Elementary discussion to the differences in the use of Chinese and Japanese ‘Three at Dawn and Four at Dusk’
试论汉语和日语“朝三暮四”的使用差异

摘要

无论是中国还是日本，“朝三暮四”这个四字成语大家都耳熟能详。然而，在交流过程中，笔者注意到中国人和日本人对于“朝三暮四”的理解和认识存在差异。为了阐明这一点，本文从既往研究、研究方法、在线问卷调查及其结果分析等三个方面展开论述，考察了中日两国大学生对于“朝三暮四”的认知和使用差异，并探讨出现认知差异的原因。问卷结果显示，中国学生多用“朝三暮四”来形容恋爱关系中见异思迁、善变的一方，而日本学生常用“朝三暮四”来表现只注重眼前利益的人。究其原因，中国学生或是受“两情若是久长时，又岂在朝朝暮暮”这一名诗句影响，看到“朝”和“暮”二字便容易联想到爱情，故久而久之大家对“朝三暮四”的认知也就发生了偏差，由原本的“警戒他人不要被花言巧语所骗”变成了“善变、见异思迁”。而在日本，“朝三暮四”说到底不过是外来词，人们对其的认知是基于原文典故，因此几乎未出现理解上的偏差。

Abstract

Whether in China or Japan, the four-letter idiom ‘Three at Dawn and Four at Dusk’ is familiar to everyone. However, in the course of communication, the author noticed that there are differences in the understanding and awareness of ‘Three at Dawn and Four at Dusk’ between Chinese and Japanese. In order to clarify this point, this paper examines the differences between Chinese and Japanese university students' perceptions and uses of ‘Three at Dawn and Four at Dusk’ and explores the reasons for the differences in perceptions from three aspects: previous research, research methodology, and the analysis of the online questionnaire and its results. The results of the questionnaire show that Chinese students often use ‘Three at Dawn and Four at Dusk’ to describe the party in a relationship who is changeable and fickle, while Japanese students often use ‘Three at Dawn and Four at Dusk’ to describe the person who only focuses on the immediate interests of the relationship. The reason for this is that Chinese students are either influenced by the poem ‘If two lovers are in love for a long time, is it not in the morning or in the evening’, and the words ‘morning’ and ‘evening’ are easily associated with love. Over time, people's perceptions of ‘Three at Dawn and Four at Dusk’ have become skewed, from ‘warning others not to be deceived by flowery words’ to ‘being fickle and thinking of change’. In Japan, However, ‘Three at Dawn and Four at Dusk’ is, after all, a foreign word, and people's perceptions of it are based on the original allusion, so there is hardly any deviation in understanding.