一個(gè)在現(xiàn)代說(shuō)中文的人能夠與來(lái)自公元 100 年的中國(guó)人交流嗎？
Would a Chinese speaker today be able to communicate with a Chinese person from 100 AD?
譯文簡(jiǎn)介
純屬好奇，一個(gè)現(xiàn)代的中國(guó)人（講普通話/粵語(yǔ)等）能否與大約 2000 年前的中國(guó)人交流？
正文翻譯
Would a Chinese speaker today be able to communicate with a Chinese person from 100 AD?
今天會(huì)說(shuō)中文的人能夠與公元 100 年的中國(guó)人交流嗎？
Just wondered if a Chinese speaker (mandarin/cantonese/etc.) today would be able to communicate with a Chinese person from approximately 2000 years ago? Or has the language evolved so much it would be unintelligible. Question for the history and linguist people! I am guessing some key words would be the same and sentence structure but the vocabulary a lot different, just a guess though.
純屬好奇，一個(gè)現(xiàn)代的中國(guó)人（講普通話/粵語(yǔ)等）能否與大約 2000 年前的中國(guó)人交流？還是說(shuō)語(yǔ)言已經(jīng)進(jìn)化到雙方無(wú)法理解的地步？想問(wèn)一下論壇里的歷史和語(yǔ)言學(xué)家！我的猜測(cè)是有些關(guān)鍵詞和句子結(jié)構(gòu)是一樣的，但詞匯量有很大不同，這只是我的猜測(cè)。
純屬好奇，一個(gè)現(xiàn)代的中國(guó)人（講普通話/粵語(yǔ)等）能否與大約 2000 年前的中國(guó)人交流？還是說(shuō)語(yǔ)言已經(jīng)進(jìn)化到雙方無(wú)法理解的地步？想問(wèn)一下論壇里的歷史和語(yǔ)言學(xué)家！我的猜測(cè)是有些關(guān)鍵詞和句子結(jié)構(gòu)是一樣的，但詞匯量有很大不同，這只是我的猜測(cè)。
評(píng)論翻譯
很贊 ( 22 )
收藏
Literally no speaker of any language today would be able to communicate with a person from 100 AD.
實(shí)際上，今天任何語(yǔ)言的使用者都無(wú)法與公元 100 年的人交流。
What about Hebrew? Or Latin?
希伯來(lái)語(yǔ)呢？或者拉丁語(yǔ)？
I'm not sure even the text from literature and poems are not so ancient and there are not a lot nowadays. 2000 years ago they still have different kingdoms in China and different languages and cultures. I don't think they would be able to understand more than 20% except if they are speaking dialects that wouldn't have much evolved during all that period. But I doubt about it ^^
我不確定，即使是留存下來(lái)的文學(xué)和詩(shī)歌也沒(méi)有那么古老，也沒(méi)有留下很多。2000 年前，中國(guó)還存在著不同的王國(guó)，不同的語(yǔ)言和文化。我不認(rèn)為他們能夠互相理解超過(guò) 20% 的內(nèi)容，除非他們說(shuō)的是方言，而方言在那段時(shí)期并沒(méi)有太大的發(fā)展。但我對(duì)此表示懷疑 ^^
No lol
哈哈，當(dāng)然不行
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Short answer: not even a little bit.
簡(jiǎn)短的回答：一丁點(diǎn)也沒(méi)辦法交流。
Deepends on your field of study in Middle/Old Chinese with an emphasis on the classics & rhyme tables, and if you know multiple dialects (with an heavy emphasis on yue, wu, min so you can actually notice the sounds in the first place). You might be able to reverse learn in that case... .other wise your more listening than speaking
Writing on the other hand you should be able to if you know the classics because everyone who was of importance knew Literary Chinese.
這取決于你對(duì)中古漢語(yǔ)的研究領(lǐng)域的重點(diǎn)是不是經(jīng)典典籍和韻表，以及你是否了解多種方言（重點(diǎn)是粵、吳、閩方言，這樣你才能初步聽(tīng)懂別人說(shuō)的話）。在這種情況下，你也許可以通過(guò)逆向?qū)W習(xí)進(jìn)行交流......否則，你在聽(tīng)力方面遭遇的困難可能比口語(yǔ)更嚴(yán)重。
另一方面，如果你了解經(jīng)典典籍，你就應(yīng)該能夠通過(guò)寫(xiě)作交流，因?yàn)槟莻€(gè)時(shí)代每個(gè)重要的人都懂得文言文。
Would a modern English speaker be able to understand Angle and Saxon German dialects from 400 AD? No way! Same applies here. No way anybody would understand anyways. Plus: there was not “Chinese” commonly spoken.
