著者

中村 邦光 板倉 聖宣

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.23, no.151, pp.140, 1984 (Released:2021-04-07)

著者

板倉 聖宣

出版者

一般社団法人 日本物理学会

雑誌

年会予稿集 28.4 (ISSN:24331155)

巻号頁・発行日

pp.92, 1973-04-03 (Released:2018-03-26)

著者

菅原 国香 板倉 聖宣

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.29, no.175, pp.136-149, 1990 (Released:2021-08-30)

---

This paper deals with the historical process of the standardization of the Japanese element names by the Tokyo Kagakukai (the Chemical Society of Tokyo) in the 1880-1900. A committee for establishment of the Japanese equivalents of Western chemical terms was formed in 1881 under Tokyo Kagakukai (the predecessor of the present Chemical Society of Japan). Up to 1888 the committee members were re-elected several times. The first proposal of the Japanese nomenclature of elements by the committee was published in the journal of Tokyo Kagakukai-shi in 1886. The second proposal was published in the book of Kagaku Yakugoshu in 1891. The third proposal was published in the book of Kagaku Goi in 1900 under the newly organized committee. Placing all of the element names contained in the 1886 and 1891 proposals into four categories, we found ;(1)katakana transliterations from English; (2) katakana transliterations from German ; (3) katakana transliterations of words common to English, German and Latin ; and (4) translations of Chinese characters. If we take notice of the katakana element names, we see that the number of transliterations from English is nearly to that from German. This is the result of the circumstances involving Japanese chemists at that time, when there were both an Anglo-American school and a German school, so that both English and German element names were considered in the course of the determination of element names. On the other hand, looking at the katakana element names in the 1900 proposal, German is prior to English in the group of words where the English element names differ from the German element names. In the case of katakana transliterated element names, the use of German element names was adopted as a standard. The field of science in Japan became under the strong German influence at that time.

著者

菅原 国香 板倉 聖宣

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.29, no.173, pp.13-20, 1990 (Released:2021-09-01)

---

This paper deals with the historical process of various Japanese nomenclature of elements in the 1820s-1880s in Japan. The first introduction of Lavoisier's terms of elements in Japan was seen in the Ensei Iho Meibutsuko(1822-25) which Genshin Udagawa and Yoan Udagawa compiled from Dutch pharmaceutical books. In this book the Dutch term hoofdstof or grondstof is translated into Japanese as the term genso(元素).In the book, Yoan Udagawa coined the terms sanso(酸素)suiso(水素)and tanso(炭素)for Dutch terms zuurstof, waterstof and koolstof respectively. Then, he coined the terms chisso(窒素)and enso(塩素). The present Japanese nomenclature of elements of the suffix-so(素)is based on Yoan's nomenclature. Lavoisier's new concept of elements was described in more detail in the Ensei Iho Meibutsuko-Hoi (published in 1835). Morisaburo Ichikawa proposed in the Rika Nikki (published in 1872) that the Japanese terms of all non-metals should have a common ending in-so(素).His idea of the nomencelature of all non-metals was not generally accepted, although it was favoured by a few chemists. In the late Edo era (1820s-1860s) the names of many other elements appeared as the transliterations of Chinese characters for the terms used in Western Europe. The use of the transliteration of the Japanese alphabet kana for the elements appeared in the early 1870s. The Chinese character-transliteration became generally less prevalent. The use of the new transliteration nomenclature of the kana was generally accepted by the early 1880s in the field of chemistry. The Chineses single word nomenclature of elements adopted in the Hua Xue Chu Jie ("化学初階 " published in 1870) and Hua Xue Jian Yuan ("化学鑑原 " published in 1872) was introduced into Japan in the early 1870s. But it has had little influence on the Japanese nomenclature of elements

著者

菅原 国香 中村 邦光 板倉 聖宣

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.25, no.157, pp.34-45, 1986 (Released:2021-04-05)

著者

板倉聖宣著

出版者

朝日新聞社

巻号頁・発行日

1993

著者

板倉聖宣 中村邦光 板倉玲子著

出版者

仮説社

巻号頁・発行日

1990

著者

板倉聖宣著

出版者

平凡社

巻号頁・発行日

2002

著者

リチャード・カーライル著 板倉聖宣 深田利夫訳

出版者

仮説社

巻号頁・発行日

1984

著者

石山 洋 佐藤 達策 片桐 一男 板倉 聖宣 中山 茂 吉田 忠 酒井 シヅ 菅原 国香 中村 邦光

出版者

東海大学

雑誌

総合研究(A)

