陶淑女中的英文名
12 views
Skip to first unread message
GnuDoyng
Nov 29, 2009, 9:45:42 AM11/29/09
to Heritage Preservation and Planning in Fuzhou (Foochow), China
目前网络上能找到的有限的资料都是写作Doweuk Girls' School。我个人比较怀疑这个Doweuk是Doseuk的误写。因为“陶
淑”用福州话罗马字拼出来是“Dò̤-sé̤ṳk”，而Doweuk无论用福州话还是普通话还是英语都不知道要怎么念。
淑”用福州话罗马字拼出来是“Dò̤-sé̤ṳk”，而Doweuk无论用福州话还是普通话还是英语都不知道要怎么念。
现在的问题是，手写体的s和w是否很容易相混？
K
Nov 29, 2009, 8:05:48 PM11/29/09
to Heritage Preservation and Planning in Fuzhou (Foochow), China
不容易。用键盘相对容易出这个错。
现在上网查"Doseuk Foochow"，什么结果都没有。如果Doweuk是Doseuk的误写，而网络上的资料又都错得一样的话，就得找找当初
把陶淑的资料搬上网络的人的参考资料是什么了。这样我们就可以看看到底是输入出错还是手写出错……还是根本没错。:P
Message has been deleted
K
Dec 1, 2009, 12:12:03 AM12/1/09
to Heritage Preservation and Planning in Fuzhou (Foochow), China
George，你对了诶。
The Chinese recorder and educational review, Volume 72的104页讲到陶淑了，是写作Do-
seuk.
The Chinese recorder and educational review, Volume 72的104页讲到陶淑了，是写作Do-
seuk.
On Nov 29, 10:45 pm, GnuDoyng <gnudo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 目前网络上能找到的有限的资料都是写作Doweuk Girls' School。我个人比较怀疑这个Doweuk是Doseuk的误写。因为“陶
> 淑”用福州话罗马字拼出来是“Dò̤-sé̤ṳk”，而Doweuk无论用福州话还是普通话还是英语都不知道要怎么念。
>
> 现在的问题是，手写体的s和w是否很容易相混？
George Ngu
Dec 1, 2009, 2:09:37 AM12/1/09
to heritage-preservation-and-pla...@googlegroups.com
Where did you find the source?
--
Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. — Hebrews 11:1
2009/12/1 K <k.ea...@gmail.com>
--
Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. — Hebrews 11:1
K
Dec 1, 2009, 3:47:38 AM12/1/09
to Heritage Preservation and Planning in Fuzhou (Foochow), China
Google books.
On Dec 1, 3:09 pm, George Ngu <gnudo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Where did you find the source?
>
> 2009/12/1 K <k.eare...@gmail.com>
George Ngu
Dec 1, 2009, 11:45:16 PM12/1/09
to heritage-preservation-and-pla...@googlegroups.com
Yeah I've found it here. Thanks.
Now, please download this book (For Christ in Fuh-Kien, published by C.M.S. in 1904), and turn to page 28. There you will find three photos between p. 28 and p. 29. The one on the bottom is undoubtedly the Shipu Church (施埔教堂). But can you recognize the other two? Is the one on the top the Do-seuk Girls' School we went to last Sunday? Perhaps not.
Another question that puzzles me is in which year was the Do-seuk Girls' School founded. This Chinese web page says the new site at Liāng-âu (岭后) was founded in 1903. Can anyone find any English sources supporting it?
Now, please download this book (For Christ in Fuh-Kien, published by C.M.S. in 1904), and turn to page 28. There you will find three photos between p. 28 and p. 29. The one on the bottom is undoubtedly the Shipu Church (施埔教堂). But can you recognize the other two? Is the one on the top the Do-seuk Girls' School we went to last Sunday? Perhaps not.
Another question that puzzles me is in which year was the Do-seuk Girls' School founded. This Chinese web page says the new site at Liāng-âu (岭后) was founded in 1903. Can anyone find any English sources supporting it?
2009/12/1 K <k.ea...@gmail.com>
K
Dec 7, 2009, 12:21:32 AM12/7/09
to Heritage Preservation and Planning in Fuzhou (Foochow), China
I've found another photo named Girls' Boarding School in《近代福州教会女学的发展研
究》, on Page 43. Was the "Girls' Boarding School" denotes a certain
school?
Anyway, I have no clue that these two photos are about the same
place.
