5 ms·

The advantage of pictograms is you can infer meaning from component radicals when looking at more complicated pictograms. Pinyin is useful but limited, e.g. the

by zavi 8y ago

The advantage of pictograms is you can infer meaning from component radicals when looking at more complicated pictograms. Pinyin is useful but limited, e.g. there is a number of different pictograms that are all pronouced 'shi4' so simply by looking at pinyin you won't be able to differentiate without additional context that might not be available in written scenario.

Sir_Cmpwn 8y ago
Homonyms exist in every language. The advantages do not outweigh the drawbacks.
- zavi 8y ago
  There's order of magnitude more homonyms in Mandarin than English to the point where having a pictograms system starts making sense. That's why 80 percent of characters are multipart with one of the radicals carrying the pronunciation.
- knolax 8y ago
  Homonyms don't exist in every language to the extant that you can write an entire essay with them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion-Eating_Poet_in_the_Stone_Den https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion-Eating_Poet_in_the_Stone_...
  - tivert 8y ago
    > Homonyms don't exist in every language to the extant that you can write an entire essay with them. Homonyms like that don't exist in any living language. Spoken Classical Chinese is a dead language, like Latin. You only get that effect when you use modern Mandarin pronunciations, they wouldn't have been homonyms if you didn't use anachronous pronunciations. It's sort of like writing a poem that means one thing in Latin and an entirely different thing in modern Italian.
    - knolax 8y ago
      Yet Classical Chinese is still a large part of Chinese literary canon, partially because the writing system allows for written Classical Chinese to comprehended by modern readers. There are no examples to "Lion-Eating Poet" in Italian and English precisely because phonetic writing systems cause most writing to be incomprehensible as pronounciations change. Your example is also egregious also because the entire point of "Lion-Eating Poet" isn't that "it means different things in classical and modern Chinese" but that semantical meaning can still be transmitted by the writing system completely independent of pronounciation.
      - tivert 8y ago
        > Yet Classical Chinese is still a large part of Chinese literary canon, partially because the writing system allows for written Classical Chinese to comprehended by modern readers. But only essentially though translation. It's different enough that a typical Chinese reader can't jump into those works with ease. Latin works are still part of the Western literary canon, and for many centuries Europeans went though the trouble of learning Latin to read them. You can still find fossilized Latin phrases in modern languages like English, et cetera. That doesn't mean Latin is a truly living language. > There are no examples to "Lion-Eating Poet" in Italian and English precisely because phonetic writing systems cause most writing to be incomprehensible as pronounciations change. > Your example is also egregious also because the entire point of "Lion-Eating Poet" isn't that "it means different things in classical and modern Chinese" but that semantical meaning can still be transmitted by the writing system completely independent of pronounciation. There can be no exact analogy because phonetic writing systems are more conserving of pronunciation while systems like Chinese are more conserving of semantics. That's why I said it's "it's sort of like." My point was the poem is more of a stunt than a real statement about a real language.
        knolax 8y ago
        >But only essentially though translation. Classical works are not translated into Modern Chinese. I think that's the source of our disagreement. When the writing system is focused on semantics, then the threshold where something is considered translation is different than for a phonetic writing system. >Latin works are still part of the Western literary canon. Yes, but most modern westerners can not read Latin on it's own, because of the writing system. >My point was the poem is more of a stunt than a real statement about a real language. What is a "real language" here? The poem is comprehensible to modern Chinese, although the grammar follows Classical Conventions. What makes it not a "real language"?
  - sanqui 8y ago
    Homonyms are words that are pronounced the same way. These words use different tones.
    - simplify 8y ago
      There are four tones. The poem has 33 unique words.
    - FabHK 8y ago
      Good point. Beyond that, FWIW, homophones are words that are pronounced the same way. Homonyms are pronounced and spelt the same way. I guess in the context of Chinese (where disambiguation by character is the big issue), one should speak of homophones?
  - FabHK 8y ago
    On this issue, see also "The Homonym problem", in Wm. C. Hannas, Asia's Orthographic Dilemma: http://pinyin.info/readings/texts/east_asian_languages.html#homonyms http://pinyin.info/readings/texts/east_asian_languages.html#...
foobiekr 8y ago
And yet people speak Chinese without displaying characters for help in comprehension.
- zavi 8y ago
  Because spoken language usually has more context (as compared to a brief written sign or a headline).
  - tivert 8y ago
    In those contexts, I'd think you could usually choose a different phrasing that wouldn't be ambiguous.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
jason_slack 8y ago
>'shi4' but isn't that when you use context around the word to know what the meaning is? The same happens in English...you don't always know without context. 学习中文很有趣！ Xuéxí zhōngwén hěn yǒuqù! hanzi or pinyin reading either way I know what this is intended to say.
- smallnamespace 8y ago
  Except Mandarin has a lot more homophones than English does, likely under the long influence of the writing system. For spoken Mandarin, you can probably infer enough from the conversational context, but for official documents, business and technical terminology, or any literature, full romanization renders the text much less incomprehensible. This isn't helped by the fact that Classical Chinese, from which most complex vocabulary is derived, is even more homophonic than daily speech.
- simplify 8y ago
  That's just spoken language. There are many words that are "literary", which means they are used primarily in writing and not spoken language. Without hanzi it would be very difficult to understand what is written.
  - jason_slack 8y ago
    Yup this can be true. If you read something like duo(3) it could be a measure word for flowers (朵) or maybe mean “to hide or avoid” (躲)
- Lfwinster 8y ago
  totally agree with other two comments, tbh, nobody uses pinyin anymore after grade six, it is really just a stepping stone for kids to learn chinese before they can memorize all the common characters help them to read. As a Chinese i actually hate pinin as an adult because my name would appear in Pinin on my passport and it loses all its meaning.
  - jason_slack 8y ago
tivert 8y ago
> The advantage of pictograms is you can infer meaning from component radicals when looking at more complicated pictograms. Pinyin is useful but limited, e.g. there is a number of different pictograms that are all pronouced 'shi4' so simply by looking at pinyin you won't be able to differentiate without additional context that might not be available in written scenario. I kinda find it hard to believe that could be much of a real problem. Pictograms may allow homonyms to proliferate more than in an alphabetic writing system, but as long as the language still lives as a spoken language, there will be limits on them that prevent them from becoming too much of a problem. A spoken language with too many homonyms just isn't useful, so it will be adapted to eliminate the problem. All bets are off when the spoken form is dead, though.
FabHK 8y ago
You have the same "advantage" with word components in alphabetic languages, such as "picto+gram", "sub+marine", and what have you.
- knolax 8y ago
  Yes and in alphabetic languages those word components are much more ambiguous, especially in abbreviations. 加州 is a lot less ambiguous than CA, hence the greater prevalence of the former in daily use.
  - FabHK 8y ago
    > alphabetic languages those word components are much more ambiguous I don't think so. The components of a polysyllabic word can give (more or less) strong hints to its meaning, but typically the word and its meaning must still be learned. But the same holds for radicals in Chinese characters, and even polysyllabic words in Chinese (电视/電視 is electric + vision, and that's TV. Television is distant + vision, and that's also TV.） That two characters with 14 bits each carry more information than two characters with 5 bits each is clear, but not a huge advantage of non-alphabetic writing, or a decisive one (compared to the disadvantages).
    - knolax 8y ago
      Yes but the point is that CA and 加州 are both two syllables in speech. In your example, "televison" is 4 syllables whereas "电视" is only two. As you've noted, the writing system has over time created a higher information to syllable ratio. A transition to a writing system with a lower information to syllable ratio would require a complete change in vocabulary and the translation of pretty much all written text.
      - FabHK 8y ago
        > the translation of pretty much all written text Yes, agreed. It would by no means be trivial. Question is whether it would be worth it (in terms of freeing up time for children to study something else, for example).

