(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Talk:Chuzi I - Wikipedia Jump to content

Talk:Chuzi I

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chuzi and Duke Chu

[edit]
  • 自己じこ细读《はたほん纪》かずはたはじめすめらぎほん纪》,ぜん一个秦出子没有被叫做秦出公,きさき一个秦出公则也叫秦出子,这已经可以消歧义りょうよう不着ふちゃくいちせいせい
    • ふみ记·はたほん纪》:生出おいで。宁公そつだい庶长どる垒、三父废太子而立出子为君。だしろくねん,三父等复共令人贼杀出子。だし子生こなじ岁立,たてろくねんそつ
    • ふみ记·はたほん纪》:めぐみおおやけじゅうねん子生こなじじゅうさんねんしょくみなみ郑。めぐみおおやけそつりつこれねん,庶长あらためむかえ灵公之子ゆきこけんじこう于河西にし而立じりつ。杀出及其はは,沈之渊旁。
    • ふみ记·はたはじめすめらぎほん纪》:とおるこくろくねんきょ西陵せいりょう。庶长どるるいまいりちちさんにんりつ贼贼ひな衍,そう衙。たけ公立こうりつ
    • ふみ记·はたはじめすめらぎほん纪》:こうとおるこくねんだしこう杀,そう雍。

——ほしひかりてきじん (talk) 01:54, 6 May 2012 (UTC) (Discussion moved here from User talk:Zanhe)[reply]

  • Translation of the message above: read Annals of Qin and Annals of Qin Shi Huang, the first Chuzi is not called Duke Chu, but the second is called Duke Chu and also Chuzi. That's sufficient disambiguation, not need for I and II. (followed by quotes from the Shiji). (translated by Zanhe)
Reply — here are the facts:
  1. In Annals of Qin of the Shiji, which deals with the history of the state of Qin, both rulers are called Chuzi.
  2. In Annals of Qin Shi Huang of the Shiji, which deals with the history of the Qin Dynasty but includes a list of rulers of the State of Qin, the first one is called Chuzi, the second called Duke Chu.
  3. In Han Zhaoqi's Annotated Shiji, Han says the first Chuzi should be called Duke Chu, and the second should be called Chuzi (see p. 358 and pp 478-479).
Summary: Chuzi may refer to either of the two rulers, and there's no conclusion whether Duke Chu exclusively refers to the second Chuzi. Therefore it's better to call them Chuzi I and Chuzi II. --Zanhe (talk) 00:11, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK,查了じゅう诸侯年表ねんぴょう,确实前面ぜんめんてき也可以叫おおやけただしわがはん使用しよういちせいせい中国ちゅうごくぼつゆう这种体系たいけいしょう歧义应该使用しよう在位ざいい年代ねんだい.——ほしひかりてきじん (talk) 04:31, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
@Zanhe: I was wondering. Would Chuzi (4th century BC) and Chuzi (8th century BC) or Chuzi (Warring States period) and Chuzi (Spring and Autumn period) be better than using regnal numbers which does not exist in Chinese terminology. KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:43, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]