Maybe partially possible to communicate using characters with some difficulties.
講現(xiàn)代英語(yǔ)的人能聽(tīng)懂公元 400 年的盎格魯和撒克遜德語(yǔ)方言嗎？不可能！中國(guó)也一樣。無(wú)論如何都不可能有人聽(tīng)得懂。另外，當(dāng)時(shí)的“漢語(yǔ)”并不普及。
也許可以部分使用漢字進(jìn)行交流，但會(huì)有一些困難。
Language would change and evolve ...phonetically shift.....vowel and consonant shift.......
so written sentence not changed,,,but Sounds might be change and uncommunicable..LoL
語(yǔ)言會(huì)改變和發(fā)展......語(yǔ)音上的轉(zhuǎn)變......元音和輔音的轉(zhuǎn)變......
書(shū)面的句子沒(méi)有改變，，，但聲音可能會(huì)改變并且無(wú)法溝通..哈哈
For the same reason that an English speaker today cannot understand old English without prior study, a modern mandarin speaker cannot understand classical or ancient mandarin without prior study.
就像今天說(shuō)英語(yǔ)的人不經(jīng)過(guò)學(xué)習(xí)就無(wú)法理解古英語(yǔ)一樣，說(shuō)現(xiàn)代普通話的人不經(jīng)過(guò)學(xué)習(xí)也無(wú)法理解古典或古代普通話。
That's not true. Confucius is much closer to today's Chinese than actual old English is to today's English. Everyone can read a little Confucius and Mencius I mean it's a staple in schools.
Old English isn't Shakespeare. We read sections of Canterbury Tales in school in America and it sounds like French not even English. Whereas you can tell Confucius is speaking the same language lol.
事實(shí)并非如此。孔子與今天的漢語(yǔ)的關(guān)系，比古代英語(yǔ)與今天英語(yǔ)的關(guān)系要密切得多。每個(gè)人都可以閱讀理解一點(diǎn)孔子和孟子的著作，我的意思是，它是學(xué)校教學(xué)的主要內(nèi)容之一。
莎士比亞還算不上是古英語(yǔ)。我們?cè)诿绹?guó)的學(xué)校里讀過(guò)《坎特伯雷故事集》，聽(tīng)起來(lái)像法語(yǔ)，甚至不能說(shuō)是英語(yǔ)。但你能看出孔子與今天中國(guó)人說(shuō)的是同一種語(yǔ)言，哈哈。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
See above where I said you need to have special training for it. I was taught some old English in school and knew from that, same way students in china learn a bit of Classical Chinese
參見(jiàn)上面我過(guò)說(shuō)你需要接受專門(mén)的訓(xùn)練。我在學(xué)校學(xué)過(guò)一些古英語(yǔ)，也能理解一些，正如中國(guó)的學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)一些文言文一樣
Lol you do not the scales are completely different. regular ppl can grok that ancient Chinese has 日 instead of 說(shuō) but most regular English speakers can't make heads or tails of Beowulf.
哈哈，你不知道兩者的尺度完全不同。普通人可以理解古代漢語(yǔ)中的“日”而不是“說(shuō)”，但大多數(shù)普通英語(yǔ)使用者卻無(wú)法理解《貝奧武夫》。
Had to memorize part of Beowulf, did some essays and I can infer enough from learning the additional letters. Pretty arrogant to say another English speaker can’t do the same.
我曾經(jīng)不得不背誦《貝奧武夫》的一部分內(nèi)容，并且寫(xiě)了一些相關(guān)的文章，而且我可以通過(guò)學(xué)習(xí)額外的字母推斷出足夠的內(nèi)容。說(shuō)一個(gè)說(shuō)英語(yǔ)的人做不到這一點(diǎn)，真是太傲慢了。
Whereas you can tell Confucius is speaking the same language lol.
