Catalan to Literary Chinese: the same character can express a different grammatical role
A possessive-looking element can instead stand for an object
Catalan commonly distinguishes a possessive expression from a personal object pronoun through different constructions. Literary Chinese can use the same character in several grammatical roles. The target must be interpreted within the clause rather than by assigning each character one permanent Catalan equivalent.
The Classical Chinese lesson uses 吏捕得之 in an account of an arrest, with 之 referring to the person apprehended. The same lesson distinguishes a possession-linking use of 之 and a verbal use associated with going. Its presence does not independently identify an owner.
For a Catalan source describing someone taking or apprehending another person, preserve the affected participant. Reading every 之 as de would invent a nominal relationship and obscure the action. Conversely, selecting an object-pronoun interpretation inside an ownership phrase could remove the link between owner and item.
The IEC explains Catalan possession through both possessives and equivalent de phrases. A source de construction therefore needs its relationship recovered before any Literary Chinese connector is chosen. The source preposition’s visible form cannot identify the target character’s role on its own.
An action phrase can identify the person performing it
The lesson illustrates 耕者 for a person who ploughs and 鬻金者 for a seller of gold. The action expression is used to form a noun phrase. The presence of an action-related character does not necessarily assert a separate finite event.
A Catalan source referring to somebody who sells an item differs from a sentence reporting that the person sold it on one occasion. Literary Chinese nominalisation can identify the participant through the activity without independently locating a sale in the past.
This distinction matters when the same source paragraph introduces a person by occupation and then reports what happened to them. If the target occupational description is read as another event, the narrative can acquire an unintended action or chronology.
The lesson also cautions that nominalised expressions need not always stand for a human. A source describing the entity that performs an action should retain that entity’s identity; a target nominaliser is not a universal instruction to add a person where Catalan refers to an animal or another referent.
A noun’s written form can also support a verbal reading
The lesson contrasts 衣 as clothes with a verbal use meaning to put clothes on. The character’s role follows the construction, not just its vocabulary-list gloss. A target that appears to mention clothing may actually describe dressing.
Catalan can distinguish an item noun from the action involving it through separate lexical forms and inflection. That source distinction must survive even if Literary Chinese uses a related written form for both. Translating the right topic is insufficient if a statement about wearing becomes a list of possessions.
Personal reference also needs the full context. The lesson describes 其 in possessive and demonstrative uses, so a nearby target form should not be taken as evidence of a particular owner’s sex or number without support.
This page concerns literary constructions, not ordinary modern Mandarin phrasing. For Catalan-to-Literary-Chinese translation, identify whether each source expression names a participant, links an owner, describes an action or forms a noun from an activity. The target can express these compactly, but its character roles cannot be recovered through a fixed word-for-word glossary.
Language references