5 ms·
I only know English, but I am curious about your logic above. How can you tell that the assumption you mentioned is incorrect? I.e. "that in 可道, 道 is a verb" i
by brutusborn 5y ago
I only know English, but I am curious about your logic above.
How can you tell that the assumption you mentioned is incorrect? I.e. "that in 可道, 道 is a verb" is false?
Is it something about the character itself or perhaps the syntax?
- thaumasiotes 5y agoI do not believe that that assumption is false. I'm confident it's correct. I'm arguing against the translation "TAO called TAO is not TAO". I think "the Way can be [spoken (of) / discussed / whatever]" makes more sense, even if the goal is "as literal of a translation as possible". Following 可 is strong evidence that 道 is a verb, though I don't know enough to call it conclusive evidence. The character 道 is identical between the noun meaning "way" and the verb meaning "say". To tell the difference, you can look at context or rely on traditional commentaries (of which there are many). In this case, the context should be sufficient. 道 [noun] 可道 [verb]。非常道 [noun]。
- HKH2 5y ago'可' also had the meaning of something like 'cute' (like in '可人') but that's clearly not relevant here. You're correct.