contribution to the new view.
As to the concept of lingistic standard in tenth century Dunhuang, Sino-Tibetan materials in particular reveal that the Hexi dialect gained in the tenth century the status of a standard and the state standard language of Changan lost accordingly its influence over the Dunhuang society, although the standard language was very strong yet in the period of Tibetan occupation and in the early period of the Guiyijun.
Comparison of Turfan and Dunhuang is a interesting matter. In Turfan, strongly Sinicized Uigur people developped a peculiar system of pronunciation of Chinese characters, whereas the Tibetans in Dunhuang failed to do so. This is probably because the Chinese had been dominant in the Dunhuang society and the Tibetan occupation was never long enough to introduce a valid cultural change.
|
