译文简介

我在琢磨，18和19世纪中国人一直称欧洲人为蛮夷，他们用的这个词和欧洲人同样用来描述其他人的词很类似，这两者之间内涵一样吗，还是说蛮夷这个词对于中国人来说有着完全不同的文化含义呢？

译文来源

http://www.reddit.com

正文翻译

-------------译者：xiaobaosdu-审核者：利未巫师------------

When Chinese records speak of "Barbarians", do they refer to savage, un-civilized people or merely foreigners?

中国史料中所说的蛮夷，是指野蛮人，未开化的人还是仅仅指外国人呢？

I was wondering if, when the Chinese in the 18th and 19th century kept referring to Europeans as barbarians, they used the word in a similar way Europeans used it to describe other peoples, with the same connotation, or does the word have completely different cultural meaning for the Chinese?

我在琢磨，18和19世纪中国人一直称欧洲人为蛮夷，他们用的这个词和欧洲人同样用来描述其他人的词很类似，这两者之间内涵一样吗，还是说蛮夷这个词对于中国人来说有着完全不同的文化含义呢？

评论翻译

-------------译者：casuffit-审核者：利未巫师------------

[deleted] 21 指標 2 年前* Barbarian generally denoted that a person or group did not abide by Chinese cultural, social, and political norms--and thus were uncivilized (It could also mean a non-Han person). But it was not absolute. There were variations in the degree of barbarity of foreigners depending on how well they adhered to Chinese practices. As such, an empire like Vietnam, which incorporated Sinitic social and political practices, was considered only semi-barbarous and more civilized. This anecdote may help show how there was a sliding scale, and status could change:

蛮夷通常指的是一个人或一个群体不遵守中国的文化，社会，和政治准则，因此被认为是未开化的（也可以是非汉人的意思）。但是，这个定义不是绝对的。蛮夷的程度会根据外国人有多遵守中国的准则而变化。因此，像越南这种采取中式社会和政治准则的帝国，就被认为只是半夷和更开化的。这件轶事展示了蛮夷的标准是个滑动标尺，根据程度不同，蛮夷的身份也会有所不同。

"[Vietnamese] scholar envoys to China justified their selection because their knowledge of the [Chinese Confucian] classics gave them leverage in international classics-dominated court politics. Ly Van Phuc, for example, the Hanoi scholar of recent Chinese ancestry, arrived in Peking as a Vietnamese envoy in 1841. He discovered that the Manchu court had assigned him official lodgings bearing the offensive title 'Vietnamese Barbarians' Hostel' (Yueh-i hui-kuan). Immediately ordering his attendants to destroy the sign, Phuc composed a querulous impromptu essay, 'On Distinguishing Barbarians' which he then presented to the startled--and himself racially barbarian--Tao-kuang emperor. In his essay Phuc pointed out the Confucian nature of the Vietnamese elite culture in impeccable scholarly language. He then demanded, 'if mankind did not dare to regard Shun and King Wen as barbarians, can it then dare to regard us as barbarians?' The Chinese response, according to Vietnamese accounts, was 'most ashamed and grateful'."
John Whitmore, Vietnam and the Chinese Model, p. 118.

"出使中国的【越南】学者是根据他们对中国【儒家】经典的学识来选择的，这些儒家学识给予了他们在受儒家文化主宰的两个国家间的宫廷政治上具有很大的影响力。比如李文馥，这个有中国血统的河内学者，在1841年作为一名越南使节来到了北京。他发现满清朝廷给他安排的下榻之处有个侮辱人的称号———粤南夷使公馆。他马上让下人把这个牌子毁掉。李文馥即兴写了一份抱怨的文章—— 《夷辩》，把文章呈现给了惊愕的并且在血统上也是蛮夷的道光皇帝。李文馥在文章中用无可挑剔的学术语言指出了越南精英文化的儒家性质。他接着质问："如果人们不敢把文王（注1）和舜帝称为蛮夷，为什么就敢把我们称为蛮夷？" 根据越南的记载，中方的回复是"十分惭愧和感激的"。