That's because you read the Analects in the pronunciation of a modern Chinese language like Mandarin. Confucius did not speak Mandarin.
“但你能看出孔子與今天中國(guó)人說(shuō)的是同一種語(yǔ)言，哈哈”
那是因?yàn)槟阕x《論語(yǔ)》時(shí)的發(fā)音是現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)的發(fā)音，比如普通話?？鬃硬粫?huì)說(shuō)普通話。
eh, Classical Chinese is still significantly more understandable than Old English is without specialized study. By that I mean I can usually at least work out what the topic is reasonably easily and take a stab at guessing what it’s trying to say. Sure, I’m usually wrong, but not always, and there’s enough there to give me some basis for guessing. (And my Chinese level is significantly below that of an educated Chinese person.) Whereas even being both a native English speaker and knowing some German, I’d be hard pressed to get anything out of a random Old English passage besides a few guesses at cognates.
In addition to the character system making changes to pronunciation far less relevant for understanding the written language, you also get exposure to classical style constructions and diction because a lot of classical sayings/quotations are still in fairly widespread circulation. And while it’s not enough to understand the details of classical texts, it’s enough to, idk, enjoy old poetry without having to read it in translation, because even if I don’t understand everything I’m still getting some of the imagery.
呃，文言文還是比古英語(yǔ)好理解很多的，不用專門(mén)研究。我的意思是，我通常至少可以相當(dāng)容易地弄清楚主題是什么，并嘗試猜測(cè)它想說(shuō)什么。當(dāng)然，我通常是錯(cuò)的，但也并非總是如此，而且有足夠的依據(jù)去讓我猜測(cè)（我的中文水平明顯低于受過(guò)教育的中國(guó)人）。盡管我的母語(yǔ)是英語(yǔ)，并且懂一些德語(yǔ)，但除了猜測(cè)一些同源詞之外，我很難從一段隨機(jī)的古英語(yǔ)段落中得到任何信息。
除了漢字系統(tǒng)使得發(fā)音的變化與理解書(shū)面語(yǔ)言的關(guān)系不大之外，你還能接觸到古典風(fēng)格的行文和修辭，因?yàn)楹芏嘟?jīng)典名言/名句仍在廣泛流傳。雖然這對(duì)于理解古典文本的細(xì)節(jié)還遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠，但對(duì)于欣賞古詩(shī)詞來(lái)說(shuō)已經(jīng)足夠了，不用再去讀翻譯版本，因?yàn)榧词刮也荒芡耆斫?，我也能領(lǐng)會(huì)到其中的一些意象。
The gulf between the spoken and written languages is massive in Chinese compared to most languages on earth, so how well they'd understand each other depends entirely on literacy.
與地球上大多數(shù)語(yǔ)言相比，漢語(yǔ)的口語(yǔ)和書(shū)面語(yǔ)言之間的鴻溝巨大，因此它們之間的相互理解程度完全取決于識(shí)字能力。
I think they can neither communicate with speaking or writing. The spoken language changed completely. And the writing system (i.e. font for simplicity) of 100 ad would be a mystery for all but few modern people who actively studied it.
我認(rèn)為他們既不能用口語(yǔ)來(lái)交流也不能用寫(xiě)作來(lái)交流?？谡Z(yǔ)完全變了。而公元 100 年的書(shū)寫(xiě)系統(tǒng)（即簡(jiǎn)體字的前身）除了極少數(shù)積極研究它的現(xiàn)代人之外，對(duì)其他人來(lái)說(shuō)都是一個(gè)謎。
isn’t the most popular scxt in 100 AD clerical scxt? clerical scxt is still very readable, it’s not oracle bone scxt. Chinese cursive is harder to read than clerical. In fact, random cutesy logo fonts are often harder to read than clerical, or maybe that’s just me lol
公元 100 年最流行的文字不就是隸書(shū)嗎？ 隸書(shū)還是很好讀懂的，它不是甲骨文。中國(guó)草書(shū)比隸書(shū)更難讀。事實(shí)上，隨處可見(jiàn)的logo上扭扭曲曲的字體往往比隸書(shū)更難讀，也許這只是我是這樣，哈哈。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Everyone who has been through high school can manage at least a little Classical Chinese, where are you getting this from?
