{"created":"2023-05-15T12:19:07.129438+00:00","id":226,"links":{},"metadata":{"_buckets":{"deposit":"a68e9e8f-70ad-40c4-a9f6-5b8f354cf218"},"_deposit":{"created_by":23,"id":"226","owners":[23],"pid":{"revision_id":0,"type":"depid","value":"226"},"status":"published"},"_oai":{"id":"oai:jpf.repo.nii.ac.jp:00000226","sets":["70:65:24"]},"author_link":[],"item_1689315340000":{"attribute_name":"出版者","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_publisher":"国際交流基金日本語国際センター","subitem_publisher_language":"ja"}]},"item_3_biblio_info_12":{"attribute_name":"書誌情報","attribute_value_mlt":[{"bibliographicIssueDates":{"bibliographicIssueDate":"1995-04-28","bibliographicIssueDateType":"Issued"},"bibliographicPageEnd":"167","bibliographicPageStart":"155","bibliographicVolumeNumber":"5","bibliographic_titles":[{"bibliographic_title":"世界の日本語教育. 日本語教育論集","bibliographic_titleLang":"ja"},{"bibliographic_title":"Japanese language education around the globe ; Japanese language education around the globe","bibliographic_titleLang":"en"}]}]},"item_3_description_10":{"attribute_name":"抄録(日)","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"中国の文字体系と比べて、全体としての日本の文字体系は「世界の文字」の中で従来あまり注目されず、文字学ではむしろ漢字から発達した仮名文字に興味が集中した。\n 本稿は文字のタイポロジーとその問題点を概観してから、中国の体系と3大表語文字体系であるエジプト、シューメル、マヤの体系との相違点の分析を行なう。とくに、3システムにおける象形文字内部に表音性が備わっていないことや、それにともなって同じ象形文字が補音符などとして早い段階で使われるようになった点に注目する。それに対して、中国の漢字が量 的に他のシステムと比べて圧倒的に多い事実は、その文字に内在する表音性によるもので、他のシステムのような文字の表音的使用が発達しなかった。以前から一部の人がいっているように、中国の漢字は形態素音節文字というべく、表語文字ではない。その考えの正当であることは最近の実験の結果 でも確認できる。\n 日本のシステムにおける漢字は、中国の場合と違って基本的に一字多音である。そこでエジプト、シューメル、マヤの体系と同様に多読字の読み方は文脈に頼るだけでなく、送り仮名など表音文字で補助的に示す傾向がある。エジプト、シューメル、マヤの文字体系を表語文字と呼ぶなら、日本語のシステムもその範疇に入れることになるが、同じ漢字を使う中国語のためには別の分類が適当である。 ","subitem_description_language":"ja","subitem_description_type":"Other"}]},"item_3_description_11":{"attribute_name":"抄録(英)","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"In comparison with the Chinese writing system, the Japanese system as a whole has hitherto received only comparatively scant attention among the writing systems of the world. Instead, the interest has focused on the kana syllabaries that were developed from it.\n This article first takes a brief look at the typology of writing, proceeds to a comparison between the way the Chinese and the other three great \"logographic\" systems (Egyptian, Sumerian, and Mayan) work, and establishes a number of important differences when compared to the Chinese system, notably the lack of phoneticism in the graphs themselves, and the concomitant early development of their use as auxiliary signs, the so-called phonetic complements. The enormous difference in the number of graphs between Chinese and the other systems is explained by their inherent phoneticism, which also partly explains why a purely phonetic use never developed in the way it did in the other three systems. As a number of writers have proposed previously, the most appropriate term for the Chinese system is morphosyllabic, to be understood as assigning a graph to a syllable in the first instance, and matching this with a morpheme for disambiguation in the second. The validity of this way of thinking is confirmed through evidence from experiments carried out by various authors on Chinese and Sino-Japanese, showing that homophonic errors are noticed significantly less frequently than non-homophonic errors.