注1：周文王叫西伯侯，就是指不在中原，周国在有时候叫西土。
孟子曰："舜生于诸冯，迁于负夏，卒于鸣条；东夷之人也。文王生于岐周，卒于毕郢，西夷之人也。地之相去也，千有馀里；世之相后也，千有馀岁：得志行乎中国，若合符节。先圣后圣，其揆一也。
--John Whitmore 的书《越南和中国的模式》，118页

-------------译者：casuffit-审核者：利未巫师------------

pieman3141 3 指標 2 年前
（回楼上）
Chinese history is indeed Han-centric, despite its relative silence on where exactly the Han nationality came from (besides stories about Huangdi and Yandi). We get the Five-ish (probably non-existent) Emperors, then bam, the Xia Dynasty. The genetic ancestors of people south of the Yangtze were considered part of the Dongyi (Eastern Barbarian) tribes until Chinese colonization during the Qin and Han dynasties.

中国历史确实是以汉族为中心，尽管历史上并没有确切的说到汉族从哪里来（除了皇帝和炎帝的故事）。我们知道有五帝（很可能不存在），然后就凭空冒出个夏朝来。在秦汉朝代的殖民以前，长江以南的人的祖先被认为是东夷部落的一部分。

Actually, now that I think about it.. Huangdi and Yandi strangely parallels other stories about twins in other cultures... Thoughts?

其实，我现在想起来，皇帝和炎帝跟其他文化里双胞胎的故事很类似？你们觉得呢？

spelchek5 1 指標 2 年前
This doesn't answer the question you posed, but I would keep on eye out for emerging research into the Banpo phase of Yangshao. China has taken to asserting that they are the oldest civilization and seem highly interested in using this archaeological site to frame their historical arguments which, as you and others have pointed out, rely heavily on mythology.

这虽然不会解答你的问题，如果是我我会关注关于仰韶半坡的最新研究。中国现在声称他们是最古老的文化，并且非常希望用这个考古遗址来支持他们的历史观点，虽然，像你和其他人所说的，他们在很大程度上依靠的是神话。

-------------译者：wszpwsren-审核者：利未巫师------------

fishstickuffs 13 指標 2 年前*
I agree with everything that's been said here so far, but I just wanted to elaborate a little bit on some of the points raised because your question leads to some very interesting topics.

我同意这里的言论，但我就此想提出的一些观点，因为你的问题引起了一些非常有趣的话题。

Typically, the more a group has a sense of "us", the more they have a sense of "them". /u/Rvn-drv is definitely accurate when he or she says that being a "barbarian" has to do with not following Chinese cultural and political norms. But it's also a bit more intricate than that. The importance of uniformity in culture dates back to the earliest verifiable dynasties, the Shang and Zhou (the Xia dynasty is quasi-mythical and not well known).

通常来说，一个集体越有一种"我们"的感觉，那么越有一种"他们"的感觉。 /u/Rvn-drv 说的十分正确，大家把那些不附和中国文化或是政治常识的人称为"蛮夷"。但事实比这更复杂，中国人在很早期的朝代中就认识到了文化统一的重要性，比如商、周（夏朝比较偏神话，且不为人所知）。

The Shang dynasty and the early parts of the Zhou dynasty were not so much the imperial bureaucracies that characterize later China, but were loosely affiliated culture groups that exerted cultural as well as political influence across larger regions of land.
When the Zhou "conquered" Shang, military conflict was a component, but much of the conquest was simply cultural usurpation. Zhou culture became the dominant standard for behavior and politics.

