the soul of the far east-第10部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


son；　the　exact　term　employed　in　any　given　instance　scrupulously　betokening　the　relative　respect　in　which　the　individual　spoken　of　is　held；　while　with　a　candor；　an　indefiniteness；　or　a　humility　worthy　so　polite　a　people；　the　I　is　known　as　〃selfishness；〃　or　〃a　certain　person；〃　or　〃the　clumsy　one。〃

Pronominal　adjectives　are　manufactured　in　the　same　way。　〃The　stupid　father；〃　〃the　awkward　son；〃　〃the　broken…down　firm；〃　are　〃mine。〃　Were　they　〃yours；〃　they　would　instantly　become　〃the　august；　venerable　father；〃　〃the　honorable　son；〃　〃the　exalted　firm。〃　＇1＇

Even　these　lame　substitutes　for　pronouns　are　paraded　as　sparingly　as　possible。　　To　the　Western　student；　who　brings　to　the　subject　a　brain　throbbing　with　personality；　hunting　in　a　Japanese　sentence　for　personal　references　is　dishearteningly　like　〃searching　in　the　dark　for　a　black　hat　which　is　n't　there；〃　for　the　brevet　pronouns　are　commonly　not　on　duty。　　To　employ　them　with　the　reckless　prodigality　that　characterizes　our　conversation　would　strike　the　Tartar　mind　like　interspersing　his　talk　with　unmeaning　italics。　　He　would　regard　such　discourse　much　as　we　do　those　effusive　epistles　of　a　certain　type　of　young　woman　to　her　most　intimate　girl　friends；　in　which　every　other　word　is　emphatically　underlined。

For　the　most　part；　the　absolutely　necessary　personal　references　are　introduced　by　honorifics；　that　is；　by　honorary　or　humble　expressions。　Such　is　a　portion　of　the　latter's　duty。　　They　do　a　great　deal　of　unnecessary　work　besides。

These　honorifics　are；　taken　as　a　whole；　one　of　the　most　interesting　peculiarities　of　Japanese；　as　also　of　Korean；　just　as；　taken　in　detail；　they　are　one　of　its　most　dangerous　pitfalls。　　For　silence　is　indeed　golden　compared　with　the　chagrin　of　discovering　that　a　speech　which　you　had　meant　for　a　compliment　was；　in　fact；　an　insult；　or　the　vexation　of　learning　that　you　have　been　industriously　treating　your　servant　with　the　deference　due　a　superior；two　catastrophes　sure　to　follow　the　attempts　of　even　the　most　cautious　of　beginners。　The　language　is　so　thoroughly　imbued　with　the　honorific　spirit　that　the　exposure　of　truth　in　all　its　naked　simplicity　is　highly　improper。　Every　idea　requires　to　be　more　or　less　clothed　in　courtesy　before　it　is　presentable；　and　the　garb　demanded　by　etiquette　is　complex　beyond　conception。　　To　begin　with；　there　are　certain　preliminary　particles　which　are　simply　honorific；　serving　no　other　purpose　whatsoever。　In　addition　to　these　there　are　for　every　action　a　small　infinity　of　verbs；　each　sacred　to　a　different　degree　of　respect。　　For　instance；　to　our　verb　〃to　give〃　corresponds　a　complete　social　scale　of　Japanese　verbs；　each　conveying　the　idea　a　shade　more　politely　than　its　predecessor；　only　the　very　lowest　meaning　anything　so　plebeian　as　simply　〃to　give。〃　Sets　of　laudatory　or　depreciatory　adjectives　are　employed　in　the　same　way。　　Lastly；　the　word　for　〃is；〃　which　strictly　means　〃exists；〃　expresses　this　existence　under　three　different　forms；in　a　matter…of…fact；　a　flowing；　or　an　inflated　style；　the　solid；　liquid；　and　gaseous　states　of　conversation；　so　to　speak；　to　suit　the　person　addressed。　　But　three　forms　being　far　too　few　for　the　needs　of　so　elaborate　a　politeness；　these　are　supplemented　by　many　interpolated　grades。