by zavi 8y ago

Sir_Cmpwn 8y ago

Homonyms exist in every language. The advantages do not outweigh the drawbacks.

zavi 8y ago
There's order of magnitude more homonyms in Mandarin than English to the point where having a pictograms system starts making sense. That's why 80 percent of characters are multipart with one of the radicals carrying the pronunciation.
knolax 8y ago
Homonyms don't exist in every language to the extant that you can write an entire essay with them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion-Eating_Poet_in_the_Stone_Den https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion-Eating_Poet_in_the_Stone_...
- tivert 8y ago
  > Homonyms don't exist in every language to the extant that you can write an entire essay with them. Homonyms like that don't exist in any living language. Spoken Classical Chinese is a dead language, like Latin. You only get that effect when you use modern Mandarin pronunciations, they wouldn't have been homonyms if you didn't use anachronous pronunciations. It's sort of like writing a poem that means one thing in Latin and an entirely different thing in modern Italian.
  - knolax 8y ago
    Yet Classical Chinese is still a large part of Chinese literary canon, partially because the writing system allows for written Classical Chinese to comprehended by modern readers. There are no examples to "Lion-Eating Poet" in Italian and English precisely because phonetic writing systems cause most writing to be incomprehensible as pronounciations change. Your example is also egregious also because the entire point of "Lion-Eating Poet" isn't that "it means different things in classical and modern Chinese" but that semantical meaning can still be transmitted by the writing system completely independent of pronounciation.
    - tivert 8y ago
      > Yet Classical Chinese is still a large part of Chinese literary canon, partially because the writing system allows for written Classical Chinese to comprehended by modern readers. But only essentially though translation. It's different enough that a typical Chinese reader can't jump into those works with ease. Latin works are still part of the Western literary canon, and for many centuries Europeans went though the trouble of learning Latin to read them. You can still find fossilized Latin phrases in modern languages like English, et cetera. That doesn't mean Latin is a truly living language. > There are no examples to "Lion-Eating Poet" in Italian and English precisely because phonetic writing systems cause most writing to be incomprehensible as pronounciations change. > Your example is also egregious also because the entire point of "Lion-Eating Poet" isn't that "it means different things in classical and modern Chinese" but that semantical meaning can still be transmitted by the writing system completely independent of pronounciation. There can be no exact analogy because phonetic writing systems are more conserving of pronunciation while systems like Chinese are more conserving of semantics. That's why I said it's "it's sort of like." My point was the poem is more of a stunt than a real statement about a real language.
      - knolax 8y ago
        >But only essentially though translation. Classical works are not translated into Modern Chinese. I think that's the source of our disagreement. When the writing system is focused on semantics, then the threshold where something is considered translation is different than for a phonetic writing system. >Latin works are still part of the Western literary canon. Yes, but most modern westerners can not read Latin on it's own, because of the writing system. >My point was the poem is more of a stunt than a real statement about a real language. What is a "real language" here? The poem is comprehensible to modern Chinese, although the grammar follows Classical Conventions. What makes it not a "real language"?
- sanqui 8y ago
  Homonyms are words that are pronounced the same way. These words use different tones.
  - simplify 8y ago
    There are four tones. The poem has 33 unique words.
  - FabHK 8y ago
    Good point. Beyond that, FWIW, homophones are words that are pronounced the same way. Homonyms are pronounced and spelt the same way. I guess in the context of Chinese (where disambiguation by character is the big issue), one should speak of homophones?
- FabHK 8y ago
  On this issue, see also "The Homonym problem", in Wm. C. Hannas, Asia's Orthographic Dilemma: http://pinyin.info/readings/texts/east_asian_languages.html#homonyms http://pinyin.info/readings/texts/east_asian_languages.html#...

