Comment on Anon thinks we're being bamboo-zled
theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 3 weeks agomost of the citations are improper/broken
…citations… to books… not broken links lol.
[19] (tr. adapted from Harper 2013: 185, 205)
And on page 185, we find the exact text cited
finitebanjo@piefed.world 3 weeks ago
The wikipedia contributors were unable to link to a digitization of the book, that's what I mean by improper. I don't own a copy of books written in 223 AD, neither does my local library.
The Donald Harper book you just posted was published in 2012.
mech@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
I’m following this exchange with steadily increasing fascination, still on the fence on whether Pandas exist.
Icytrees@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
I found a lead. Could help explain why pandas got so famous in China so recently. Taipei Times isn’t a great source but it’s late and I got excited. www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/…/2003435562
idiomaddict@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Say your library did, you would read this book in Classical Chinese? Or would you rely on a translation, probably published much later?
finitebanjo@piefed.world 3 weeks ago
It being listed in the catalog would at least be some indication that the evidence exists, as opposed to an endless linked list of "trust me bro".
idiomaddict@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Here’s a digitization of the first one and the second one, including a picture of an edition of the work itself. I found it by googling the names of the works in the quoted section.
If that’s not sufficient, I suggest you ask at your local (or most local) university library.
theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
That’s not how citations work.
TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Here’s a link to the Erya.