Terms　of　respect　are　applied　not　only　to　those　mortals　who　are　held　in　estimation　higher　than　their　fellows；　but　to　all　men　indiscriminately　as　well。　　The　grammatical　attitude　of　the　individual　toward　the　speaker　is　of　as　much　importance　as　his　social　standing；　I　being　beneath　contempt；　and　you　above　criticism。

Honorifics　are　used　not　only　on　all　possible　occasions　for　courtesy；　but　at　times；　it　would　seem；　upon　impossible　ones；　for　in　some　instances　the　most　subtle　diagnosis　fails　to　reveal　in　them　a　relevancy　to　anybody。　　That　the　commonest　objects　should　bear　titles　because　of　their　connection　with　some　particular　person　is　comprehensible；　but　what　excuse　can　be　made　for　a　phrase　like　the　following；　〃It　respectfully　does　that　the　august　seat　exists；〃　all　of　which　simply　means　〃is；〃　and　may　be　applied　to　anything；　being　the　common　wordin　Japanese　it　is　all　one　word　nowfor　that　apparently　simple　idea。　　It　would　seem　a　sad　waste　of　valuable　material。　　The　real　reason　why　so　much　distinguished　consideration　is　shown　the　article　in　question　lies　in　the　fact　that　it　is　treated　as　existing　with　reference　to　the　person　addressed；　and　therefore　becomes　ipso　facto　august。

Here　is　a　still　subtler　example。　　You　are；　we　will　suppose；　at　a　tea…house；　and　you　wish　for　sugar。　　The　following　almost　stereotyped　conversation　is　pretty　sure　to　take　place。　　I　translate　it　literally；　simply　prefacing　that　every　tea…house　girl；　usually　in　the　first　blush　of　youth；　is　generically　addressed　as　〃elder　sister；〃　another　honorific；　at　least　so　considered　in　Japan。

　You　clap　your　hands。　　（Enter　tea…house　maiden。）

　You。　　Hai；　elder　sister；　augustly　exists　there　sugar？

　The　T。　H。　M。　　The　honorable　sugar；　augustly　is　it？

　You。　　So；　augustly。

　The　T。　H。　M。　He　（indescribable　expression　of　assent）。　　（Exit　tea…house　maiden　to　fetch　the　sugar。）

Now；　the　〃augustlies〃　go　almost　without　saying；　but　why　is　the　sugar　honorable？　　Simply　because　it　is　eventually　going　to　be　offered　to　you。　　But　she　would　have　spoken　of　it　by　precisely　the　same　respectful　title；　if　she　had　been　obliged　to　inform　you　that　there　was　none；　in　which　case　it　never　could　have　become　yours。　　Such　is　politeness。　　We　may　note；　in　passing；　that　all　her　remarks　and　all　yours；　barring　your　initial　question；　meant　absolutely　nothing。　She　understood　you　perfectly　from　the　first；　and　you　knew　she　did；　but　then；　if　all　of　us　were　to　say　only　what　were　necessary；　the　delightful　art　of　conversation　would　soon　be　nothing　but　a　science。

The　average　Far　Oriental；　indeed；　talks　as　much　to　no　purpose　as　his　Western　cousin；　only　in　his　chit…chat　politeness　replaces　personalities。　　With　him；　self　is　suppressed；　and　an　ever…present　regard　for　others　is　substituted　in　its　stead。

A　lack　of　personality　is；　as　we　have　seen；　the　occasion　of　this　courtesy；　it　is　also　its　cause。

That　politeness　should　be　one　of　the　most　marked　results　of　impersonality　may　appear　surprising；　yet　a　slight　examination　will　show　it　to　be　a　fact。　　Looked　at　a　posteriori；　we　find　that　where　the　one　trait　exists　the　other　is　most　developed；　while　an　absence　of　the　second　seems　to　prevent　the　full　growth　of　the　first。　This　is　true　both　in　general　and　in　detail。　　Courtesy　increases；　as　we　travel　eastward　round　the　world；　coincidently　with　a　decrease　in　the　sense　of　self。　　Asia　is　more　courteous　than　Europe；　Europe　than　America。　Particular　races　show　the　same　concomitance　of　characteristics。　France；　the　most　impersonal　nation　of　Europe；　is　at　the　same　time　the　most　polite。

