sinologist

DeFrancis was the undisputed pre-eminent sinologist of his time, however many of the literacy claims are unfounded.

While American sinologist Robert Henricks[2] translated it as: By not elevating the worthy, you bring it about that people will not compete.

As I've just commented, I only discovered in the past year the work of British biochemist-turned-sinologist Joseph Needham.

>...thoughts of a British space scientist (not a Sinologist) I'd trust a space scientist more than a Sinologist on this (or just about any other matter).

I remember seeing a pro-democracy speech given by some Sinologist at an American University, the audience of which was mainland Chinese people.

I think the sinologist introduced that character originally, possibly as a typo or something.

To master Chinese, I think that you can't help but become a sinologist.

I said elsewhere I will read his Chinese stuff and have my sinologist friends read it with me too see if it similar and I overreact.

As any sinologist will tell you, the power struggles at the very top are mostly unknown to us (except years later, to historians) but even in Mao's era there was certainly not a single voice.

The messier answer: Middle Chinese (or Middle Sinitic as Mair calls it) was taken seriously as a language that people actually spoke and as the ancestor of Chinese varieties by the early Sinologist Bernhard Karlgren.

Later in the same Wikipedia article: > American sinologist Allen Carlson is of the opinion that it is nearly impossible, without substantial field research in Tibet, to verify the numerous allegations of violations advanced by China critics.

> This has been going on for decades in Asia I’m no sinologist, but isn’t this off by at least an order of magnitude if not two?

Sinologist Victor Mair reports: " On Thursday we had our Spring mid-term examination.

The question of "why Europe and not China?" is literally The Needham Question, which occupied British sinologist Joseph Needham for his entire life (and beyond -- his Science and Civilisation in China is still being written, approaching 70 years since it began, and two decades after Needham's own death.

The article kindly submitted here reports the thoughts of a British space scientist (not a Sinologist): "He believes China could have astronauts on the lunar surface by 2025." I will make a testable prediction here, which I hope all of us live to see confirmed or disconfirmed.

The general form of this question, or at least one version of it ("why did the Industrial Revolution occur in England and not in China, which had developed a vastly larger set of technologies far earlier") is known as the Needham Question, after sinologist Joseph Needham, author of Science and Civilisation in China, an epic 30+ volume work covering Chinese invention and technology, begun in 1954 and still in process.

Sinologist Joseph Needham (I've commented numerous times on his Science and Civilisation in China, which I'd only recently discovered) also hit political turbulence due to his support of (and to unwitting duping by) the Communist China regime.

> David Hinton is, with Arthur Waley and Burton Watson, the rare example of a literary Sinologist—that is, a classical scholar thoroughly conversant with, and connected to, contemporary literature in English.