Talk:Chinese Union Version

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Chinese Union Version article.

Article policies
This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Christianity This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the Christianity in China work group. See also Portal:Christianity in China.

(rated as high importance)

This article is supported by WikiProject Bible. See also the Bible Portal. (with unknown importance)

I strongly doubt the following assertion.

For example, some of the phrases used in the CUV are now only used in Cantonese but not Mandarin, and some phrases are even disappearing from Cantonese.

There are other dialects, like Minnan, which still preserve a lot of old Chinese expressions, even more than Cantonese. Why is it Cantonese only, but not others, that preserves these old Chinese phrases?

The transliteration scheme used by the CUV shows a heavy influence from Cantonese as well as from Mandarin, with many transliterations sounding almost exactly like the original Hebrew when pronounced in Cantonese but sounding wrong when pronounced in Mandarin. Other than a small number of exceptions, standard transliterations are generally not followed.

What makes the writer think that the transliteration is influenced by Cantonese only?

The full name of this version is 官話和合本, where 官話 means exactly Mandarin. If these claims were valid, why would they have still named it a Mandarin version?