6 ms·

It needs them because there are too few unique syllables in Mandarin. I'm sure a linguist can provide the proper terminology, but there are only around 400 uniq

by ddeck 3y ago

It needs them because there are too few unique syllables in Mandarin. I'm sure a linguist can provide the proper terminology, but there are only around 400 unique sounds in Mandarin, ignoring tones. Even adding five tones still only increases this to ~1500 (not all are used). Compare this to English, where estimates are in the 10-15k range. There are therefore an enormous number of homophones in Mandarin, which makes it very challenging to comprehend without context. I've often had native speaking friends eavesdrop on a conversation, only to tell me that they're not sure what is being discussed. It also means that the language cannot be usefully written phonetically, and thus unique characters are required. some discussion here: https://chinese.stackexchange.com/questions/40574/why-does-mandarin-chinese-have-a-smaller-inventory-of-unique-syllables https://chinese.stackexchange.com/questions/40574/why-does-m... https://chinese.stackexchange.com/questions/39695/does-chinese-require-more-context-to-avoid-ambiguities-than-english https://chinese.stackexchange.com/questions/39695/does-chine... https://chinese.stackexchange.com/questions/14596/how-many-syllables-does-chinese-have https://chinese.stackexchange.com/questions/14596/how-many-s...

yorwba 3y ago
Having few unique syllables doesn't mean tones are required, since syllables can be combined. Most Mandarin words are disyllabic or longer, and 400×400 = 160k is enough combinations for a quite large vocabulary. Unique characters being required to distinguish homophones in modern written Mandarin is mostly a circular effect due to the characters already being available, so people use them in ways that would be ambiguous when read aloud (as intentional puns or simply to be more concise.) If there had been no preexisting writing system and written Mandarin was a simple transcription of spoken Mandarin, introducing characters would be about as helpful as indicating the Indo-European roots of words in English writing, which is to say that some people might get a feeling of epiphany after realizing the connection between seemingly disparate words, but it would hardly be practical for everyday use.
- Umofomia 3y ago
  Evidence that Chinese can be perfectly understandable written without the use of characters can be seen in the Dungan language (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungan_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungan_language), which can be considered a dialect of Mandarin Chinese, but is written in the Cyrillic alphabet. > Unique characters being required to distinguish homophones in modern written Mandarin is mostly a circular effect due to the characters already being available, so people use them in ways that would be ambiguous when read aloud (as intentional puns or simply to be more concise.) Indeed, because of the way Dungan is written, it ended up evolving differently with respect to how new vocabulary is derived, often borrowing words phonetically from Russian instead of constructing them from Chinese morphemes that might otherwise be considered ambiguous when used individually.
- carlmr 3y ago
  >Most Mandarin words are disyllabic or longer, and 400×400 = 160k is enough combinations for a quite large vocabulary. While true, I'd bet that some combinations dominate because they sound better/are easier to pronounce. Also just because you can technically differentiate 160k sound pairs doesn't mean you can do it in a noisy environment. Japanese and Korean have a similarly limited number of syllables and have very long words compared to English. I'm guessing because they don't have tones. If you look at communication theory you don't only need distinct sounds, you also need error correction. Which requires extra bits of redundant information. Tones just make it possible to carry extra bits. Longer strings of syllables like in Japanese and Korean do the same. More complex syllables, like in English, too. It's just multiple different ways of carrying enough bits in speech to work in a noisy environment. Another analogy could be password strength. You can have a very long numeric password (Japanese & Korean), A password with a mix of a-zA-Z0-9 of medium length (English). A password with weird special characters but shorter (Chinese), and they all end up having the same entropy (given that the password rules are known to the attacker).