帝国官僚机构——中国后来标志性的特征——并未出现在商朝和周朝早期，反而是一些松散型的学派致力于在整个广大的地域发挥文化和政治影响力。
周朝战胜商朝，其过程不仅仅是军事征服。周的文化将商的文化取而代之，并作为一种行为和政治的标准而留存。

China's political philosophy has traditionally been highly China-centric. Much is often made of the Chineseword for "China", 中国, which literally means "center country". In the cosmology of imperial China, China is the center of the world. All other countries look toward China.
This perspective colored its foreign policy for the entire imperial period until the eventual cataclysm of the Opium Wars. The surrounding "barbarian" populations- the Xiongnu, Mongols, Manchus- participated in the imperial tribute system.

中国的政治哲学历来高度以中国为中心。这种思想经常体现在中文词汇中。"中国"，字面意思是"中心之国"。在中国古代的宇宙观中，中国是世界的中心。其他国家则向中国看齐。
这一点沁染了整个中国帝国时代的对外政策，直到被鸦片战争终结。同时，一些周围的"蛮夷"，比如匈、蒙古、满族，都参与到帝国的朝贡体系里。

word for "China", 中国, which literally means "center country". In the cosmology of imperial China, China is the center of the world. All other countries look toward China.
word for "China", 中国, which literally means "center country". In the cosmology of imperial China, China is the center of the world. All other countries look toward China.

意"中国"，中国，字面意思是"中心之国"。在中国古代的宇宙观，中国是世界的中心。所有其他国家把中国。

word for "China", 中国, which literally means "center country". In the cosmology of imperial China, China is the center of the world. All other countries look toward China.
意"中国"，中国，字面意思是"中心之国"。在中国古代的宇宙观，中国是世界的中心。所有其他国家把中国。

-------------译者：注册成功-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

On- usually- a yearly basis, delegates from all surrounding nations would come to the Imperial Capital and perform ritualized acts of submission, as well as provide monetary tribute. This reinforced the proper order of the universe, with China in the center.

每年，周围属国的代表团都会进京朝贡以及进行相关的朝拜仪式。这强化了天下的合理秩序，其中以中国为中心。

But the experience with Europeans was vastly different. Those "barbarian" peoples along the borders of China were less than, but they fit into the Chinese concept of how the world ought to be ordered. Countries like Korea adopted many Chinese institutions, and so would have a bit of respect from Chinese- something of the "respectable barbarian" if you will. Europeans had no concept of Chinese superiority. In fact, they conceived of the Chinese as "uncivilized".

但是欧洲人的感觉就很不同了。虽然周边民族被中国视为蛮夷，像朝鲜这样的国家就采用了中国的很多制度文化，所以多多少少获得了中国人的好感，可以称之为"可敬的蛮夷"。而欧洲人根本就没有"天朝上国"的概念。事实上，欧洲人认为中国人是"未开化的"。

This didn't- and couldn't- make any sense to the Chinese, whose entire concept of being "civilized" required Chinese institutions. So Europeans were a particularly reprehensible variety of barbarian because they posed a threat to the entire Chinese concept of how the universe should be ordered.
Once Europeans made manifest an actual military superiority, well, the devastation to the Chinesenational psyche is hard to overstate.

这对中国人来说毫无意义，因为中国的整个"文明"观念是以中国文化习俗为支撑的。由于欧洲人对中国的整个天下观念造成了威胁，所以中国人认为欧洲人是一种应该遭受斥责的野蛮人。

Previously, Europeans were pesky outsiders who didn't realize how things worked. Now, they had actually upset the way things worked... but maybe that wasn't how things worked after all? The only event of equal devastation to the national psyche was the invasion by the Japanese. In the Chinese mind, there had been the thought, "At least we're the center of Asia. Sure, European countries can upset the order, but not another Asian country!" The invasion by Japan was a further humiliation.