\n An examination of the Japanese system shows that unlike in the Chinese systems, the use of kanji is essentially polyphonous, i.e. one graph can represent more than one sound. Like the Egyptian, Sumerian, and Mayan systems, the Japanese system therefore makes use of disambiguation devices that go beyond mere reliance on context to assist the reader in the decoding process, even if these may obscure morpheme boundaries. The Japanese system has retained the use of logographic kanji in the same way that the Egyptian, Sumerian, and Mayan systems never opted for a purely alphabetic or syllabic system. If we call the Egyptian, Sumerian, and Mayan systems logographic (the term is used to include morphographic), then the Japanese system may be said to be essentially the same. Thus an examination of the nature of the Chinese and Japanese writing systems against the other major systems shows that, despite the fact that both use kanji, they are essentially different systems. ","subitem_description_language":"en","subitem_description_type":"Other"}]},"item_3_description_15":{"attribute_name":"表示順","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"10","subitem_description_type":"Other"}]},"item_3_description_16":{"attribute_name":"アクセション番号","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"KJ00000611504","subitem_description_type":"Other"}]},"item_3_identifier_registration":{"attribute_name":"ID登録","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_identifier_reg_text":"10.20649/00000220","subitem_identifier_reg_type":"JaLC"}]},"item_3_source_id_1":{"attribute_name":"雑誌書誌ID","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_source_identifier":"AN10390791","subitem_source_identifier_type":"NCID"}]},"item_3_source_id_19":{"attribute_name":"ISSN","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_source_identifier":"09172920","subitem_source_identifier_type":"ISSN"}]},"item_3_text_6":{"attribute_name":"著者所属(日)","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_text_language":"ja","subitem_text_value":"筑波大学文芸・言語学系"}]},"item_3_text_7":{"attribute_name":"著者所属(英)","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_text_language":"en","subitem_text_value":"University of Tsukuba"}]},"item_3_title_3":{"attribute_name":"論文名よみ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_title":"セカイ ノ モジ チュウゴク ノ モジ ニホン ノ モジ : カンジ ノ イチヅケ サイコウ","subitem_title_language":"ja-Kana"}]},"item_creator":{"attribute_name":"著者","attribute_type":"creator","attribute_value_mlt":[{"creatorNames":[{"creatorName":"カイザー, シュテファン","creatorNameLang":"ja"},{"creatorName":"カイセテアン","creatorNameLang":"ja-Kana"}]},{"creatorNames":[{"creatorName":"Kaiser, Stefan","creatorNameLang":"en"}]}]},"item_files":{"attribute_name":"ファイル情報","attribute_type":"file","attribute_value_mlt":[{"accessrole":"open_date","date":[{"dateType":"Available","dateValue":"2018-07-23"}],"displaytype":"detail","filename":"Sekai05_kaiser.pdf","filesize":[{"value":"732.7 kB"}],"format":"application/pdf","licensetype":"license_note","mimetype":"application/pdf","url":{"label":"Sekai05_kaiser","url":"https://jpf.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/226/files/Sekai05_kaiser.pdf"},"version_id":"a5e686e0-7e04-403e-9441-562bf5cc6638"}]},"item_language":{"attribute_name":"言語","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_language":"jpn"}]},"item_resource_type":{"attribute_name":"資源タイプ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"resourcetype":"journal article","resourceuri":"http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501"}]},"item_title":"世界の文字・中国の文字・日本の文字 : 漢字の位置付け再考","item_titles":{"attribute_name":"タイトル","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_title":"世界の文字・中国の文字・日本の文字 : 漢字の位置付け再考","subitem_title_language":"ja"},{"subitem_title":"Rethinking Kanji : A Comparative Approach","subitem_title_language":"en"}]},"item_type_id":"3","owner":"23","path":["24"],"pubdate":{"attribute_name":"PubDate","attribute_value":"2017-01-10"},"publish_date":"2017-01-10","publish_status":"0","recid":"226","relation_version_is_last":true,"title":["世界の文字・中国の文字・日本の文字 : 漢字の位置付け再考"],"weko_creator_id":"23","weko_shared_id":-1},"updated":"2023-07-18T07:22:50.668481+00:00"}