Re: Origin of Mahjong (MJ) / other Hu Pai Design

On Dec 8, 4:56 am, al <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am not sure of the point made in this paragraph.

I understand what he was saying clearly.

In the 1st half of the paragraph you discuss the confusion over the
correct way of writing hu2. You then say that there can be dispute
over this commonly used word. I can see from your illustration the
various ways of writing hu2 and the different meanings they generate.
However, I do not see where the confusion arises. Does it arise in
their use?

The last sentence in the paragraph then says there is dispute over
this commonly used word. But in the discussion, there is no mention of
dispute. Can you enlighten me?

Let me raise one question for you relating to the confusion of sound
and word (meaning). Is 'diao' dropping or hanging? How about ma? Is it
hemp or horse?

You have missed the point of my questions. My questions relate to the
term 'dispute' and it seemingly relying on the idea of 'confusion'. I
want to know what are the claims being made about 'tong' that entail a
'dispute'.

Now, with reference to tong2, and tong3, the issue is in what context
do you frame a discussion about the use of these terms. If a context
is put forward, then there must be evidential support for that
context.

Himly was a diligent scholar, but his sources did not have first-hand
information. Hearsay mixed with dialectic variation and colloquial
renditions, any name is a suspect, particularly as there is no frame
of reference.

Possible hearsay. Possible dialectic variation. Possible colloquial
renditions. The frame of reference is Chinese playing card games.

In this above statement, you have implied two points.
(1) the base for Himly's Cash-base hypothesis could be invalid and
unreliable.

Wrong again. My statement was saying that you were claiming hearsay
(as in unreliable) actually was the case with Himly's observations, as
were the dialectic variations etc etc. I was pointing out that these
are unsupported claims.

Sure they may have been there at Himly's experiences. Sure, there may
be other possible explanations of that time for his observations, but
if there are, then they better have some support that makes them
strong enough to counter Himly's observations.

(2) mahjong is based on and similar to all Chinese card games (which
constitute its frame of reference)

This is a baseless (dare I say willful?) misrepresentation of what I
said. I said Chinese playing cards are the frame of reference.

Point (1) weakens the Cash-base position.

Wrong. Only actual cases of evidential data that contradict key points
of the explaantion would weaken it. Possible alternative scenarios are
just that - possible. I have explained before about possible and
actual. Possible does not mean actual.

Point (2) has claims that are contrary to factual situation. Symbols
different, formats different, rules different, set-up different,
counting system very different and more... Chinese card games can
hardly be frame of reference for mahjong.

Superficial objections readily explained with reference to money cards
that had representations of money denominations that were modified
though abstraction etc, dependant on region. Similarly with maque -
three suits, with one suit represetation identical to money cards,
names of two suits identical to money cards and both referring to
denominations of money - see Pan. 3rd suit name explained with few
assumptions as being related to money. Rules slightly different to
peng he - consistent with a new game -play as are scoring etc etc.

Money suited system, four suits, three suits, quadruplication, mo he
pai, peng he pai..... All discussed at length.

My simple answer is "no way". My simple refrain is " Cash is no cash;
Mouse is no mouse".

[snip]
How and why or what is the connection between ma que (mahjong) and the
paper card games? I may guess your answer to be likely : refer to post
xx.

Incredible. I am afraid I can do nothing for your bad memory. So I
will not refer you to look at past discussions on this very topic.

Obviously, we disagree.

I have serious objections to the reasons and evidence that support
your claims.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Incorrect use of undated sources
    ... Two suits have the 4 words. ... You have 11 Cash cards with Zero and Half included. ... Money symbols connotes gambling. ... The extra cards are not money. ...
    (rec.games.mahjong)
  • Re: Small Claims Action Outside My Jurisdiction
    ... money laundering, computer hacking, counterfeiting, and so on. ... first attempt at exposing how identity theft worked and existed well ... somewhere, not a government one, and asked her how many credit cards ... But even if we're talking theft, that generally is a state crime. ...
    (misc.legal)
  • Re: Numbers of tiles in the Himly and Glover sets.
    ... When Money is not Cash, ... playing cards of the Late Ming.. ... Pan and Feng had different names for the same game. ...
    (rec.games.mahjong)
  • Re: Incorrect use of undated sources
    ... The colors of these cards match. ... 3-suited madiao game. ... A suit is in a defined limited number. ... I that is what the game is about; not money. ...
    (rec.games.mahjong)
  • Re: Mahjong & Matiao Related? How and Why?
    ... symbols onto the particular cards of a particular suit. ... call them circles, cakes, wheels or containers or Cash, as you like. ... It is 4 suits of fourty cards. ... the presence of taiji symbol alone has proven the connection to I- ...
    (rec.games.mahjong)
Loading