> That's no valid comparison. > > The question is whether I, who has almost no > knowledge of Kanji and > Chinese, would be able to recognize the similarities > easier than it is > possible for you to decipher fraktur.
I read three of the above: Fraktur, Chinese and a little bit of Japanese. Although Chinese hanzi and Japanese Kanji are identical in shape, stroke patterns and meaning, and a printer would be able to use almost identical individual characters to print both languages in their modern versions, a Chinese person would have problems picking up a reading knowledge of modern Japanese without a significant effort. The reverse, however is not true. This has historical reasons, which go too far to explain. Fraktur is, in essence, just another set of glyphs which can be used to write the German language. No such equivalence is easily achieved between Chinese and Japanese, unless you want to read Buddhist scriptures...but that's a different, although fascinating story. -frank > pick up. In the > same way a C or J or K speaker will perhaps pick up > some knowledge which > makes it easy/easier to read the [JK], [CK], or [CJ] > glyphs > respectively. I cannot say whether this is true or > not. > > -- > --------------. ,-. > 444 Castro Street > Ulrich Drepper \ ,-----------------' \ Mountain > View, CA 94041 USA > Red Hat `--' drepper at redhat.com > `--------------------------- > > -- > Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels > Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/ > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