先前，欧洲人是可恶的外来者，根本不明白中国的运作模式。而现在，欧洲人完全颠覆了中国人的运作方式。。。或者事情本来就不是这么运作的？还有一件对中国人的心理造成同等规模伤害的就是日本的入侵。中国人先前有过这样的看法，那就是"至少我们是亚洲的中心。当然，欧洲国家可以颠覆这个秩序，但是不是由另一个亚洲国家来颠覆！"所以日本的入侵深化了中国人的羞辱感。

Eventually China pulls itself back together under the Nationalists and are recognized by European nations as an important ally, and admitted as a member of the Security Council of the UN. This temporary regain of prestige is tossed out the window when the Communists triumph in the civil war, and the Nationalists are forced to leave for Taiwan. All major governments stop recognizing China as legitimate, and transfer recognition to Taiwan.

最终中国在国民党的领导下振作了起来，并被欧洲国家当成是一个重要的盟友，成为了安理会成员国。这些短暂回归的声誉在共产党赢得内战后消失殆尽，国民党撤到台湾。主要强国都不再承认中国是合法的政府，转而承认台湾的国民党政府。

Imagine the identity crisis of a nation that can't get formal recognition while ruling over a landmass the size of China! And to the PRC, Taiwan is their sovereign territory anyways. And then the US begins selling planes, weapons and ships to Taiwan.

中国这么一大块土地，却无法获得国际承认，你可以想象当时中国面临了多么严重的认同危机！而中共始终认为台湾是其领土的一部分。然后美国开始向台湾出售飞机，武器和舰艇。

-------------译者：casuffit-审核者：利未巫师------------

And people wonder why China is so adamant over the meaningless Senkaku islands, or regaining control of Taiwan. Well, to the Chinese, sticking up for the Senkaku islands and reunification with Taiwan (which they assert is part of their territory) is making a stand and saying, "We will protect our sovereignty no matter what!" It is a response to a century of humiliation at the hands of Europeans and the Japanese.

人们不理解为什么中国在无意义的尖阁群岛之争（注：钓鱼岛）和收复台湾上态度非常坚定。对中国人来讲，支持尖阁群岛和台湾统一（他们声称是其领土）就是对外宣言："我们不论付出什么代价，都要保护主权!".这个回应是针对欧洲人和日本人造成的中国屈辱百年。

To this day, in the Forbidden City, you can see large ceremonial cauldrons that were used for putting out fires. From a distance, they appear gold with intricate black designs. On closer look, you will notice that these intricate designs are in fact nothing more than the chisel marks where Europeans hacked away the inch-thick gold layer on the outside of the cauldrons. The wounds are fresh.

在今天的在紫禁城里，你可以看见用来救火的大型礼仪大缸。它们从远处看似乎是金的，并带着错综复杂的黑色图案。当你靠前细看，你会发现这些图案其实是当年欧洲人把一英寸厚的黄金凿下来的痕迹。中国人的伤口还是新鲜的。

故宫大缸

So in a very meaningful way, this concept of what it means to be "barbarian", and why Europeans were particularly "barbarous" gets at the essential issue of what it means to be Chinese- in the past and present.

因此， "蛮夷"的定义和为什么欧洲人被认为是尤其"野蛮的"，涉及到一个必要的问题：在过去和现在，（以上）这些对中国人意味着什么。

This dilemma of the collapse of the old order and a search for a new place of respect in the world has colored China's actions since the 1970's, and will into the foreseeable future.

从70年代到可预见的未来时代，中国的行为被进退两难的困境影响：一方面是面对旧秩序的崩溃，另一方面要在世界上寻找受到尊重的一席之地。

Anyways, your question leads to what I think are some very interesting discussion points. I hope I didn't ramble off too far!

