4 ms·

Yes, the 'how' is similar between the two, but 'why' and 'to what extent' are not. Like I said, in China primary motivator was improving literacy rate. The nu

Yes, the 'how' is similar between the two, but 'why' and 'to what extent' are not. Like I said, in China primary motivator was improving literacy rate. The number of simplified characters (3500 out of 7000) closely matches the number of characters necessary for almost-full literacy (most common 3500 characters cover about 99.5% of everyday written language).

gsklee 9y ago
> I guess the point of codifying existing handwritten forms is probably true for the Chinese simplified characters also? > Many of the simplifications were made by taking a cursive form and declaring it the "official" version. Wrong. While many simplified characters were modeled after their cursive forms, it's not simply taking these cursive forms and declared them "official". Per se, the cursive form is cursive, and the simplified characters are in regular script. The problem is, when you forcibly bend the curves into straight lines, many lost their artistic aspects and became ugly abominations. > Like I said, in China primary motivator was improving literacy rate. The funny thing: Taiwan uses the traditional set and has a higher literacy rate than China. People used to blame the traditional characters as too complicated and a hinderance to literacy. Apparently what really matters at all is the education itself.
- echaozh 9y ago
  The point is, simplified characters are easier to write, say, when they're leaving a note on the table before having to leave in seconds. Why are the cursive forms invented in the first place? Are they only artistic? They got their use in real life as well. People are lazy and always in a hurry.
  - gsklee 9y ago
    Are you comfortable with the thought of being forced to abandon the traditional Latin script and picking up a new script based on half-straightened squiggly handwriting form of alphabets, in everyday reading, on papers and screens? If yes, then I think you indeed made a point.

gsklee 9y ago

> I guess the point of codifying existing handwritten forms is probably true for the Chinese simplified characters also? > Many of the simplifications were made by taking a cursive form and declaring it the "official" version. Wrong. While many simplified characters were modeled after their cursive forms, it's not simply taking these cursive forms and declared them "official". Per se, the cursive form is cursive, and the simplified characters are in regular script. The problem is, when you forcibly bend the curves into straight lines, many lost their artistic aspects and became ugly abominations. > Like I said, in China primary motivator was improving literacy rate. The funny thing: Taiwan uses the traditional set and has a higher literacy rate than China. People used to blame the traditional characters as too complicated and a hinderance to literacy. Apparently what really matters at all is the education itself.

echaozh 9y ago
The point is, simplified characters are easier to write, say, when they're leaving a note on the table before having to leave in seconds. Why are the cursive forms invented in the first place? Are they only artistic? They got their use in real life as well. People are lazy and always in a hurry.
- gsklee 9y ago
  Are you comfortable with the thought of being forced to abandon the traditional Latin script and picking up a new script based on half-straightened squiggly handwriting form of alphabets, in everyday reading, on papers and screens? If yes, then I think you indeed made a point.