你為什么會(huì)這么覺(jué)得？每個(gè)讀過(guò)高中的人都至少會(huì)一點(diǎn)文言文。
I lived in china, amd my wife is Chinese.
Try to find a photo an original piece of writing from 2000 years ago and see how many characters you can recognize. Remember that the Chinese character we can read and write, have changed significantly through out the past 5000 years. I agree, that she can try and guess at the meaning of a book written in classic chines printed using modern fonts, but if you bring her an original manuscxt, she said that she doubt that she can recognize more than a handful of characters
我曾在中國(guó)生活過(guò)，我的妻子也是中國(guó)人。
試著找一張 2000 年前的原始文字照片，看看你能認(rèn)出里面多少漢字。記住，我們能讀寫(xiě)的漢字在過(guò)去的 5000 年里發(fā)生了很大的變化。我同意，她可以試著猜測(cè)一本用現(xiàn)代字體印刷的古典中文書(shū)籍的意思，但如果你把原稿拿給她看，她說(shuō)她很懷疑自己能認(rèn)出的漢字能不能超過(guò)幾個(gè)。
I am Chinese. This https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_calligraphy#/media/File%3ALantingXu.jpg would be very legible to most Chinese people (high school graduates).
我是中國(guó)人。這個(gè)
對(duì)大多數(shù)中國(guó)人（高中畢業(yè)生）來(lái)說(shuō)都沒(méi)什么難度。
Absolutely not, and that holds true for every language that still exists as a spoken language.
絕對(duì)不行，這適用于每一種仍作為口語(yǔ)存在的語(yǔ)言。
No. Someone from 100 ad would be dead and therefore unable to talk.
不。來(lái)自公元 100 年的人會(huì)死掉，因此無(wú)法說(shuō)話。
Read and write yes but speak no
讀和寫(xiě)可以，但說(shuō)不行
Spoken? Not at all.
Although Han Dynasty Chinese from that period shares many similarities with modern Chinese fangyan, the sounds and grammar are overall completely separate. To any modern Chinese speaker they may as well be listening to Vietnamese. In fact, due to more recent Chinese loanwords in Vietnamese, it may be more intelligible than Han Dynasty Chinese!
Some fangyan, like Hokkien and Cantonese, retain more conservative elements than Mandarin which make them more similar to ancient Chinese varieties, but they've still changed a lot in 2000 years. I don't think there's any [non linguist] speaker of a modern lect which could accurately understand any more than the occasional word from Han Dynasty Chinese.
This video shows pretty well the differences in pronunciation and grammar between Ancient, medi and modern Chinese: https://youtu.be/SUxGsjDEfvo?si=03V34wregQZ7yxAR
In terms of writing however, probably. Classical/Literary Chinese is taught in most Chinese schools and many characters retain similar meanings today as they did 2000 years ago. To the untrained modern Chinese person, you can probably get the jist of what a Han Dynasty person writes, but may miss out on a lot of additional context which could change the meanings completely. This is however only taking into account standard varieties, both modern and ancient Chinese have many written dialects and so intelligibility varies between people.
話？完全不行。
雖然漢朝時(shí)期的漢語(yǔ)與現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)的方言有很多相似之處，但在語(yǔ)音和語(yǔ)法上是完全不同的。對(duì)于任何現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)使用者來(lái)說(shuō)，他們會(huì)以為自己聽(tīng)到的是越南語(yǔ)。事實(shí)上，由于越南語(yǔ)中出現(xiàn)了更多新近的漢語(yǔ)借詞，它可能比漢代漢語(yǔ)對(duì)于現(xiàn)代中國(guó)人來(lái)說(shuō)更易懂！
有些方言，如福建話和廣東話，保留了比普通話更多的保守成分，這使它們與古代漢語(yǔ)更相似，但它們?cè)?2000 年間依然發(fā)生了很大變化。我認(rèn)為沒(méi)有任何一個(gè)（非語(yǔ)言學(xué)家）會(huì)說(shuō)現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)的人能夠準(zhǔn)確地理解漢代漢語(yǔ)中偶爾出現(xiàn)的詞匯。
下面這段視頻很好地展示了古代漢語(yǔ)、中古漢語(yǔ)和現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)在發(fā)音和語(yǔ)法方面的差異：
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
不過(guò)，就書(shū)寫(xiě)而言，大概可以。大多數(shù)中文學(xué)校都教授古代漢語(yǔ)/文言文，許多漢字在今天仍保留著與 2000 年前相似的含義。對(duì)于沒(méi)有受過(guò)訓(xùn)練的說(shuō)寫(xiě)現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)的人來(lái)說(shuō)，你大概可以理解漢代人寫(xiě)的字的意思，但可能會(huì)忽略很多額外的語(yǔ)境，從而完全改變了字義。然而，這僅僅是考慮到標(biāo)準(zhǔn)變體，現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)和古代漢語(yǔ)都有許多書(shū)面方言，因此不同人的理解能力也不盡相同。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Does anyone know how reliable this channel is? They do a ton of "how ancient, barely attested languages sound" kind of videos, and I really want to believe them, but they even include for example Tocharian and barely have any sources.