不管怎么说，你的问题引出了一些很有意思的论点。我希望我没有絮叨太多。

EDIT: If anyone is interested in more information about the tribute system and its relation to contemporary Chinese politics, look for articles by Professor Joseph W. Escherick. The articles of his I've used particularly for this post can be found in the book China's Rise in Historical Perspective edited by Brantley Womack. This book is a wonderful resource in genera.
http://www.amazon.com/Chinas-Historical-Perspective-Brantly-Womack/dp/0742567222/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1354223145&sr=1-1&keywords=china%27s+rise+in+historical+perspective

编辑：如果有人想知道更多的有关朝贡和当代中国政治联系的信息，可以去看Joseph W. Escherick教授的文章。我的这个回复是根据他的书《China's Rise in Historical Perspective》（注：好像没有中文版，我翻成"历史视野下看中国崛起"）（编辑：Brantley Womack）。这本书是个很好的资源。下面是书在亚马逊的网页：
http://www.amazon.com/Chinas-Historical-Perspective-Brantly-Womack/dp/0742567222/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1354223145&sr=1-1&keywords=china%27s+rise+in+historical+perspective

-------------译者：casuffit-审核者：利未巫师------------

JimmyLane -3 指標 2 年前
Hi,
I read what you just wrote and while this may not be the place to discuss it, I find it hard to accept that an invasion that happened 150 years ago is considered to be a fresh wound. Just because you can still see some kind of vestige doesn't mean one has to still retain some sort of wronged pride.
The contact with a militaristic and imperialist Western civilization may have been a little rough at first but didn't the Chinese benefit a lot from the science and technology they got from it ?

嗨，
我看了你写的，这里可能不是适合讨论的地方，我很难接受一个150年前发生的侵略还被认为是新鲜的伤口。就算你现在可以看到一些侵略的痕迹，但这不代表一个人还应该继续留着一颗受伤的自尊心。虽然有军国主义和帝国主义的西方文明跟中国的第一次接触有些粗暴，但是中国人难道没有从中得到科学和技术？

What about the technological transfers they acquire by luring companies with illusion of their huge internal market and never giving them control of their investment ? What I think is happening is less a justified feud than deliberate attempts to turn their newly found economic hegemony into something far beyond what any country should have, essentially paving the way to a second Cold War, one where ideology is second to racial prejudice.

另外，中国用庞大的国内市场的假象引诱外国公司把技术转移给他们，却从不给外国公司在中国的资产控制权。我觉得这么做的原因倒不是世仇，而是他们故意要把新得到的经济霸权超越任何一个国家应有的，基本上，为第二次冷战铺平了道路。在这新冷战中，种族偏见将排在意识形态之前。

In my opinion and maybe in a counter-intuitive way, it would seem that China is lacking an identity, the cataclysm that was the early days of Mao's China and the subsequent departure from anything communist have left very little to define a new Chinese model of society.

我接下来说的观点也许是有点反直觉的。中国看起来好像缺少个性，早期激进的毛泽东时代，和后面尽量跟共产主义划清界限，都没留下新中国社会模式的定义。

Since the CCP is refusing to call into question anything for fear of upsetting a society already on edge and losing control, no progress is being made other than the cementing of a consensus composed mainly of two things : a Middle-age version of so-called enlightened despots and a nationalism that doesn't make any sense in a globalized economy where frontiers are second to manufacturing strength. What China could use is a Habermas who tried solving the conscience crisis of the German people with his constitutional patriotism.

中共拒绝质疑任何可能颠覆这个快失控的社会的问题，所以除了在两件事情上取得了共识外，政府并没有任何进展。第一是中年版本的所谓的开明独裁者，第二是民族主义，在这个全球化的经济体系中，制造实力比国界更有优势，因此，民族主义是没意义的。中国需要的是哈贝马斯（注：德国当代的哲学家），他提出的宪法爱国主义解决了德国人（注：二战后）的良知危机。

But maybe peaceful change is not possible anymore. Maybe one cannot hope for peaceful change from a regime that silence dissent with tanks.

