<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Anschluss vs. Annektierung，德國「併吞」奧地利的詞辨</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lukhnos.org/blog/zh/archives/197/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lukhnos.org/blog/zh/archives/197</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 08:04:40 +0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: K Tai</title>
		<link>http://lukhnos.org/blog/zh/archives/197/comment-page-1#comment-406</link>
		<dc:creator>K Tai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:52:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lukhnos.org/wp/?p=197#comment-406</guid>
		<description>In that case, the Romance counterpart would be &#039;con-clusion&#039;? Cf. &#039;An-schluß&#039;, &#039;con-clude&#039;.  Eerie correspondence with the Final Solution.

The phrase &#039;進出&#039; means &#039;to advance&#039; in XXth-century Japanese, but &#039;to enter and to leave&#039; in contemporary Mandarin. I would even go so far as to say it connotes in Japanese &#039;to impose&#039;, &#039;to force oneself on&#039;, &#039;to encroach&#039; or even readily &#039;to invade&#039;.  Some Mandarin-speakers superimpose the Mandarin meaning as an evidence of the nonchalant nature of WW2 Japanese militarism, which (I venture) is unwarranted.  The actual Mandarin correspondence should be &#039;进攻&#039;, &#039;入侵&#039;, or &#039;侵略&#039;, which is fair enough.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In that case, the Romance counterpart would be &#8216;con-clusion&#8217;? Cf. &#8216;An-schluß&#8217;, &#8216;con-clude&#8217;.  Eerie correspondence with the Final Solution.</p>
<p>The phrase &#8216;進出&#8217; means &#8216;to advance&#8217; in XXth-century Japanese, but &#8216;to enter and to leave&#8217; in contemporary Mandarin. I would even go so far as to say it connotes in Japanese &#8216;to impose&#8217;, &#8216;to force oneself on&#8217;, &#8216;to encroach&#8217; or even readily &#8216;to invade&#8217;.  Some Mandarin-speakers superimpose the Mandarin meaning as an evidence of the nonchalant nature of WW2 Japanese militarism, which (I venture) is unwarranted.  The actual Mandarin correspondence should be &#8216;进攻&#8217;, &#8216;入侵&#8217;, or &#8216;侵略&#8217;, which is fair enough.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lukhnos</title>
		<link>http://lukhnos.org/blog/zh/archives/197/comment-page-1#comment-405</link>
		<dc:creator>lukhnos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:49:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lukhnos.org/wp/?p=197#comment-405</guid>
		<description>K,

I never understand the meaning and implications of ‘進出’ in the Japanese context of that period. Can you tell us more?

Also, &quot;closure&quot; is more like &lt;i&gt;Einschluß&lt;/i&gt; in German: the relationship of putting one thing into (&quot;ein-&quot;) another or enclosing one thing by another, whereas by &lt;i&gt;Anschluß&lt;/i&gt; (from &lt;i&gt;anschließen&lt;/i&gt;) the relationship is putting one thing by another (&quot;an-&quot;). Now thinking about it, that&#039;s really a shrewd choice of Nazi Germany&#039;s part.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>K,</p>
<p>I never understand the meaning and implications of ‘進出’ in the Japanese context of that period. Can you tell us more?</p>
<p>Also, &#8220;closure&#8221; is more like <i>Einschluß</i> in German: the relationship of putting one thing into (&#8221;ein-&#8221;) another or enclosing one thing by another, whereas by <i>Anschluß</i> (from <i>anschließen</i>) the relationship is putting one thing by another (&#8221;an-&#8221;). Now thinking about it, that&#8217;s really a shrewd choice of Nazi Germany&#8217;s part.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: K Tai</title>
		<link>http://lukhnos.org/blog/zh/archives/197/comment-page-1#comment-404</link>
		<dc:creator>K Tai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:40:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lukhnos.org/wp/?p=197#comment-404</guid>
		<description>I thought &#039;Anschluss&#039; could be translated as &#039;closure&#039;.  Another problem with politico-military terms of that era is the difference in understanding of the Sino-Japanese phrase &#039;進出&#039;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought &#8216;Anschluss&#8217; could be translated as &#8216;closure&#8217;.  Another problem with politico-military terms of that era is the difference in understanding of the Sino-Japanese phrase &#8216;進出&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lukhnos</title>
		<link>http://lukhnos.org/blog/zh/archives/197/comment-page-1#comment-403</link>
		<dc:creator>lukhnos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:38:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lukhnos.org/wp/?p=197#comment-403</guid>
		<description>不然 99% 的贊成率是怎麼來的。:Q 嚴格說來那不是自由的選舉。</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>不然 99% 的贊成率是怎麼來的。:Q 嚴格說來那不是自由的選舉。</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ijliao</title>
		<link>http://lukhnos.org/blog/zh/archives/197/comment-page-1#comment-402</link>
		<dc:creator>ijliao</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2005 06:04:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lukhnos.org/wp/?p=197#comment-402</guid>
		<description>為什麼 &quot;是&quot; 和 &quot;否&quot; 的圈圈大小差這麼多 @_@</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>為什麼 &#8220;是&#8221; 和 &#8220;否&#8221; 的圈圈大小差這麼多 @_@</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
