Being a member in the group with Brown-san and Ardo-san, I took delight with our lively discussion in which we exchanged our observations on three fascinating aspects of Katakana. These topics invite further exploration (Refer to: posted under Tristan in link https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6315025652818038010&postID=3795102668321607840&isPopup=true). However, instead of investigating these subjects, I am most intrigued by the development history of the three writing system in Japanese, namely, Hanji, Katakana and Hiragana. Particularly, I ask why there is the need to develop the paralleled systems Katakana and Hiragana. On this, Park Sensee provided us overview knowledge in the class. In this analysis blog, I like to further analyze this very topic.
Katakana system was believed to be originated in the Heian period, i.e., nineth century Japan. However, in April 2002, Yoshinori Kobayashi, professor of Japanese at Tokushima Bunri University, suggested in a lecture that he gave at Otani University in Kyoto that the Katakana system may have originated in the eighth century on the Korean Peninsula and introduced to Japan through Buddhist texts (Refer to: http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20020404b7.html ). Nevertheless, this hypothesis is being critically examined and debated. For example, Minami Hirakawa (平川南) argued contrarily in his book Ancient Japan: The Passage the writing system came through (歴博フォーラム古代日本文字の来た道), published one year later in 2005 in Japanese.
Hiragana system was also believed to be originated near the same time, although it gains its popularity among women who were denied of formal education; while men, received formal education of Hanji. My question remains, however, as to why Katakana was developed in approximately the same period as Hiragana? If Hiragana was used mostly by women and Hanji by men, who used Katakana? I shall investigate further by discussions with Japanese linguistics and historians, as well as research of more secondary scholarship.
Really interesting analysis, Qiu san. I really would like to see some more examples of the historical trends that you mention.
ReplyDeleteSecond, I think you dialectic reasoning regarding gender and hiragana/katakana might not have been the case. While Hiragana may have been often used by women, that does not mean that Katakana was seen as a engendered syllabary. I would take a look at more secondary scholarship on this and see what's out there. It's an interesting question.
Tristan Brown
Wow these blogs are all so interesting! I am actually much more interested in Katakana now than I had expected :)
ReplyDeleteWhat I have always heard is that Katakana and Kanji were more like "men's script" and hirgana were for like "women's script." Of course I have no idea, but that is always the impression I have gleaned from things I have read and seen. Weren't katakana used in Buddhist scriptures to represent phonetic sounds? Could they also have been used by men when they were learning Kanji? Do we have any Japanese linguists at Columbia? We need to get to the bottom of this...
2002 huh. You have a follow up on what the consensus is? Has the good man's claims been debunked or verified?
ReplyDeleteWow, the fact that katakana might have came from Korea is pretty shocking to me, but looking at it now, I wouldn't be surprised that it does. Katakana is noticeably different than Hiragana especially with its usage of sharp lines and edges like in the korean alphabet.
ReplyDeleteCheng san, Ardo san, Chaesang san and Brown san, thank you for your feedback. I shall benefit from them for my final analysis.
ReplyDeleteBTW, Cheng san, I am surprised (though happily) about your visit to my blog. How did you come across this path? You are welcome to visit often and leave comments!