但是，和平演变大概已经没可能了。人们估计不会期望一个用坦克镇压异议者的政权会有什么和平演变。

-------------译者：casuffit-审核者：利未巫师------------

thanatos90Chinese Intellectual History 24 指標 2 年前
The Chinese used words like 'barbarian' (and, there are actually a number of characters that all get translated from Chinese into 'barbarian') in much the same way I understand the ancient Greeks used the word. Pretty much every foreigner was a 'barbarian' of some nature or other, no matter what their culture was like, so it can't be taken to strictly suggest what we think of barbarian nowadays (they didn't necessarily believe that Europeans went around in animal skins with clubs). That having been said, the Chinese did have some pretty strong cultural assumptions, and pretty much assumed that all other foreign countries were culturally inferior. Hence, 'barbarian'.

中国人用"蛮夷"（其实还有其他同意词也被英文翻译成了"蛮夷"）跟古希腊人用这个词的方式一样：基本上每个外国人，不论他们的文化如何，究其本质都是"蛮夷"，都被认为是"蛮夷"。所以这个词的用法在严格意义上讲，跟我们现代所指的"野蛮"是不同的（他们不一定认为欧洲人都是裹着兽皮扛着棒子的）。话虽这么说，中国人确实有一些强烈的文化臆测，认为中国文化几乎优越于所有外国的文化。因此，"蛮夷"。

[deleted] 12 指標 2 年前
（回楼上）
I maybe going off topic but even ancient Indians referred others as Barbarians or mleccha in sanskrit.
In ancient sutras or laws, a person who travels to an other land.. He is not considered a Hindu anymore as they believed that he has been contaminated with the language and culture of mlecchas. They also considered people who eat meat as mlecchas, but now it is only associated with eating beef... and there seems to be no concensus on whether to consider priests working outside India as Brahmins.
Here is a pretty good summary on this topic in the context of Hinduism:
http://www.hinduismtoday.com/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=3065

我可能会跑题，但是古印度人也在梵文里把非印度人称为蛮夷或"蔑戾车"（注：意思是野蛮人）。
在印度的古代佛经和法律里，当一个人去其他国家旅行，这个人就不再是印度人了，因为他们相信这个人已被"蔑戾车"（注：野蛮人）的语言和文化给玷污了。他们还认为吃肉的人是"蔑戾车"，不过现在只把吃牛肉的人称为是"蔑戾车"。还有，在印度外传教的祭司算不算是婆罗门（注：印度的祭司贵族，最高种姓）这个问题上，他们也没有达到共识。
下面的网页给了这个在印度教背景下的话题不错的总结：
http://www.hinduismtoday.com/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=3065

-------------译者：wszpwsren-审核者：利未巫师------------

TiakoRoman Archaeology 6 指標 2 年前
This is a question that requires knowledge of the intricacies of the Chinese language, but from my historical readings the Chinese reference to foreigners was not unlike how the Greeks used "barbaros"--it could be pejorative, and there was generally a sense that foreigners were not as good as Chinese, but it was by no means relentlessly pejorative, nor does it carry the same connotations as the modern term "barbarian."

对于这个词汇，必须对中国那缤纷繁杂的语言有一定的认识才行，就我的历史阅读经历里当中国人指称外国人时，不像希腊人用的"barbaros"这个词【译注：barbaros，希腊语βρβαρο，英语中的barbarian的语源，可参考http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbarian】--也有一点轻蔑的意思，中国人普遍有一种外国人不如中国人的感觉，但绝不是那种直截了当的蔑视。

In fact, I suspect the bundle of Chinese terms was originally translated as such by Jesuits who were specifically drawing on their classical education.
In fact, the fact that this is a translation is important to stress. Modern works on China, particularly by journalists and political analysts, that throw around the term like candy on Halloween are engaging in a very pervasive and very damaging form of stereotyping themselves.

事实上，我怀疑这一大堆中国词汇最初是由耶稣会士参照他们的古典教育而翻译过来的。
事实上，翻译的重点应该是着重于事实的真相（词汇本来的意思）。当代关于中国的作品，尤其是由记者和政治分析家写著的，他们的（翻译）用词就像万圣节乱撒的糖果，这些用词常常套着他们自己的想法而以非常流行的意思并破坏原意的方式来翻译。

-------------译者：注册成功-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

snackburros 5 指標 2 年前
This is absolutely correct. The Chinese terms were quite centered on the concept of "foreignness" and "strangeness". The four historical terms translated as "barbarian" in Chinese actually were more concerned with location rather than any barbarous characteristics.

