New Article

On Oct 15, 3:30 am, ithinc <ithi....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 13, 10:14 pm, al <a....RemoveThis@ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > Didn't you read the authors' words such as "inner flowers" and "outer
> > flowers"?
>
> You may need to change your glasses. These two terms are direct
> translations of Liu Yishu's record. And they still exist now in
> Jiangdu Mahjong. The terms were created by the players, not by the
> writers.
>
> > "Inner flowers" applied to 化 and "outer flowers" applied to 花.. Is that
> > not interchangeable use of two words for one object?
>
> You read it wrong. It is not interchangeable use.
> Inner Flowers include: 筒王(饼王/同化) 索王(索化) 萬王(万化) 總王(搃王) 元王 合王 喜王 陞王
> Outer Flowers include: 天王 地王 人王 和王 東王 南王 西王 北王 春 夏 秋 冬 雨 日 風 雪 蘭 荷 菊
> 梅, etc.
>
> > I disagree with you. 化 represents MORE THAN the pronunciation in 花.
>
> You have the freedom.
>
> > I just said. New terms have been introduced. They are "inner flowers"
> > and "outer flowers".
>
> > Let me explain again. 化 is coined as "inner flower" and 花 is "outer
> > flower".
>
> See above.
>
> > If I understood you correctly, 化 had substituted 花 for simpler
> > engraving. What if you were wrong and that 化 was intended as a
> > variable like X+Y=10 where X is variable from 1 to 9 or Y is variable
> > from 9 to 1?
>
> It is a valid hypothesis before it's proved wrong. I have given
> reasons and circumstantial evidences.
>
> > > 化, when meaning change, is always a verb in Chinese, even when it is
> > > used as the subject of a sentence. Chinese is not English. We won't
> > > call some object 化.
>
> > There is change and there is variability. Regardless which language;
> > there is reason and there is reasonableness. What you said above lacks
> > grammatical common sense.
>
> It is obvious you lack the grammatical knowledge of Chinese.
>
> ithinc
++++++++++++++
As I recall, I read your post briefly before I was hospitalized. I was
afflicted with food-poisoning from a lunch I ate on the way to an
appointment with an ophthalmologist for an infection in my eye. That
was over 3 weeks ago. I felt sick on the way home from the trip and
through the night. I was so weak the next morning I had to go by
ambulance to the local hospital.

In the hospital the I-V injection overloaded my systems. Fluid was in
my lungs and my heart had to work harder. I could hardly breathe. I
was then transferred to Intensive-Care-Unit. That saved my life. Tests
showed I had congestive heart failure and M-I, a heart attack. I am
recuperating at home now, but I was in the hospital for nearly 3
weeks.
++++++++++++
I wrote the above 2 paragraphs this morning. I will continue to write
a few more lines this afternoon until I need another rest. I thought I
should explain my sudden absence from the scene following your last
post about 3 weeks ago.

I don't feel like reading too much of anything right now. I will try
to answer you from memory. You quoted from a book the terms flower (花)
and transformation (化) were used interchangeably by the author. You
concluded that was, as you said, "circumstantial evidence."
++++++++++++++
I took another break. Now let me continue.
"Circumstantial evidence" that might have been. It is worthless unless
it corresponds with reality. For example, there was much written about
the flat earth at one time, and probably even more was written about
the geocentric theory. So there was plenty of circumstantial evidence
given by established sources turned out to be incorrect. Therefore
what you quoted from an old book is not necessarily correct either.
++++++++++++++++++
You said (化) is abbreviation for (花) and that it was for the purpose
of easier engraving. In the tile MJ set of "Flowers and Kings" there
were only 3 (化) tiles and the difference between (花) and (化) is only +
+.
I would say if the omission of ++ is to simplify engraving, the 3
tiles can do without the word (化) entirely. Why not simplify them
using one word for each suit and still maintain their functions? The 4
real flower tiles in that set do not use the word (花).

筒, 索, and 万 (3 little words) could have served as wild cards for the
three suits. Eliminate the (化) would have been the simplest. But that
was not done, because, perhaps, there was a reason.
+++++++++++++++++
I do not see (花) = (化) or vise versa in the tile set in "Flowers and
Kings" as you do. You and I have different views on MJ history. You
pride on knowing a great deal of what has been written in Chinese
books of history and literature. I see such writing as being based on
mostly hearsay and oral tradition. I do not have your teacher-scholar
level of knowledge, but I exercise my critical judgment based on
observations as a slow learner-student.

For example, I reviewed your post briefly; you said "These two terms
are direct translations of Liu Yishu's record. And they still exist
now in Jiangdu Mahjong. The terms were created by the players, not by
the writers."

Who was Liu Yishu, anyway? Why was he such an authority on MJ?

Just because that was in the records then what was said and translated
is correct? We should not forget or ignore the confusion in Cash,
Tien, Ping, Circle, Dot or Tong. These terms were also made up by the
players. Which or any one of them is right? None of them!
++++++++++++
By the way, as far as Chinese grammar is concern, it is the worse
among the three languages I have studied. My 4 years of Latin is more
than 20 years Chinese in terms of grammar rules. As I recall, grammar
was not taught in my days of classes (in China) until senior high or
beyond grade 9. However, there are not that many clear-cut grammatical
rules in Chinese. Foreigners who have tried to learn Chinese would
tell you that.
++++++++++++++++++++
I actually started this post yesterday. I am slowing down. I am glad
to have the chance of giving you a reply.
++++++++++
Cheers...al