Thinking back to that lecture, I recall that it was about the notable milestones in the history of the language. Our professor may well have been discussing the scope of all the changes that occurred in the 20th century, rather than assessing the effect any specific change.
Based on the comments here, I suspect that I have misremembered his emphasis concerning the impact of the simplification of the symbols. I now think it is likely that he was speaking about what he saw as the intent of simplification, rather than its actual impact. On 1/31/2010 18:51, Roger Hui wrote: > I wonder if your professor from Taiwan was referring > to the "New Culture Movement" > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Culture_Movement > that took place in China in the 1910s and 1920s. > One result was the institution of a vernacular literature, > where a Mandarin speaker would write the way > he/she spoke. THAT was a breakthrough. > > What happened before was akin to speaking in English > as you do today but writing as Shakespeare did. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David Mitchell<[email protected]> > Date: Sunday, January 31, 2010 14:52 > Subject: Re: [Jchat] the things i dislike most about J > To: Chat forum<[email protected]> > >> 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