非常正确。中国的这些词汇更多是以"外来性"和"奇异性"概念为中心。中文中用以形容野蛮人的这四个历史性词汇更多关注的是地点，而不是任何的野蛮特征。

南蛮北番/胡,东夷西狄 is the old saying, within this 蛮 (man - forms part of the meaning for "barbarous" in the word 野蛮) is probably the main culprit for being translated into "barbarian". Note that here it's associated with the concept of "south" and it was from the south where most foreigners made contact with China, be it Arab, Persian, or European.

南蛮北番/胡,东夷西狄是老说法了。蛮通常和"野"字联系在一起，形成"野蛮"，所以"蛮"被翻译成barbarian(野蛮人）可能就是因为这个原因。注意，这里的蛮和南配对，而大部分外国人都是通过南方进入中国的，包括阿拉伯人，波斯人或者欧洲人。

Many Chinese characters have different meanings due to context and the meaning of this word changes by context, and frequently it's all about homonyms, homophones, wordplay, pun, and allegories. I don't know the etymology of the word that means barbarian or barbarous today and I don't know whether it's by chance or design that it matched up to the one denoting the southern tribes.

根据语境，中文文字可以有不同的含义，而文字的意思也会根据语境发生变化，一般都是同音异义字，同音异形异义词，双关语，寓言等。我不了解蛮字的词源，也不了解为什么这个字要和南方部落联系在一起，是故意人为的还是偶然的？

The term 胡 for northern tribes is associated with the terms for "mustache" and "chaos", I wouldn't be surprised if it was a readaptation of the term's meaning after being used in a pretty common Chinese 4-character idiom denoting "different" - currently preferred as 南腔北调 (southern accent northern tone) or 南来北往 (south come north go).

胡用以指代北方部落，胡也可以表示"胡子"或者"糊"（混乱）的意思。在中国的四字成语中，会使用南、北来进行区分，比如成语南腔北调和南来北往，所以南蛮北番/胡,东夷西狄可能也是同样的道理。

This paper from 1988 seems to believe that the word's originally intended meaning wasn't so much about barbarousness but rather strangeness in their customs. Unfortuantely it's in Chinese. I think also generally you can tell that the word for "barbarous" is actually 野蛮 ye man which involves the character for "wild" as well. Note that attaching just 蛮 - the character for southern/"barbarous" doesn't necessarily mean barbarian in Chinese even today, but rather attaching the first character there 野 ye for wild to the ren suffix (for person, common character that denotes most jobs or descriptors of a person) comes out with a definition for savage or uncivilized.

这篇1988年的文章中认为这个词原先的意思并不是指代野蛮，而是指代他们文化习俗的奇异性。可惜这是中文，所以难免让人产生不解。英文中的野蛮在中文中由"野"（野外的）和"蛮"组成。注意，蛮在今天的中文中并不一定是野蛮人的意思。

I'm even willing to say that even today the character in question, 蛮, doesn't necessarily mean barbarous or barbarian.

所以我想说的是蛮在如今未必就是野蛮人的意思。

I can go on but I'm not a professional language teacher or linguist so I don't know if all these explanations make any sort of sense. Feel free to ask for clarifications.

