4 ms·

FYI I think the 绝 is only Simplified Chinese, 絕 in Traditional. I think 絶 is the Japanese equivalent.

• yorwba 9y ago
  Right, I only copied the text from my parent comment, without checking that it actually matches the original. My point about the grammar stands, though. I think they simply wrote Chinese text using Japanese kanji. Simplified Chinese would be "(谢绝)(中国人)" = "(politely refuse)(Chinese person)" = "(verb)(object)", which is correct Chinese grammar. However, 謝絶 seems to be a noun/suru verb in Japanese (http://jisho.org/search/謝絶 http://jisho.org/search/謝絶), so I think the equivalent phrase would be "(中国人)(を)(謝絶)(します)" = "(Chinese person)(object of)(polite refusal)(make)" = "(object)(particle marking object)(noun/suru verb)(inflected form of suru)". Disclaimer: I am not a native speaker of either language and didn't have much in the way of grammar lessons, so this might all be horribly wrong. I'm definitely open to corrections ;)
  • ttflee 9y ago
    It's quite natural for a native Chinese speaker to recognize all these variants.
  • markburns 9y ago
    I am not doubting you. I was saying something simpler: One Chinese-only character is enough to show it is not Japanese.
    • yorwba 9y ago
      The original text didn't use the Chinese-only character, it used Japanese kanji instead.
      • markburns 9y ago
        Ah, sorry, I didn't notice. That makes sense then.