Considered　a　priori；　the　connection　between　the　two　is　not　far　to　seek。　　Impersonality；　by　lessening　the　interest　in　one's　self；　induces　one　to　take　an　interest　in　others。　　Introspection　tends　to　make　of　man　a　solitary　animal；　the　absence　of　it　a　social　one。　The　more　impersonal　the　people；　the　more　will　the　community　supplant　the　individual　in　the　popular　estimation。　　The　type　becomes　the　interesting　thing　to　man；　as　it　always　is　to　nature。　　Then；　as　the　social　desires　develop；　politeness；　being　the　means　to　their　enjoyment；　develops　also。

A　second　omission　in　Japanese　etymology　is　that　of　gender。　　That　words　should　be　credited　with　sex　is　a　verbal　anthropomorphism　that　would　seem　to　a　Japanese　exquisitely　grotesque；　if　so　be　that　it　did　not　strike　him　as　actually　immodest。　　For　the　absence　of　gender　is　simply　symptomatic　of　a　much　more　vital　failing；　a　disregard　of　sex。　Originally；　as　their　language　bears　witness；　the　Japanese　showed　a　childish　reluctance　to　recognizing　sex　at　all。　　Usually　a　single　sexless　term　was　held　sufficient　for　a　given　species；　and　did　duty　collectively　for　both　sexes。　　Only　where　a　consideration　of　sex　thrust　itself　upon　them；　beyond　the　possibility　of　evasion；　did　they　employ　for　the　male　and　the　female　distinctive　expressions。　　The　more　intimate　the　relation　of　the　object　to　man；　the　more　imperative　the　discriminating　name。　　Hence　human　beings　possessed　a　fair　number　of　such　special　appellatives；　for　a　man　is　a　palpably　different　sort　of　person　from　his　grandmother；　and　a　mother…in…law　from　a　wife。　　But　it　is　noteworthy　that　the　artificial　affinities　of　society　were　as　carefully　differentiated　as　the　distinctions　due　to　sex；　while　ancestral　relationships　were　deemed　more　important　than　either。

Animals；　though　treated　individually　most　humanely；　are　vouchsafed　but　scant　recognition　on　the　score　of　sex。　　With　them；　both　sexes　share　one　common　name；　and　commonly；　indeed；　this　answers　quite　well　enough。　　In　those　few　instances　where　sex　enters　into　the　question　in　a　manner　not　to　be　ignored；　particles　denoting　〃male〃　or　〃female〃　are　prefixed　to　the　general　term。　　How　comparatively　rare　is　the　need　of　such　specification　can　be　seen　from　the　way　in　which；　with　us；　in　many　species；　the　name　of　one　sex　alone　does　duty　indifferently　for　both。　　That　of　the　male　is　the　one　usually　selected；　as　in　the　case　of　the　dog　or　horse。　　If；　however；　it　be　the　female　with　which　man　has　most　to　do；　she　is　allowed　to　bestow　her　name　upon　her　male　partner。　　Examples　of　the　latter　description　occur　in　the　use　of　〃cows〃　for　〃cattle；〃　and　〃hens〃　for　〃fowls。〃　A　Japanese　can　say　only　〃fowl；〃　defined；　if　absolutely　necessary；　as　〃he…fowl〃　or　〃she…fowl。〃

Now　such　a　slighting　of　one　of　the　most　potent　springs　of　human　action；　sex；　with　all　that　the　idea　involves；　is　not　due　to　a　pronounced　misogynism　on　the　part　of　these　people；　but　to　a　much　more　effective　neglect；　a　great　underlying　impersonality。　Indifference　to　woman　is　but　included　in　a　much　more　general　indifference　to　mankind。　　The　fact　becomes　all　the　more　evident　when　we　descend　from　sex　to　gender。　　That　Father　Ocean　does　not；　in　their　verbal　imagery；　embrace　Mother　Earth；　with　that　subtle　suggestion　of　humanity　which　in　Aryan　speech　the　gender　of　the　nouns　hints　without　expressing；　is　not　due　to　any　lack　of　poesy　in　the　Far　Oriental　speaker；　but　to　the　essential　impersonality　of　his　mind；　embodied　now　in　the　very　character　of　the　words　he　uses。　　A　Japanese　noun　is　a　crystallized　conc