有人知道這個(gè)頻道有多可靠嗎？他們制作了大量“幾乎沒(méi)有考證的古代語(yǔ)言聽(tīng)起來(lái)如何”的視頻，我真的很想相信他們，但他們甚至演示了已經(jīng)消失的吐火羅語(yǔ)，而且?guī)缀鯖](méi)有擺出任何資料來(lái)源。
This is a long shot, but what have you heard about anything regarding the similarities between Korean-pronounced Chinese characters and Chinese spoken during the Han Dynasty?
People who know Korean usually soon realize that our pronunciation is much closer to the Cantonese and Vietnamese pronunciation of the characters than it is to Mandarin. I've heard somewhere that that's because Korea started to really accept Chinese culture during the Han Dynasty and that culture moved southwards which would also explain the Cantonese and Vietnamese.
Just a random question I had in mind since you mentioned loanwords in Vietnamese.
這個(gè)問(wèn)題說(shuō)來(lái)話長(zhǎng)，但你聽(tīng)說(shuō)過(guò)關(guān)于朝鮮語(yǔ)發(fā)音的漢字與漢朝時(shí)期的漢語(yǔ)發(fā)音相似的事情嗎？
了解朝鮮語(yǔ)的人通常很快就會(huì)意識(shí)到，我們對(duì)漢字的發(fā)音與廣東話和越南語(yǔ)的發(fā)音更接近，而不是普通話。我聽(tīng)說(shuō)這是因?yàn)轫n國(guó)在漢朝開(kāi)始真正接受中國(guó)文化，并且這種文化向南遷移了，這也解釋了為什么會(huì)出現(xiàn)跟廣東話和越南話相似的情況。
看你提到了越南語(yǔ)中的借詞，我隨便問(wèn)問(wèn)。
It's possible that Old Korean and Old Chinese were similar, but AFAIK most modern Korean (as well as Japanese, Vietnamese, etc.) readings of Chinese characters come from Middle Chinese (which were borrowed into Middle Korean). A great deal of them were borrowed from the Tang dynasty, but there are borrowings earlier and later of course. I haven't studied similarities between Korean and the Han dynasty, but you can see a striking similarity between Korean and Middle Chinese in many cases.
Also, Cantonese and Mandarin started to develop in the late Middle Chinese period (Song dynasty).
Example: rhyming words from Du Fu's poem "Spring Scene" (春望):
Characters: 深, 心, 金, 簪
Korean: sim, sim, kim, jam
Hakka (Dabu): shim1, sim1, gim1, zem1
Cantonese: sam1, sam1, gam1, zaam1 (vowel changes)
Vietnamese: tham, tam, kim/cam, tram (some initials are different, also kim is older and from Middle Chinese, while cam came later and is from Cantonese gam1)
Japanese On'yomi: shin, shin, kin/gon, shin/san
Modern Standard Mandarin: shēn, xīn, jīn, zān (only xīn and jīn rhyme)
But there are instances where Korean is not that close. For instance, entering tones that end with -t in Middle Chinese became -l, and other consonant and vowel changes occurred.