我可以继续聊，但是我不是专家，所以也不知道我的这些解释对不对。如果有什么需要澄清的，可以继续问我。

-------------译者：yanzi1990-审核者：利未巫师------------

mcmug 3 指標 2 年前
I'm a native Chinese speaker and you're very much right on. Nowadays, when we use the character 蛮 it refers to unreasonable or irrational behavior.
The etymology of the characters are hard to pin down, but basically there's no general term (at least not commonly used) for barbarians as a people but there is for barbarism as a behavior. We use 蛮 as something of an insult, calling someone uncultured, rude or unreasonable which is basically the kind of contempt the Imperial Chinese had for people who did not act like them

汉语是我的母语，我觉得你说的很对。现如今，当我们使用"蛮"这个汉字时，是指行为上不讲理或不理智的人"蛮"这个字的语源很难弄懂，但是基本上很不用来（或者很少用来）指称野蛮人，而是指一种野蛮粗鲁的行为。我们把"蛮"字当作一种侮辱，称呼那些没有文化，粗鲁和不讲理的人，这本质上是帝国时代的中国人对那些行为举止不像他们的人的表示一种轻蔑的称呼。

KerasTasi 2 指標 2 年前*
Chinese history tends to be quite Sino-centric in this period. Most contemporary historians focused their work on China and the surrounding quasi-Sinitic regions (SE Asia, Japan), which were seen as partially enlightened by their adoption of Chinese
characters and socio-ethical systems. References of regions to the West generally stopped at Persia or, at best, Bactria.

中国在这个历史时期非常倾向于"以中国为中心"。大多数当代历史学家把工作重点放在中国和周边类似中国文化的地区上（东南亚，日本），这些地区通过采用汉字和中国的社会道德体系而在一定程度上受到开化。提起西方地区大体上会停留在波斯，至多不超过巴克特里亚。

For the most part, this was due to the official status of Chinese historians. By the seventh century AD, they were well-established, charged with using history to provide lessons in statecraft, told moral stories to reinforce the socio-ethical code, and provide precedent for the actions of the Imperial government. For these reasons, they can perhaps be forgiven for focussing on the Middle Kingdom so intensely, especially in contrast to pre-19th century European history.

大部分来说，这归功于中国历史学家的官方身份。到了公元七世纪，历史学家的官方身份是完善发展的，他们负责用历史在课上传授治国之道，讲道德故事来加强社会道德标准，为皇家朝廷的行为提供先例。

That said, they did pretty much exclusively apply the term 'Barbarian' to non-Sinitic peoples. Pragmatism dictated that they recognised some barbarians to be more civilised than others - for example, Japanese or Koreans were superior to Europeans.

那说明，他们确实用野蛮人这个词形容那些非类似中国文化的人们。实用主义者说他们认为一些野蛮人比其他人更文明-例如，日本人或韩国人优于欧洲人。

The philosopher Chen Yang wrote: 'some people are born in barbarian lands but their actions are in harmony with rights and righteousness. In that case they have a Chinese heart and mind.' So there is plenty of subtlety in the definition, albeit without getting away from the overall sense that barbarians were less civilised than Chinese.
哲学家陈阳写过：'有些人生于野蛮的土地上，但是他们的行为很正直合理。在那种情况下，可以说他们有了一颗中国人的心和思想.' 所以这个定义有很多微妙之处，尽管还是没有从野蛮人不如中国人文明的大体观念中逃离出来。

I think Tiako raises a very legitimate concern in regards to how we interpret or use this knowledge, but I do feel that it was largely a derogatory term, much in the way Europeans or, later, Westerners, characterised the non-white world.

我觉得Tiako 提出了一个我们怎样深入理解和使用这个词的合理关切，但是我真的觉得这个词很大程度上是贬义词，就像欧洲人，或后来说的西方人，指称非白人世界的那些用词。
EDIT: Apologies, forgot to source - this is essentially a paraphrasing of Patrick O'Brien's prolegomenon for the journal Global History, entitled 'Historiographical traditions and modern imperatives for the restoration of global history*

编辑：很抱歉，忘了说来源-这主要是改写自Patrick O'Brien 为《世界历史》的期刊写的前言，标题是《全球史重构下的传统史学方法与现代规则》。

中国史料中所说的“蛮夷”是什么意思？