A very instructive reply. Thank you.
(I hope this is somewhat correct.) 謝謝你 On 1/31/2010 11:58, Roger Hui wrote: >> He said that there had been a breakthrough in written >> Chinese that had happened during the leadership of Chairman Mao, >> where the symbols used were greatly simplified to allow a more universal >> access to the written language. > > I disagree. The "breakthrough in written Chinese" > is the equivalent of a new font in English, like the > change in printed German from using a Gothic > font to the Roman font. > > There was another attempt at a breakthrough > which as far as I know has failed, namely to > alphabetize Chinese words. For example: > > traditional Chinese: 黑龍江 > simplified Chinese: 黑龙江 > alphabeticized Chinese: Heilongjiang (Hei-long-jiang) > > This is not "instead of", but "totally replace". > > Only a totalitarian regime with Mao's degree > of control would have even contemplated > the simplified Chinese system, let alone > the alphabeticized system. In the case of > the latter even that degree of control was > not enough. I think they'd have to kill > off anyone raised on the old symbols, > and inculcate the alphabeticized system > from birth along with giving mother's milk. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David Mitchell<[email protected]> > Date: Sunday, January 31, 2010 2:36 > Subject: Re: [Jchat] the things i dislike most about J > To: Chat forum<[email protected]> > >> I find the comparison of J symbology and written Chinese >> interesting. I >> struggled for years learning Spanish, Latin and German in my >> early school years >> and I gained little useful fluency. In my last year of >> college, I studied >> Mandarin Chinese (since mostly forgotten). >> >> I found spoken Mandarin a surprisingly easy language to learn >> (at a 6 year old >> level.) I found written Chinese much more challenging. >> >> Part of the course discussed the history of the language. >> Our teacher noted >> that classical written Chinese was a formal language of the >> elite, never >> intended for general use. He said that there had been a >> breakthrough in written >> Chinese that had happened during the leadership of Chairman Mao, >> where the >> symbols used were greatly simplified to allow a more universal >> access to the >> written language. >> >> On 1/29/2010 18:27, Dan Bron wrote: >>> DIETER ENSSLEN wrote: >>>> J is challenging in itself. >>> >>> I agree that J is challenging to learn. >>> >>>> All meaningless symbols. >>> >>> But I disagree here. The phrase "meaningless symbol" is >> an oxymoron: if a symbol doesn't mean anything, it's not a >> symbol. And, >>> of course, all J's symbols mean something ([1]). >>> >>> The analogy we usually give is to Chinese. When I look >> at a Chinese newspaper or sign, I certainly can divine no >> meaning. So yes, >>> to me, the symbols are meaningless. But over a billion >> people on this planet live their whole lives using only Chinese, so >>> obviously it means something to them. And maybe that >> "something" is worth the difficult challenge to learn Chinese >> (which is so >>> very different from English). Or maybe not. >> Depends on what your goals are. >>> >>> -Dan >>> >>> [1] http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/vocabul.htm > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
