# "route" from Chinese "路"?



## yong321

Category:English terms calqued from Chinese - Wiktionary lists _route_ as a calque from Chinese.
route - Wiktionary says of _route_
"From Middle English _route_, a borrowing from Old French _route_, _rote_ (“road, way, path”) (compare modern French _route_), from Latin _rupta (via)_.[1] As a Chinese administrative division, a calque of Chinese _路_ (lù)."

But the Webpage gives no reference to support the Chinese origin of the word. It's true that during the Mongols' rule (1271-1368), one type of administrative region in China was called 路 (literally "road", pronounced [lu:]). Due to Pax Mongolica, I suppose it's possible that the concept spread to, or perhaps was taken from, another part of Euroasia. Anyone knows an article or book supporting the etymological connection between _route_ and 路? I know Wiktionary or Wikipedia allows editing, but I don't know how to ask questions there.


----------



## Testing1234567

The Wiktionary isn't claiming that "route" derives from 路 at all. What it likely means is that the word "route" is used to signify a Chinese administrative division because of its name 路 in Chinese.


----------



## berndf

Testing1234567 said:


> What it likely means is that the word "route" is used to signify a Chinese administrative division because of its name 路 in Chinese.



That is exactly what it says: _As a Chinese administrative division, a *calque *of Chinese 路 (lù).
_
A _calque _is a literal translation of a derived word or expression.


----------



## yong321

Saying _route_ is a calque of 路 literally means _route_, in the creation of the word, is a literal translation of 路, and the translation is not what a lexicographer does in documenting existing usage but has to be what originally formed the calque.

See the first link I posted (note the title, "English terms calqued from Chinese"). No doubt that _add oil_ is a calque of 加油, and _paper tiger_ is a calque of 纸老虎. But my thought on "_route_ - 路" relationship is, purely coincidental. Neither is a calque of the other. (Whoever thinks _route_ is calqued from Chinese 路 may as well think _stone_ is calqued from Chinese 石头!) Well, unless there's historical evidence to prove otherwise.


----------



## Testing1234567

yong321 said:


> Saying _route_ is a calque of 路 literally means _route_, in the creation of the word, is a literal translation of 路



No, you should read the text more clearly.

Wiktionary says "*As a Chinese administrative division*, a calque of Chinese _路_ (lù)." (emphasis mine)

It doesn't say that the entirety of the word is from 路, but rather its usage *as a Chinese administrative region*.


----------



## berndf

You have to read more carefully. The Wiktionary entry reads: _*As a Chinese administrative division*, a calque of Chinese 路 (lù).
_
The word _route _itself is not a calque, only its use to designate a _Chinese administrative division_ is a calque.

What this means is that because during the Song dynasty the provinces of China were called _Lù_ (literally _route_), the provinces of that era are sometimes called _routes_ in English.

PS: Crossed with above.


----------



## yong321

OK. I understand.

This is a questionable usage of the word calque. Wikipedia
Calque - Wikipedia
says "a calque (/ˈkælk/) or loan translation is a word or phrase borrowed from another language by literal, word-for-word, or root-for-root translation."
Wiktionary
calque - Wiktionary
says "A word or phrase in a language formed by word-for-word or morpheme-by-morpheme translation of a word in another language."
In both definitions, we see that a calque involves decomposing the word or phrase in the source language into components. 路 cannot be separated into multiple words. Then multiple roots or morphemes? The left side is a radical meaning "foot" and the right side means "individual". So a calque of 路 would be _foot-individual_, or slightly more meaningful, _foot-one's-own_.


----------



## berndf

yong321 said:


> This is a questionable usage of the word calque.


From my experience, I have no difficulties with the term _calque _here and had no difficulties interpreting this entry. I actually prefer the equivalent term _loan translation_; that may be easier to understand. What is important is that logic of a derived meaning in transported into another language rather than the word itself. This can apply to complex expressions but also to single words or roots. The Wikipedia article you cited gives and example: In English you call a computer mouse _mouse_ because its silhouette resembles that of a mouse. Many languages have loaned this but not the word _mouse_ itself but the idea and used their own words for the animal to designate a computer mouse, like German _Maus_, or French _souris_, i.e. a _loan translation_. By contrast, Italian _mouse _is a _loan word_.


----------



## yong321

berndf,
Thank you! I didn't realize a calque included a "semantic calque" or "semantic loan", without the need to have multiple composite words or morphemes. _Mouse_ ("computer mouse") is inded a perfect example. But I personally would still prefer "loan" to "calque" in this case, leaving "calque" to those that can be decomposed.

