3 ms·
I have a strong feeling that as long as writing systems are ignored, just about every language is "a wash". There's a limit to the difficulties a natural langu
by xiaoma 17y ago
I have a strong feeling that as long as writing systems are ignored, just about every language is "a wash". There's a limit to the difficulties a natural language will throw at someone. Since writing systems are constructed that may not be the case.
It's also possible that the very different experiences of Japanese and Chinese learners learning to read are due to the expectations the locals place on themselves. In Japan, once you know the Joyo Kanji, you can be pretty confident that you'll have furigana to help you when tougher words show up in newspapers, in video games or even on TV. In Taiwan, on the other hand, the only place you'll find significant help from zhuyin is in materials made for children. China has a bit more pinyin for the illiterate population, but it is still nothing compared to the furigana in Japanese media.
- pradocchia 17y agothat's a good point, two syllabries + kanji + furigana for non-joyo is a finite set, whereas chinese is a open set (virtually). some spoken languages are known to be simpler than others, as measured through their phonology, morphology and syntax. trade languages, creoles, pidgins, etc. mandarin is a trade language/pidgin of sorts, with resulting simplification of its phonology relative to other dialects. bahasa indonesian is another well-known example. fun factoid: while the number of Chinese characters throughout history number in the hundreds of thousands, the working set for any one writer at any time has been shown through textual analysis to be ~8000 for a well-educated person, with an upper bounds under 20K.