An old photo of Do-seuk in 1903<http://ofcn.cn/ggq>shows a scene
similar to the one that George found<http://ofcn.cn/jIEp>(forgive my
doodling). Suppose George's is about Do-seuk, then it was shot decades
later than the confirmed one, and was taken from the Mt. Chang'an
facing toward north. From this angle, the island circled with blue
should be today's Jiangxin Park, the massing in the yellow circle
should be the three buildings of Hwa Nan College. I'm almost sure that
it's Do-seuk, however, there should be a building in the red circle,
where was it? Torn down??
> here<http://books.google.com/books?id=TP8CAAAAIAAJ&q=do-seuk&dq=do-seuk&ei...>.
> *For Christ in Fuh-Kien*, published by C.M.S. in 1904), and turn to page 28.
究》, on Page 43. Was the "Girls' Boarding School" denotes a certain
school?
Anyway, I have no clue that these two photos are about the same
place.
An old photo of Do-seuk in 1903<http://ofcn.cn/ggq>shows a scene
similar to the one that George found<http://ofcn.cn/jIEp>(forgive my
doodling). Suppose George's is about Do-seuk, then it was shot decades
later than the confirmed one, and was taken from the Mt. Chang'an
facing toward north. From this angle, the island circled with blue
should be today's Jiangxin Park, the massing in the yellow circle
should be the three buildings of Hwa Nan College. I'm almost sure that
it's Do-seuk, however, there should be a building in the red circle,
where was it? Torn down??
> here<http://books.google.com/books?id=TP8CAAAAIAAJ&q=do-seuk&dq=do-seuk&ei...>.
> Thanks.
>
> Now, please download this
> book<http://www.archive.org/download/cu31924023068590/cu31924023068590.pdf>(
>
> Now, please download this
> *For Christ in Fuh-Kien*, published by C.M.S. in 1904), and turn to page 28.
> There you will find three photos between p. 28 and p. 29. The one on the
> bottom is undoubtedly the Shipu Church (施埔教堂). But can you recognize the
> other two? Is the one on the top the Do-seuk Girls' School we went to last
> Sunday? Perhaps not.
>
> Another question that puzzles me is in which year was the Do-seuk Girls'
> School founded. This Chinese web
> page<http://www.fjsdfz.org/html/news/2004b/20041123fzwb.htm>says the
> bottom is undoubtedly the Shipu Church (施埔教堂). But can you recognize the
> other two? Is the one on the top the Do-seuk Girls' School we went to last
> Sunday? Perhaps not.
>
> Another question that puzzles me is in which year was the Do-seuk Girls'
> School founded. This Chinese web
> new site at Liāng-âu (岭后) was founded in 1903. Can anyone find any
> English sources supporting it?
>
> 2009/12/1 K <k.eare...@gmail.com>
> English sources supporting it?
>
George Ngu
Dec 7, 2009, 1:57:12 AM12/7/09
to heritage-preservation-and-pla...@googlegroups.com
Um-mm, it seems that we've got an anachronism here. Hwa Nan College was built in 1911, posterior to the year 1904 when the book For Christ in Fuh-Kien itself was published. Moreover, I think Do-seuk lies to the southeast of Hwa Nan, not to the southwest. So, the buildings in the yellow circle can't be Hwa Nan.
I regret to say that we still need a further and thorough research into this subject.
I regret to say that we still need a further and thorough research into this subject.
2009/12/7 K <k.ea...@gmail.com>
K
Dec 7, 2009, 3:27:17 AM12/7/09
to Heritage Preservation and Planning in Fuzhou (Foochow), China
Uh-oh, 1904... Orz.... I didn't notice that, sorry. No wonder you
questioned the construction time of Do-seuk.
So then it can't be Hwa Nan, right. But Do-seuk does lie to the
southwest of Hwa Nan<http://ofcn.cn/K>.
On Dec 7, 2:57 pm, George Ngu <gnudo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Um-mm, it seems that we've got an anachronism here. Hwa Nan College was
> built in 1911, posterior to the year 1904 when the book *For Christ in
> Fuh-Kien* itself was published. Moreover, I think Do-seuk lies to the
questioned the construction time of Do-seuk.
So then it can't be Hwa Nan, right. But Do-seuk does lie to the
southwest of Hwa Nan<http://ofcn.cn/K>.
On Dec 7, 2:57 pm, George Ngu <gnudo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Um-mm, it seems that we've got an anachronism here. Hwa Nan College was
> Fuh-Kien* itself was published. Moreover, I think Do-seuk lies to the
> southeast of Hwa Nan, not to the southwest. So, the buildings in the yellow
> circle can't be Hwa Nan.
>
> I regret to say that we still need a further and thorough research into this
> subject.
>
> 2009/12/7 K <k.eare...@gmail.com>
> circle can't be Hwa Nan.
>
> I regret to say that we still need a further and thorough research into this
> subject.
>
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages