Comments on: The Chinese Language: Technology As Friend Of Tradition http://www.8asians.com/2009/03/13/technology-as-friend-of-tradition/ A blog for Asian Americans Mon, 13 Feb 2012 01:41:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Nathan Cain http://www.8asians.com/2009/03/13/technology-as-friend-of-tradition/comment-page-1/#comment-129684 Nathan Cain Mon, 22 Feb 2010 07:27:26 +0000 http://www.8asians.com/?p=2794#comment-129684 Why would you get angry at someone for writing you a note the way they learned in school? You learned it one way, they learned another. Why would you get angry at someone for writing you a note the way they learned in school? You learned it one way, they learned another.

]]> By: Mark http://www.8asians.com/2009/03/13/technology-as-friend-of-tradition/comment-page-1/#comment-123788 Mark Wed, 27 May 2009 09:45:57 +0000 http://www.8asians.com/?p=2794#comment-123788 I too am not happy with simplified chinese aswell even though I am not Chinese and am just starting to learn characters. I really think traditional charcters are more beautiful than simplified characters and they have a whole history behind them, why ruin them by simplifying? A the same time they are easier to learn as they do not lose meaning as the simplified charaters do. Also, I think it's harder for people to learn both simplified and traditional characters rather than 1 system, especially for foreigners so I don't see how this increases literacy, but that's my opinion. I too am not happy with simplified chinese aswell even though I am not Chinese and am just starting to learn characters. I really think traditional charcters are more beautiful than simplified characters and they have a whole history behind them, why ruin them by simplifying? A the same time they are easier to learn as they do not lose meaning as the simplified charaters do. Also, I think it’s harder for people to learn both simplified and traditional characters rather than 1 system, especially for foreigners so I don’t see how this increases literacy, but that’s my opinion.

]]> By: Mark http://www.8asians.com/2009/03/13/technology-as-friend-of-tradition/comment-page-1/#comment-140459 Mark Wed, 27 May 2009 09:45:00 +0000 http://www.8asians.com/?p=2794#comment-140459 I too am not happy with simplified chinese aswell even though I am not Chinese and am just starting to learn characters. I really think traditional charcters are more beautiful than simplified characters and they have a whole history behind them, why ruin them by simplifying? A the same time they are easier to learn as they do not lose meaning as the simplified charaters do. Also, I think it's harder for people to learn both simplified and traditional characters rather than 1 system, especially for foreigners so I don't see how this increases literacy, but that's my opinion. I too am not happy with simplified chinese aswell even though I am not Chinese and am just starting to learn characters. I really think traditional charcters are more beautiful than simplified characters and they have a whole history behind them, why ruin them by simplifying? A the same time they are easier to learn as they do not lose meaning as the simplified charaters do. Also, I think it’s harder for people to learn both simplified and traditional characters rather than 1 system, especially for foreigners so I don’t see how this increases literacy, but that’s my opinion.

]]> By: Tim http://www.8asians.com/2009/03/13/technology-as-friend-of-tradition/comment-page-1/#comment-116033 Tim Sun, 15 Mar 2009 15:24:19 +0000 http://www.8asians.com/?p=2794#comment-116033 @Kim: It isn't that traditional is harder to learn to read, it's that traditional is harder to learn to write. In fact it was argued at the CPPCC meeting that in fact it's easier to learn to read traditional, because you have context behind what the character means if you don't know what word the character represents. That's because complex Chinese characters typically are made up of other Chinese characters (for example the character for forest, is the character for wood used three times in one character), and when you simplify them, you lose the original context of how the character itself was created (for example, the character for country contains the character for people, land, etc and the simplification takes all that away). If you have the context and you don't know the word you can guess at the meaning. On the other hand, writing characters with 20 or more brush strokes is extremely difficult and time-consuming to learn, and with technology, it's not as big of a deal to write them. There are of course opinions all over the spectrum on the topic of moving back to traditional, and the debate is sure not to end anytime soon. You can find a run down on a lot of this at the <a href="http://www.danwei.org/scholarship_and_education/simplified_traditional_charact.php" rel="nofollow">danwei.org</a> site, including a link to an interestingly titled opinion piece called <a href="http://www.caogen.com/blog/Infor_detail.aspx?ID=105&articleId=13131" rel="nofollow">We shouldn't have simplfied back then, and we shouldn't return to traditional now.</a> @Kim: It isn’t that traditional is harder to learn to read, it’s that traditional is harder to learn to write. In fact it was argued at the CPPCC meeting that in fact it’s easier to learn to read traditional, because you have context behind what the character means if you don’t know what word the character represents. That’s because complex Chinese characters typically are made up of other Chinese characters (for example the character for forest, is the character for wood used three times in one character), and when you simplify them, you lose the original context of how the character itself was created (for example, the character for country contains the character for people, land, etc and the simplification takes all that away). If you have the context and you don’t know the word you can guess at the meaning. On the other hand, writing characters with 20 or more brush strokes is extremely difficult and time-consuming to learn, and with technology, it’s not as big of a deal to write them.

There are of course opinions all over the spectrum on the topic of moving back to traditional, and the debate is sure not to end anytime soon. You can find a run down on a lot of this at the danwei.org site, including a link to an interestingly titled opinion piece called We shouldn’t have simplfied back then, and we shouldn’t return to traditional now.

]]> By: Tim http://www.8asians.com/2009/03/13/technology-as-friend-of-tradition/comment-page-1/#comment-140458 Tim Sun, 15 Mar 2009 15:24:00 +0000 http://www.8asians.com/?p=2794#comment-140458 @Kim: It isn't that traditional is harder to learn to read, it's that traditional is harder to learn to write. In fact it was argued at the CPPCC meeting that in fact it's easier to learn to read traditional, because you have context behind what the character means if you don't know what word the character represents. That's because complex Chinese characters typically are made up of other Chinese characters (for example the character for forest, is the character for wood used three times in one character), and when you simplify them, you lose the original context of how the character itself was created (for example, the character for country contains the character for people, land, etc and the simplification takes all that away). If you have the context and you don't know the word you can guess at the meaning. On the other hand, writing characters with 20 or more brush strokes is extremely difficult and time-consuming to learn, and with technology, it's not as big of a deal to write them. There are of course opinions all over the spectrum on the topic of moving back to traditional, and the debate is sure not to end anytime soon. You can find a run down on a lot of this at the <a href="http://www.danwei.org/scholarship_and_education/simplified_traditional_charact.php" rel="nofollow">danwei.org</a> site, including a link to an interestingly titled opinion piece called <a href="http://www.caogen.com/blog/Infor_detail.aspx?ID=105&articleId=13131" rel="nofollow">We shouldn't have simplfied back then, and we shouldn't return to traditional now.</a> @Kim: It isn’t that traditional is harder to learn to read, it’s that traditional is harder to learn to write. In fact it was argued at the CPPCC meeting that in fact it’s easier to learn to read traditional, because you have context behind what the character means if you don’t know what word the character represents. That’s because complex Chinese characters typically are made up of other Chinese characters (for example the character for forest, is the character for wood used three times in one character), and when you simplify them, you lose the original context of how the character itself was created (for example, the character for country contains the character for people, land, etc and the simplification takes all that away). If you have the context and you don’t know the word you can guess at the meaning. On the other hand, writing characters with 20 or more brush strokes is extremely difficult and time-consuming to learn, and with technology, it’s not as big of a deal to write them.

There are of course opinions all over the spectrum on the topic of moving back to traditional, and the debate is sure not to end anytime soon. You can find a run down on a lot of this at the danwei.org site, including a link to an interestingly titled opinion piece called We shouldn’t have simplfied back then, and we shouldn’t return to traditional now.

]]> By: Kim http://www.8asians.com/2009/03/13/technology-as-friend-of-tradition/comment-page-1/#comment-115991 Kim Sun, 15 Mar 2009 05:10:29 +0000 http://www.8asians.com/?p=2794#comment-115991 ABSOLUTELY NOT! China should never return to Traditional. Its substantially more difficult to learn, and In any case, because all Chinese must be learned by rote--- (unlike phonetic romance languages)---its a huge time, and study commitment for any student. Simplified offers most of the same images, and brush-stroke stories that Traditional does, but its..... simplified. Brush strokes take time and work, and as characters are reduced in size, they are harder to read--particularly for the elderly. Fewer brush stroke = clearer, and faster communication. And in any case, The Chinese written language is under assault by English, across China, as the international language,and one that is easier to learn. I appreciate the stories presented here, but my Father (in-law)---die hard Communist that he is, and former, very broad minded college president ----who, btw, is fluent in more than 4000 Traditional characters---believes to this day, that the literacy Simplified gave to the people of China under Mao, was one of the great, and lasting gifts of Communism. ABSOLUTELY NOT! China should never return to Traditional. Its substantially more difficult to learn, and In any case, because all Chinese must be learned by rote— (unlike phonetic romance languages)—its a huge time, and study commitment for any student.

Simplified offers most of the same images, and brush-stroke stories that Traditional does, but its….. simplified. Brush strokes take time and work, and as characters are reduced in size, they are harder to read–particularly for the elderly. Fewer brush stroke = clearer, and faster communication. And in any case, The Chinese written language is under assault by English, across China, as the international language,and one that is easier to learn.

I appreciate the stories presented here, but my Father (in-law)—die hard Communist that he is, and former, very broad minded college president —-who, btw, is fluent in more than 4000 Traditional characters—believes to this day, that the literacy Simplified gave to the people of China under Mao, was one of the great, and lasting gifts of Communism.

]]> By: Kim http://www.8asians.com/2009/03/13/technology-as-friend-of-tradition/comment-page-1/#comment-140457 Kim Sun, 15 Mar 2009 05:10:00 +0000 http://www.8asians.com/?p=2794#comment-140457 ABSOLUTELY NOT! China should never return to Traditional. Its substantially more difficult to learn, and In any case, because all Chinese must be learned by rote--- (unlike phonetic romance languages)---its a huge time, and study commitment for any student. Simplified offers most of the same images, and brush-stroke stories that Traditional does, but its..... simplified. Brush strokes take time and work, and as characters are reduced in size, they are harder to read--particularly for the elderly. Fewer brush stroke = clearer, and faster communication. And in any case, The Chinese written language is under assault by English, across China, as the international language,and one that is easier to learn. I appreciate the stories presented here, but my Father (in-law)---die hard Communist that he is, and former, very broad minded college president ----who, btw, is fluent in more than 4000 Traditional characters---believes to this day, that the literacy Simplified gave to the people of China under Mao, was one of the great, and lasting gifts of Communism. ABSOLUTELY NOT! China should never return to Traditional. Its substantially more difficult to learn, and In any case, because all Chinese must be learned by rote— (unlike phonetic romance languages)—its a huge time, and study commitment for any student.

Simplified offers most of the same images, and brush-stroke stories that Traditional does, but its….. simplified. Brush strokes take time and work, and as characters are reduced in size, they are harder to read–particularly for the elderly. Fewer brush stroke = clearer, and faster communication. And in any case, The Chinese written language is under assault by English, across China, as the international language,and one that is easier to learn.

I appreciate the stories presented here, but my Father (in-law)—die hard Communist that he is, and former, very broad minded college president —-who, btw, is fluent in more than 4000 Traditional characters—believes to this day, that the literacy Simplified gave to the people of China under Mao, was one of the great, and lasting gifts of Communism.

]]> By: Erik http://www.8asians.com/2009/03/13/technology-as-friend-of-tradition/comment-page-1/#comment-115879 Erik Sat, 14 Mar 2009 08:24:06 +0000 http://www.8asians.com/?p=2794#comment-115879 I'm sort of from a different background, and I've just started to learn to read and write this year, and though I was introduced first to simplified, and despite it being like 10x harder for an ABC like me, I do wish that Traditional were the standard again. I’m sort of from a different background, and I’ve just started to learn to read and write this year, and though I was introduced first to simplified, and despite it being like 10x harder for an ABC like me, I do wish that Traditional were the standard again.

]]>