The ff of connotations between two owers, plum and cherry,...
Transcript of The ff of connotations between two owers, plum and cherry,...
The differences of connotations between two flowers,plum and cherry, in classical Japanese poetry, 10th century.Hilofumi Yamamoto Tokyo Institute of Technology
Introduction• This project addresses an analysis of connotations of flowers in classical poetry: i. e., ‘ume’ (plum) and ‘sakura’ (cherry) .
• We will identify the characteristics of two flowers by computer modeling.
• Using parallel texts of original texts and contemporary translations of classical Japanese poetry, the Kokinshu, we will clarify
the details of connotations in an objective procedural manner that is not influenced by human observations.
• The aim is to examine whether or not the residual of CT −OP gives information on the non-literal elements of OP .
Problem1. What is the difference between ume (plum) and sakura (cherry)?
2. What kind of connotations does each flower contain?
3. Which picture is that of cherry flowers?
a. b. c. d. e.
MethodsMaterial: Kokinshu a.k.a. Kokinwakashu is:
the first anthology compiled by the order of Emperor Daigo
(ca. 905), which contains about 1,111 poems. And 10 sets of
their Contemporary Japanese Translations (CT)
Kaneko(1927)◦
1930
Kaneko(1933)◦⊳
Kubota(1935)◦
1940 1950
Saeki (1958)•
1960
Kubota(1960)◦⊳
Matsuda
(1968)◦⊳
1970
Ozawa(1971)◦⊳
Takeoka
(1976)◦⊳
Okumura(1978)◦⊳
Kyusojin
(1979)◦⊳
1980
Kom
achiya
(1982)◦⊳
Kojima&
Arai (1989)◦⊳
1990
Katagiri (1998)◦⊳
2000
Yusa(2000)◦
Fig. 1: Dates of publication of annotations of the Kokinshu: ◦indicates that it has CT; • indicates that it does notinclude CT; ▷ indicates that it is used in this project.
poet write OP read expert reader
write
CT
read
novice reader
compare
10th century
Field of experience
20th century
Field of experience (expert)
20th centuryField of experience
(novice)
R = CT - OPwhere, CT , Contemporary translation Texts; OP , Origi-nal classical Poetry texts; R indicates a residual obtainedby subtracting elements of OP from those of CT .
Fig. 2: Schema of relationship between theoriginal poem texts (OP ) and thecontemporary translation texts (CT )based on Schramm (1954).
Result
plum (20/20,3.91): OP cw.>5.6;non-dist=off; idf=on(2)
that
see.1
2
plum3
old age
woven hat
1
wear in (my) hair1
hide.vi.1
1
sew.111
1
1
1
1
2
dark
1
flower
2
1
lodge.n
fragrance.12
3 2
10
sorrow.1
2
who.13
2
colour
4
3
snow
4
break off5
spring
4
be.3
4
scatter.1
2
see.3
3
smell.vt.2
2
2
2
4
sleeve.1
24
hisakatano.pw
cloud.vi
1
1
in whole area
12
2
spring season
1
evidence
1
715
4
1Kurabu.PN
1
2
2
warbler
4
2
go over 1
fall
3
3
separate.3
2
2
2
1
1
sing.vi
3
3
do.1
3
bloom
2Fig. 3:Plumby OP
plum (20/198,3.71): CT cw.>15.5;non-dist=off; idf=on(2)
which
plum16
woven hat10
distinction
17garden
17
dark 13
fragrance.1
65
fragrance.240
flower157
look away
8
smell.vt.1
14
Kurabu.PN8
old age
6
warbler
10
degree
stop by5
cling
6
8
snow
17
break off10
33
sleeve.142
31
lingering fragrance
18
5 9
blame
7
7
daybreak
7
get dark
7
4
7
around5
moonless night
5
mountain
8
go over
8
clearly
7
wear in (my) hair
sew.24
6
hide.vi.2
6
7
4
6
a bit5
7
7
break off.1
13
discern
11
Fig. 4: Plumby CT
plum (20/198,3.71): OP-5.6-1; CT-15.5-2; (op(IS)ct)
sleeve.1 plum42
dark
13
fragrance.1
65 flower157
smell.vt.1
14
warbler
31break off
33
Fig. 5: Plumby intersectionof OP and CT
plum (20/198,3.71): OP-5.6-1; CT-15.5-2; (op(is)CT)
which
plum16distinction 17
woven hat
10
garden17
fragrance.240
look away
8
Kurabu.PN
8
degreestop by5
cling6
8
snow17
break off
10
warbler
10lingering fragrance
18
59blame
7
7
daybreak7
get dark
7
around
5
moonless night
5
mountain
8
go over
8
dark
7
clearly7
hide.vi.2
7
4
6
a bit57
7
break off.1
13
discern
11
sew.2
6
smell.vt.1
4
Fig. 6: Plumby subtracting OP from CT
plum-CT-20-198-3.71-15.5 cherry-CT-43-298-3.30-15
whichplum 16
woven hat10
Kurabu.PN
8
distinction
17
garden
17
dark
13 fragrance.165
fragrance.2
40flower
157
look away
8
smell.vt.1
14
way home
lodging4
scatter.2
5
village.1
6
old age6
warbler
10
this year
dyed inky black
6
edge
Yoshino.PN
5
mountain
19
cherry
13
go over7
only13
hearsay.2
4
number7
9
7
scatter.19
compare
9
without cease
6
around
5
moonless night
5
love.2
98
clearly
7
degree
stop by5
cling6
8
snow
17
break off 10
33
sleeve.1
42
31
lingering fragrance
18
59
blame
7
7
spring hazemountain cherry7
hide.vt
19
trail
19
mist7
6
how much
7
19
field
Fukakusa
7
10
6
daybreak
7 get dark
7
4
22
6
25
27
77
200
142
break off.1
15
13
cherry blossom
7
31
48
bloom25
60
wear in (my) hair
sew.2 4
6
hide.vi.2
6
7
4
6
a bit57
7
5
17
road
12
increase
7
8
7
76
6
discern
11
keep listening.2
5
faint
4
Fig. 7: Combined Network Modelof Plum and CherryConclusion
• It will be necessary to examine not only common nouns but also the distinctive characters ofproper nouns in order to further examine the connotative associations of poetic vocabulary.
• We observed proper nouns such as place names, Kurabu, Tatsuta, Otowa, Yoshinoin the network models of common nouns, and concluded that they seem to strongly influence the associations of poetic vocabulary.
• The relative salience clearly indicates that both ume (plum) and sakura (cherry) share Kurabu yama (Mt.Kurabu), which comprisesa cluster of nodes in the sub-network.
Reference• Schramm, W. L. 1954. How communication works. The process and effects of mass communication. 3–26. University of Illinois Press.
• Yamamoto, H. 2006. Extraction and Visualisation of the Connotation of Classical Japanese Poetic Vocabulary. Symposium forComputer and Humanities, 2006. The information processing society of Japan. Vo. 2006, No. 17, 21–8.
1