Let's look the words from "Spring Scene" that have entering tone in Middle Chinese (入聲):
Characters: 國(guó), 木, 別, 月, 白, 欲
Korean: guk, mok, byeol, wol, baek, yok
Cantonese: gwok3 / gok3 (HK), muk6, bit6, jyut6, baak6, juk6
Hakka (Dabu): ged7, mug8, pied8, ngied8, ped8, rhug8
Vietnamese: qu?c, m?c, bi?t, nguy?t, b?ch, d?c
Japanese: koku, moku/boku, betsu, getsu, hyaku/byaku, yoku
Modern Standard Mandarin: guó, mù, bié, yuè, bái, yù (no -k/-t endings)
So as you can see, Korean and Middle Chinese are still quite similar, but in some cases like 月 Korean has diverged a lot (loss of ngj- at the beginning, changing of -t to -l. So ngjwot and wol are quite different).
古朝鮮語(yǔ)和古漢語(yǔ)可能很相似，但據(jù)目前所知，大多數(shù)現(xiàn)代朝鮮語(yǔ)（以及日語(yǔ)、越南語(yǔ)等）的漢字讀音來(lái)自中古漢語(yǔ)（被借用到中古朝鮮語(yǔ)中）。其中有很多是從唐朝借來(lái)的，當(dāng)然也有借用得更早和更晚的。我沒(méi)有研究過(guò)朝鮮語(yǔ)和漢朝漢語(yǔ)之間的相似之處，但你可以在很多情況下看到朝鮮語(yǔ)和中古漢語(yǔ)之間驚人的相似之處。
此外，粵語(yǔ)和普通話在中晚期（宋朝）開(kāi)始發(fā)展。
例如：杜甫《春望》詩(shī)中的押韻詞：
漢字：深, 心, 金, 簪
中古漢語(yǔ)：syim, sim, kim, tsim/tsom
朝鮮語(yǔ)：sim, sim, kim, jam
客家話（大埔）：shim1, sim1, gim1, zem1
廣東話：sam1, sam1, gam1, zaam1 （元音變化）
越南語(yǔ)：tham, tam, kim/cam, tram（有些首字母是不同的，而且“kim”的歷史較長(zhǎng)，源于中古漢語(yǔ)，而“cam”的歷史較晚，源于粵語(yǔ)“gam1”）。
日語(yǔ)音讀：shin, shin, kin/gon, shin/san
現(xiàn)代標(biāo)準(zhǔn)普通話：shēn、xīn、jīn、zān（只有 xīn 和 jīn 押韻）
但在有些情況下，韓語(yǔ)并不那么接近。例如，中古漢語(yǔ)中以-t 結(jié)尾的聲調(diào)變成了-l，其他輔音和元音也發(fā)生了變化。
我們來(lái)看看《春望》中有哪些入聲的字：
漢字: 國(guó), 木, 別, 月, 白, 欲
中古漢語(yǔ)：kwok、muwk、bjet、ngjwot、baek、yowk
朝鮮語(yǔ)：guk, mok, byeol, wol, baek, yok
廣東話：ged7, mug8, pied8, ngied8, ped8, rhug8
客家話（大埔）：ged7, mug8, pied8, ngied8, ped8, rhug8
越南語(yǔ)：qu?c, m?c, bi?t, nguy?t, b?ch, d?c
日語(yǔ)：koku, moku/boku, betsu, getsu, hyaku/byaku, yoku
現(xiàn)代標(biāo)準(zhǔn)普通話：guó, mù, bié, yuè, bái, yù （無(wú) -k/-t 詞尾）
因此，正如你所看到的，朝鮮語(yǔ)和中古漢語(yǔ)還是很相似的，但在某些情況下，如“月”字的讀法朝鮮語(yǔ)已經(jīng)有了很大的分化（開(kāi)頭的 ngj- 丟失，-t 改為-l。因此，“ngjwot”和“wol”有很大不同）。
Korean began importing Chinese culture, including loanwords in the Ming dynasty. Mandarin then rapidly underwent a change that made it less similar to Middle Chinese. Han Dynasty stuff is much more different from both.
Cantonese preserved a lot of the finals but lost the glides, and for Mandarin it is vice versa.
