Is the Chinese writing system beautiful and elegant, or stupid and inefficient?
>>51959944
C H I N A
H
I
N
A
>>51959944
Who's asking?
>>51959944
It's only inefficient if you're a dumbass.
> beautiful
> elegant
> stupid
> inefficient
It is all of those things.
>>51959944
>Lu Xun
If the Chinese characters are not destroyed, China will perish.
>Mao Zedong
Chinese characters are a backward written form. They must be Latinized, only then could they serve the needs of saving the country
Chinese writing a shit
>>51959944
it just works
does anyone use bopomofo system at all? redpill please
>>51959944
All of them
>>51960034
it's basically like the japanese pronunciation system
>>51960019
>Mao Zedong
Wow what a GOAT thinker! Upvoted!
>>51959944
stupid and inefficient
it's slowing down chinese progress by slowing down literacy among children.
>>51960034
I think Taiwan still uses it. Not sure about HK
>>51959944
It's fucking stupid and slows down progress.
>>51960157
This
>>51959967
t. Zhang
>MUH 5000 YEARS OF HISTORY
>>51960246
Forgot pic
>>51960154
How convenient of you to ignore Lu Xun. Nigger.
>>51960270
The Qin seal script looks much more beautiful than modern Chinese characters imo
The Chinese script is just like English bastardization of the Latin alphabet into quasi-ideograms: sure, you might want to keep it for the sake of "MUH ETYMOLOGY!", but if you're trying to track history in the words instead of with the words, you're doing it wrong.
Horribly obtuse.
Learned Mandarin, Korean, and Japanese.
Writing in Chink Moonrunes gave me the most trouble.
None phonetic writing system should all die.
>>51960375
>Non-phonemic writing systems should all die.
Why? Just because they're harder?
Might as well kill half of the English phonemes following the same premise... as well the spelling. [Fuck English spelling rules.]
Both.
Wish I knew it but wouldn't bother to learn it.
>>51960370
You can track history with the words of another culture, but you might lose some notions and details carried by the history in the words of the primary culture. The choice must be adapted to the needs.
>>51960450
>Why? Just because they're harder?
They're inefficient and delay learning real subjects.
>>51960450
Fuck's sake, I'm a chink and I think they're stupid.
Sure, Chinese characters are divided into parts that let you guess the pronunciations and stuff, but it's usually different from what you think. Characters are fucking overrated and should die tbqh
>>51960270
doesnt look like a tiger anymore
Its beautiful sure, but it likely contributed much to the jewropeans fucking the chinks over.
Think about it, they had the technology to print stuff on large scale before the kike ass europeans but due to their writing system it couldn't work.
>>51960450
>>51960375
Still, they look beautiful. And I actually enjoy learning them, so it's not really a chore for me.
It's both: pretty, but too complex for plebs. Thus, simplified characters.
>>51960494
You can still track history inside the culture with metalanguage instead of etymological spelling. When it's needed.
Etymology is something for dictionaries, not for the spelling.
>>51960527
I'm not even defending them, just showing the argument is inconsistent - the very same reasons to kick'em out would be applied to English... and yet, stupid fucks keep parroting "duh, English iz veri eesy".
It's elegant and beautiful but not stupid and inefficient
>>51959944
the most important point of chinese writing system is all of stupid foreigner can't learn that forever,
even though they spend whole lifetime for leaning chinese or japanese.
>>51959944
I think so it's a beautiful and elegant system for writing.
but, talking system based on writing,It's bit a inefficient.
>>51960307
>Lu Xun
>Head of the League of Left-Wing Writers
You're joking, right? These are the same people who would've supported the Cultural Revolution you fucking roach.
Is it possible to make a useable phonetic script for universal Mandarin and/or Japanese use?
Or in other words, why isn't pinyin/bopomofo or hiragana/katakana just used for reading and writing their respective languages?
Of course there would be homonyms if they were used, but what script doesn't have those?
>>51963439
You dumb dumb dumb dumb DUMB fucking nigger. Lu Xun is the most influential Chinese writer of the 20th century you dumb dumb dumb dumb duuuuuuumb fucking nigger. Nigger.
>>51963758
>Is it possible to make a useable phonetic script for universal Mandarin and/or Japanese use?
For Japanese it's possible, since they have a fixed set of syllables.
Mandarin, on the other hand, has a completely different linguistic structure. Maybe if you were to write each phrase (2 to 4 characters) as a word with spaces in between, it might work?
>>51963758
The problem is the extremely high number of homonyms, especially since Chinese changed a lot of its pronounciation thanks to the characters. Also the use of phonetic scripts doesn't bring any advantages.
Look up the pronounciation of ancient Chinese, it looks like fucking Turkic Siberian languages. The Chinese characters killed it tho
>>51963942
>The problem is the extremely high number of homonyms
Many characters are homonyms of one another, but usually words are made of two or more characters. In that case, homonyms might be easily differentiated based on context.
>>51960496
I bet your an English major. or a NEET.
>>51960034
I use it to learn Chinese. When I use pinyin I pronounce too American. Zhuyin is a perfect system. I honestly think China should mix Zhuyin with traditional characters. World with meanings should use hanzí while for completely phonetic words such as foreign words, Zhuyin should be used.
>>51963942
If there were so many homonyms as to make the written language unintelligible, then wouldn't the spoken language also be unintelligible?
The advantages would be increased literacy rates, significantly less time needed to learn to read/write, easier computer input, etc.
>>51959944
>stupid and inefficient
Literally made to be stupidly complicated so the peasants couldn't use it
>>51960019
Lu Xun is seriously overrated, father of modern vernacular my foot.
>>51959944
all of them plus overwhelming.
>>51964364
Not unintelligible, but more difficult and time consuming to understand in context. The written and spoken language are different just as the ways we speak and write English are different. Homonyms in Chinese are more likely to cause ambiguity in written language rather than spoken language just due to the nature of it. Whether simplification has increase literacy rates is still an ongoing debate. It's certainly possible to maintain high literacy rates even using traditional characters (Taiwan and HK, for example). As someone who has knowledge of both but uses only traditional, it really isn't a massive time difference -- it's barely noticeable.
>>51959944
It got retarded around the time every word had to be two syllables. It's still better than any kind of Latin orthography though.
>>51964512
Your mom is overrated.
>>51964702
>Homonyms in Chinese are more likely to cause ambiguity in written language
Just use heterographs then. It would require some learning and memorisation, but still years less than learning hanzi.
>As someone who has knowledge of both but uses only traditional, it really isn't a massive time difference -- it's barely noticeable.
Fair enough, but I was talking about the difference between a phonetic script (like a modified pinyin or zhuyin) vs. hanzi, rather than standard hanzi vs. traditional hanzi.
All of the above.
