Talk:波瀾萬丈

RFV discussion: January 2021–May 2022

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.

---

波瀾萬丈

Rfv-sense: "eventfulness". Added by @H2NCH2COOH, who appears to have copied the sense from Japanese. This idiom is unlikely to be a noun in Chinese anyway. Not found in major monolingual dictionaries. RcAlex36 (talk) 10:14, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry for any inconvenience caused by copying the Japanese explanation without checking its property. I replaced it with "eventful" now. This idiom can be found in Baidu Hanyu. Though Baidu Hanyu is not always a reliable source, the word does appear occasionally in Chinese. --H₂NCH₂COOH (Talk) 11:02, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

See Chinese Wikisource for its usage in classical Chinese. Seems that it originates from 續玄怪錄 "方寸之間，波瀾萬丈". -H₂NCH₂COOH (Talk) 11:10, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@H2NCH2COOH: One would expect the idiom to be synonymous with 波瀾壯闊／波澜壮阔 (bōlánzhuàngkuò), but most of the time it doesn't seem to 比喻声势雄壮，规模宏大。景象非常壮观. Judging by the fact that this idiom is not found in the three major monolingual dictionaries (Guoyu Cidian, Xiandai Hanyu Cidian and Hanyu Da Cidian, the "eventful" sense is probably borrowed from Japanese. RcAlex36 (talk) 11:37, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

No. It is not borrowed from Japanese. As I mentioned above, this idiom could be found in 續玄怪錄: "吁，是何言哉！人世勞苦，萬愁纏心，盡如燈蛾，爭撲名利，愁勝而髮白，神敗而形羸，方寸之間，波瀾萬丈，相妒相賊，猛於豪獸。" (rough translation: "Alas! What are you even talking about! The mortal world is full of suffering, with thousands of things worrying your heart. Everyone competes for their fame and wealth just like a flying moth hurtling into candlelight. Their sorrows win which bleaches their hairs; their spirits lose which weakens their bodies. Within their tiny, agitated hearts, they envies and hates each other, making them fiercer than beasts.") Though I didn't choose "eventful" in this rough translation, I think it is because of the context (though preferably it could be better translated with a word other than "eventful".)--H₂NCH₂COOH (Talk) 13:16, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Or perhaps the meaning "agitated" could be treated as an obsolete one? --H₂NCH₂COOH (Talk) 13:21, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@H2NCH2COOH: 續玄怪錄 is from the Tang dynasty. Now I don't have access to any large Chinese corpus (except 四庫全書), but if 波瀾壯闊 ("agitated") appears only once (i.e. is a hapax legomenon) in ancient texts and isn't continuously used afterwards, then the modern sense of "eventful" is probably a re-introduction from Japanese, or at least reinforced by the Japanese word. In my opinion, you can't really translate 波瀾萬丈 as "eventful" in the quote you have given. It doesn't seem to be commonly used in Chinese published media, and often when it's used the piece of news has something to do with Japan. Sometimes its meaning is closer to 波瀾壯闊, sometimes not ("eventful" isn't really close to 波瀾壯闊 in meaning). Of course, I would appreciate if you can cite some example sentences containing 波瀾萬丈 from the 20th century. @沈澄心, any thoughts? RcAlex36 (talk) 13:43, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@RcAlex36, @H2NCH2COOH: attested in 中华读书报 ([1][2][3]) and Guangming Daily ([4]). There's also a quotation in 2007. However, I don't know how 波瀾萬丈 is used in the 20th century. --沈澄心✉ 14:48, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

In People's Daily, this word is only used once during 1946-2021. --沈澄心✉ 14:52, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

By the way, I propose a verification request of 波亂萬丈 (kyūjitai) as listed in 波乱万丈. AFAIK, 波乱万丈 exists because of 同音の漢字による書きかえ (replacement of homophonic kanji), so its traditional form is supposed to be 波瀾萬丈, not its back-formation 波亂萬丈. Is there any method to suppress the auto-generation of kyūjitai forms? --H₂NCH₂COOH (Talk) 11:25, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@H2NCH2COOH: |kyu=- -- Huhu9001 (talk) 12:57, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

By the way, what do you think of 錕斤拷? -- Huhu9001 (talk) 12:59, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

It is justified to have this entry as an internet slang or something, but instead of following the convention that explanations should be put under traditional form, I think it should be put under simplified entry and redirect its traditional form to the simplified form. --H₂NCH₂COOH (Talk) 02:46, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

The "eventful" sense should be cited. @RcAlex36, please check the quotes. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 21:24, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

RFV passed. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 22:31, 10 May 2022 (UTC)