朝鮮人從明朝開(kāi)始引進(jìn)中國(guó)文化，包括借詞。隨后，普通話迅速發(fā)生變化，與中古漢語(yǔ)的相似度降低。漢代的讀法與兩者的差異更大。
粵語(yǔ)保留了很多尾音，但失去了滑音，普通話則反之。
I think Sino-Japanese, Sino-Korean, and Sino-Vietnamese readings all date to the Tang/Song Dynasties. Sino-Korean kept the final stop consonants of Middle Chinese*, which are no longer found in Jianghuai Mandarin, which is (probably?) the closest surviving language/topolect to whatever would’ve been spoken in Nanjing/Beijing during the Ming Dynasty
this is pretty obvious if you look at Korean personal names (which like Viet names are of Chinese etymology) and the names of certain food items that have Sino-Korean etymologies like mayak (麻藥)
我認(rèn)為中日詞、中韓詞和中越詞的讀音都可以追溯到唐宋時(shí)期。中韓語(yǔ)保留了中古漢語(yǔ)*的末止輔音，而江淮官話中已沒(méi)有這種輔音，江淮官話是（可能是？）最接近明代南京/北京話的現(xiàn)存語(yǔ)言/方言。
如果你看看韓國(guó)人的名字（和越南人的名字一樣，都有中國(guó)詞源）和某些食品的名字（如麻藥mayak ），就會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)這一點(diǎn)非常明顯。
ABC
Speaking, no. Writing 文言文 Classical Chinese, yes
A lot of sound components in characters e.g. 能 in 態(tài) do not make sense in modern Mandarin but did in the past
說(shuō)不了。但寫(xiě)“文言文”交流，可以
漢字中的許多音素，如“能（態(tài)）”在現(xiàn)代普通話中沒(méi)有意義，但在過(guò)去是有意義的。
Except literacy was really really low
除了識(shí)字率非常非常低
Which is kind of the point. Only when literacy remains low can the written language remain consistent over thousands of years.
If writing and reading remains a "classy" thing to do, people would tend to resist changes to remain "classy", and would gladly give up practicality for authenticity. If you complain that it doesn't match the spoken language? "Shut up, you peasant, write it the old way or get out."
As literacy goes high...well, here comes the 白話文. Had literacy been this high 2000 years ago, written Chinese back then would be completely incomprehensible today.
這正是問(wèn)題的關(guān)鍵所在。只有識(shí)字率保持在較低水平，書(shū)面語(yǔ)言才能在數(shù)千年中保持一致。
如果書(shū)寫(xiě)和閱讀仍然是一件“高雅”的事，人們就會(huì)為保持“高雅”而抵制做出的改變，并樂(lè)意為藝術(shù)性而放棄實(shí)用性。如果你抱怨書(shū)面語(yǔ)與口語(yǔ)不符？“閉嘴，你個(gè)鄉(xiāng)巴佬，要么按老辦法寫(xiě)，要么滾蛋”。
隨著識(shí)字率的提高......白話文來(lái)了。如果 2000 年前的識(shí)字率就這么高，那么當(dāng)時(shí)的書(shū)面中文今天就完全無(wú)法理解了。
For some reason I thought at various points in Chinese history, literacy was promoted or high— buuut maybe that’s just relative to the world at the time though, or to more chaotic periods like 3 kingdoms?
I know the Qing pushed for literacy, but I thought literacy wasn’t too bad in the Tang either, being a golden age.
不知為何，我覺(jué)得在中國(guó)歷史上的不同時(shí)期，識(shí)字率都得到了提升或提高，但這也許只是相對(duì)于當(dāng)時(shí)的世界而言，或者是相對(duì)于三國(guó)等較為混亂的時(shí)期而言？
我知道清朝才開(kāi)始提倡掃盲，但我認(rèn)為唐朝作為黃金時(shí)代，掃盲情況也不差。
It’s great but it’s still feudal. There are only so much you can do when there are production bottle neck.
它很偉大，但仍然是古代社會(huì)。當(dāng)出現(xiàn)生產(chǎn)瓶頸時(shí)，你能做的只有這么多。
The written case is not only plausible, but something analogous actually happened before. Choe Bu was a Korean bureaucrat who was shipwrecked in Zhejiang and made his way back home by land, writing in Classical Chinese along the way to communicate.
書(shū)寫(xiě)交流的案例不僅可信，而且類似的事情也確實(shí)發(fā)生過(guò)。崔弼是一位朝鮮官僚，他在浙江遭遇海難，從陸路回國(guó)，一路上用文言文寫(xiě)作交流。