巻号頁・発行日

1991

---

南蛮文化導入期から顧みると,直接日本へ渡来した文物や学術よりも訪中したイエズス会士の著書を輸入して学んだ西洋科学技術の影響のほうが日本の文明に与えたものは大きかった。中国語訳された書物は、日本の最高に知的レベルの高い人びとが学びやすかったからである。江戸時代の前期はその消化に費やされた。とくにマテオ・リッチの業績が大きな影響を与えている。第2期として,蘭学興隆期がくる。ここでは,オランダ語の原書を日本人が直接読み,訳した。その訳語には,中国語訳の先例を探し,できるだけ,それを採用する努力がなされた。新訳語を造ることには消極的であった。しかし導入された知識は科学革命以後のもので,イエスズ会士がもたらしたルネサンス時代の訳語だけでは対應できず,止むを得ず新訳語の造語もおこなわれた。その過程を追ってみると,始めは音訳で入れ,次ぎに義訳へ訳し直す傾向が見られる。また直訳を志向しつつ,既存の義訳の蓄積も活用する傾向も指摘されている。別に留意されるべきことは,アヘン戦争後,中国へ進出した英米のミッションの新教宣教師による中国文の西洋知識普及書の存在である。これを利用した清朝知識の著作も含め,わが国へ紹介され,19世紀の西欧科学技術導入に影響を与えた。明治に入って,外来学術用語は多方面に滲透し,乱立した。情報流通の必要上,とくに教育上,訳語の標準化が求められてきた。政府直接ではないが,学協会を通じて,権威側で進められた。1880年代から開始された数学部門の例もあるが,訳語の統一が活発化するのは20世紀以後である。そこには先例となる中国語訳への依存は見られず、むしろ中国人の日本留学者などの手で,日本語訳が中国語訳の中に定着したりしている。各種の事例で例証することができた。

著者

板倉 聖宣 菊池 俊彦

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.31, no.181, pp.51-54, 1992 (Released:2021-04-07)

著者

中村 邦光 板倉 聖宣

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.30, no.178, pp.107-119, 1991 (Released:2021-08-27)

---

According to the present investigation, it is found that Japanese "physical books" which discussed the essence of heat hnd disaffirmed the "material theory of heat" since 1872 (Meiji 5) and those books supporting the "kinetic theory of heat" had become predominant and been diffused rapidly. Authors did not think so earlier. They expected that there were fairly a lot confusions between traditional thoughts in Japan or the "material theory of heat" and the "kinetic theory of heat". It is shown, however, as a result of the investigation that the shift from the "material theory of heat" to the "kinetic theory of heat" had proceeded smoothly and rapidly. In this context, authors cannot help being struck with wonder by the fact that the acceptance of European science in early years of Meij in Japan was done quite neatly as a "thorough imitaion".

著者

板倉 聖宣 永田 英治

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.29, no.176, pp.193-200, 1990 (Released:2021-08-30)

著者

菅原 国香 板倉 聖宣

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.28, no.172, pp.193-202, 1989 (Released:2021-09-01)

著者

中村 邦光 板倉 聖宣

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.24, no.155, pp.129-140, 1985 (Released:2021-04-07)

著者

中村 邦光 板倉 聖宣

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.22, no.148, pp.193-205, 1983 (Released:2021-09-24)

---

In our last paper titled "The Value of Pi in the Edo Period" (Kagakusi Kenkyu, No.143, 1982. pp. 142-152), we did an exhaustive review of the books of native mathematics of Japan published in the Bunsei Era (1818-1830), and showed that these books could be divided into two types according to the two pi values (i.e. 3.14... and 3.16...) they respectively adopted. Specifically, the relatively advanced books of mathematics adopted 3.14..., while the value of 3.16... was generally used in popular booklets of the Jinkoki type and the like. It had been more than 150 years since Muramatsu correctly demonstrated the pi value of 3.14... in his Sanso published in 1663, but a considerable number of books still adopted 3.16... as the pi value in our period of study. Then, the next question would be how the correct value of 3.14... demonstrated by Muramatsu was handed down to the mathematicians of the Edo Period and disseminated. We carried our study a step further in this direction and tried to clarify the adoption process. As a result of our extensive research and analysis, we believe that we have successfully traced the adoption process of 3.14... instead of 3.16... as the value of pi. Among the various issues treated in this paper, the following points would be of particular interest. 1. After Muramatsu's Sanso (published in March,1663), the first book with 3.14... as the value of pi was Nozawa's Dȏkaishȏ (dated August, 1663 in the preface and published in November,1664), the interval between these books is less than two years. 2. Among the books of mathematics published during the ten years between 1663 and 1673, every one of those with 3.14... as the value of pi made an intentionnal alteration to the value adopted by its predecessor, such as 3.14 (→3.1404)→3.142→3.1416. This phenomenon had some connection with thebmovement to take over the traditional unsolved problems and it continued up to Miyake's Guȏ-sampȏ (published in 1699), in which the value of pi was further changed from 3.1416 to 3.141593. There were even a few cases of alteration from 3.142 to 3.14. 3. With the publication of Zȏho-sampȏ-ketsugishȏ (1684), Zohȏ-shimpenjinkȏki (1686) and Kaizanki-Kȏmoku (1687), the value of pi in the three most widely-read books of native mathematics in the Edo Era, Jinkȏki, Kaizanki and Sampȏ-Ketsugishȏ was altered from 3.16... to 3.14... 4. Upon examining all the books of native mathematics published between 1681 and 1690, we found that there was only one book (i.e. Kambara's Sankanki published in 1685) that had not altered the value of pi to 3.14.... and still used 3.16... All the remaining ten books adopted the value of 3.14... Once having attained this stage, how did it come about that the popular books of native mathematics fell back to the value of pi of 3.16... without any apparent hesitation ? A report, on this issue is now in preparation.

著者

板倉 聖宣 中村 邦光

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.21, no.143, pp.142-152, 1982 (Released:2021-04-08)

著者

板倉聖宣著

出版者

岩波書店

巻号頁・発行日

2011

著者

板倉聖宣著

出版者

岩波書店

巻号頁・発行日

1972

著者

板倉聖宣著

出版者

仮説社

巻号頁・発行日

1994