foobiekr 8y ago

And yet people speak Chinese without displaying characters for help in comprehension.

zavi 8y ago
Because spoken language usually has more context (as compared to a brief written sign or a headline).
- tivert 8y ago
  In those contexts, I'd think you could usually choose a different phrasing that wouldn't be ambiguous.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

jason_slack 8y ago

>'shi4' but isn't that when you use context around the word to know what the meaning is? The same happens in English...you don't always know without context. 学习中文很有趣！ Xuéxí zhōngwén hěn yǒuqù! hanzi or pinyin reading either way I know what this is intended to say.

smallnamespace 8y ago
Except Mandarin has a lot more homophones than English does, likely under the long influence of the writing system. For spoken Mandarin, you can probably infer enough from the conversational context, but for official documents, business and technical terminology, or any literature, full romanization renders the text much less incomprehensible. This isn't helped by the fact that Classical Chinese, from which most complex vocabulary is derived, is even more homophonic than daily speech.
simplify 8y ago
That's just spoken language. There are many words that are "literary", which means they are used primarily in writing and not spoken language. Without hanzi it would be very difficult to understand what is written.
- jason_slack 8y ago
  Yup this can be true. If you read something like duo(3) it could be a measure word for flowers (朵) or maybe mean “to hide or avoid” (躲)
Lfwinster 8y ago
totally agree with other two comments, tbh, nobody uses pinyin anymore after grade six, it is really just a stepping stone for kids to learn chinese before they can memorize all the common characters help them to read. As a Chinese i actually hate pinin as an adult because my name would appear in Pinin on my passport and it loses all its meaning.
- jason_slack 8y ago

tivert 8y ago

> The advantage of pictograms is you can infer meaning from component radicals when looking at more complicated pictograms. Pinyin is useful but limited, e.g. there is a number of different pictograms that are all pronouced 'shi4' so simply by looking at pinyin you won't be able to differentiate without additional context that might not be available in written scenario. I kinda find it hard to believe that could be much of a real problem. Pictograms may allow homonyms to proliferate more than in an alphabetic writing system, but as long as the language still lives as a spoken language, there will be limits on them that prevent them from becoming too much of a problem. A spoken language with too many homonyms just isn't useful, so it will be adapted to eliminate the problem. All bets are off when the spoken form is dead, though.

FabHK 8y ago

You have the same "advantage" with word components in alphabetic languages, such as "picto+gram", "sub+marine", and what have you.

knolax 8y ago
Yes and in alphabetic languages those word components are much more ambiguous, especially in abbreviations. 加州 is a lot less ambiguous than CA, hence the greater prevalence of the former in daily use.
- FabHK 8y ago
  > alphabetic languages those word components are much more ambiguous I don't think so. The components of a polysyllabic word can give (more or less) strong hints to its meaning, but typically the word and its meaning must still be learned. But the same holds for radicals in Chinese characters, and even polysyllabic words in Chinese (电视/電視 is electric + vision, and that's TV. Television is distant + vision, and that's also TV.） That two characters with 14 bits each carry more information than two characters with 5 bits each is clear, but not a huge advantage of non-alphabetic writing, or a decisive one (compared to the disadvantages).
  - knolax 8y ago
    Yes but the point is that CA and 加州 are both two syllables in speech. In your example, "televison" is 4 syllables whereas "电视" is only two. As you've noted, the writing system has over time created a higher information to syllable ratio. A transition to a writing system with a lower information to syllable ratio would require a complete change in vocabulary and the translation of pretty much all written text.
    - FabHK 8y ago
      > the translation of pretty much all written text Yes, agreed. It would by no means be trivial. Question is whether it would be worth it (in terms of freeing up time for children to study something else, for example).