Since _route_ in the sense of Chinese administrative division is a calque, I suspect we could add lots of such semantic calques to the Wikipedia page. _Grade_ for 品 as in "三品官" (third-grade official). _Province_ for 省 as in "中书省“ (literally, central book province, a government office or ministry, not related to an area in the country as in "a province in Canada"). And so on.


----------



## berndf

As I said, I prefer the term _loan translation_. The opposition _loan word_ vs. _loan translation_ is very intuitive. You could reserve the term calque for complex expressions but it isn't done. Generally, _loan translation_ and _calque_ are used interchangeably. And I don't see a big need for such a differentiation. Usually, what matters in etymological analysis is only if the word itself or the underlying logic is loaned.


----------



## Dib

I also had no problem understanding what the entry meant without having to make any special effort. This is a perfectly normal usage of the word "calque", which to me is a synonym for "loan-translation". However, I agree with berndf, that "loan translation" is a more accessible term.





yong321 said:


> This is a questionable usage of the word calque. Wikipedia
> Calque - Wikipedia
> says "a calque (/ˈkælk/) or loan translation is a word or phrase borrowed from another language by literal, word-for-word, or root-for-root translation."
> Wiktionary
> calque - Wiktionary
> says "A word or phrase in a language formed by word-for-word or morpheme-by-morpheme translation of a word in another language."
> In both definitions, we see that a calque involves decomposing the word or phrase in the source language into components.



Actually, neither the wikipedia nor the wiktionary definition of "calque" requires decomposability. 路 is a single-root/single-morpheme word, and when you translate it *literally* (i.e. disregarding the context) root-for-root/morpheme-for-morpheme, you get "route". There is no conflict!



> 路 cannot be separated into multiple words. Then multiple roots or morphemes? The left side is a radical meaning "foot" and the right side means "individual". So a calque of 路 would be _foot-individual_, or slightly more meaningful, _foot-one's-own_.



Radicals of the Chinese *script* are not the same as *linguistic* roots or morphemes.


----------



## yong321

Dib,

> 路 is a single-root/single-morpheme word

Actually, if we trust 《说文解字》
说文解字路的解释|说文解字路的意思|汉典“路”字的说文解字
“路”“从足从各”， the two parts of 路 both serve as morphemes.

> Radicals of the Chinese *script* are not the same as *linguistic* roots or morphemes

Sure. We can easily find differences. I was trying to stretch the definition of "calque" as I understood it to make _route_ meet the requirement. I had not realized the concept of "semantic calque" until berndf pointed that out for me.


----------



## Testing1234567

I would use the term phono-semantic matching.


----------



## berndf

Testing1234567 said:


> I would use the term phono-semantic matching.


For what?


----------



## Dib

yong321 said:


> Actually, if we trust 《说文解字》
> 说文解字路的解释|说文解字路的意思|汉典“路”字的说文解字
> “路”“从足从各”， the two parts of 路 both serve as morphemes.



Thank you for the link, but unfortunately, I don't know Chinese (okay, full disclosure - I can read a handful of characters). But even to my very non-expert's eyes, it is patently obvious that it is a normal phono-semantic compound character, where the left component, 足 (standard Mandarin zú, Old Chinese (_Zhengzhang_): /*ʔsoɡ/, to walk)^ provides a hint at the meaning and the right component, 各 (Standard Mandarin gè, gě, Old Chinese: (_Zhengzhang_): /*klaːɡ/, each/every)^ provides a hint at the pronunciation (relatively clear only if compared in Old Chinese) of 路 (Standard Mandarin lù, Old Chinese: (_Zhengzhang_): /*ɡ·raːɡs/, road/route)^.

Now, you don't really need to trust anybody to analyze whether 足 and 各 are two *morphemes *(as opposed to script components, i.e. approximately *graphemes*#) in 路. Just perform a simple experiment yourself. Pronounce them separately (in any chosen dialect and historical stage) and then pronounce them together. Does it sound like 路 in that chosen dialect and historical stage? It doesn't have to be exactly same, but the difference - if any - must be explanable by independently verifiable (morpho-)phonological rules (e.g. tone sandhi in case of modern Chinese dialects). If not, you are not dealing with two morphemes - for the chosen dialect and historical stage.

------

^The definitions are taken from Wiktionary. While I can't guarantee their accuracy, it suffices for my illustrative purpose if they are at least approximately correct.
#I say "approximately", because I am not sure whether graphemes in the Chinese context should correspond to full characters, or the components/radicals.


----------



## Testing1234567

In other words, whether something is a morpheme does *not* depend on the script used to write the language.


----------