OJFord 3y ago
> but there are only around 400 unique sounds in Mandarin, ignoring tones. Even adding five tones still only increases this to ~1500 (not all are used). Compare this to English, where estimates are in the 10-15k range. Sure, but English needs them because there are only around 26 letters; compare this to Mandarin, where estimates are in the 400 range.
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  Why would a small number of letters make English need more syllables? If anything, letters being overloaded limits the number of syllables we can express.
  - OJFord 3y ago
    I was mostly just joking/pointing out that the comparison's a bit.. not to say 'apples and oranges', but a bit arbitrary, it seemed to me could just as well be comparing letter count - or even that that makes more sense as a comparison for (disregarding tone) characters, but still arbitrary, the languages just work differently.
mchaver 3y ago
There are language with even smaller sets of unique sounds that do not have tones like Hawaiian: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaiian_phonology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaiian_phonology There are many common homophones in English that are distinguished by context. Conversation tends to have a lot of context. As a Mandarin speaker, I've never really experienced this context problem. You can make up some artificial examples in English and Chinese but they don't really reflect average communication. Like "The bat and the bow are on the table". It is important to know that a good percentage of words in Mandarin are multi-syllabic (not just one character). Mandarin can be written phonetically perfectly fine. Currently the most popular systems are Hanyu Pinyin (used in China, Singapore and Malaysia) and Zhuyin (used in Taiwan). Kids learn these systems in school before they learn characters. Chinese characters have a strong historical and cultural value, that's why they are still around.
- ddeck 3y ago
  I'm surprised you've never experienced this. Even names often require an explanation, because the pronunciation is insufficient to convey which words (i.e. characters) are used. >Mandarin can be written phonetically perfectly fine It can, and I use hanyu pinyin daily, but my point is that given the small space of possible sounds, it often has a great deal of ambiguity, and is mentally taxing to read. Have you ever tried reading an essay or book in pinyin? With syllabic spacing? There will be many places where it is simply not possible to know for certain what a particular word is. And then there are text books, scientific books. Chinese characters do indeed have strong historical and cultural value, but that is not why they are still around. They are still around because they are essential to the written language.
  - soundnote 3y ago
    > They are still around because they are essential to the written language. This argument used to be made in Korea, yet the country seems to have transitioned to alphabetic writing without issue. A lot of the tax of reading phonetic scripts of Chinese or Japanese is that fluent speakers are simply not at all used to it, even if they can read it. For example: ᚦᛁᛋ ᚨᚱᚷᚢᛗᛖᚾᛏ ᚢᛋᛖᛞ ᛏᛟ ᛒᛖ ᛗᚨᛞᛖ ᛁᚾ ᚲᛟᚱᛖᚨ, ᛃᛖᛏ ᚦᛖ ᚲᛟᚢᚾᛏᚱᛃ ᛋᛖᛖᛗᛋ ᛏᛟ ᚺᚨᚹᛖ ᛏᚱᚨᚾᛋᛁᛏᛁᛟᚾᛖᛞ ᛏᛟ ᚨᛚᛈᚺᚨᛒᛖᛏᛁᚲ ᚹᚱᛁᛏᛁᛝ ᚹᛁᚦᛟᚢᛏ ᛁᛋᛋᚢᛖ. ᚨ ᛚᛟᛏ ᛟᚠ ᚦᛖ ᛏᚨᚲᛋ ᛟᚠ ᚱᛖᚨᛞᛁᛝ ᛈᚺᛟᚾᛖᛏᛁᚲ ᛋᚲᚱᛁᛈᛏᛋ ᛟᚠ ᚲᚺᛁᚾᛖᛋᛖ ᛟᚱ ᛃᚨᛈᚨᚾᛖᛋᛖ ᛁᛋ ᚦᚨᛏ ᚠᛚᚢᛖᚾᛏ ᛋᛈᛖᚨᚲᛖᚱᛋ ᚨᚱᛖ ᛋᛁᛗᛈᛚᛃ ᚾᛟᛏ ᚨᛏ ᚨᛚᛚ ᚢᛋᛖᛞ ᛏᛟ ᛁᛏ, ᛖᚹᛖᚾ ᛁᚠ ᚦᛖᛃ ᚲᚨᚾ ᚱᛖᚨᛞ ᛁᛏ. Same normal English, but Elder Futhark as the script. If you grew up reading that you'd read without issue. Now? It's a pain.

by ddeck 3y ago

yorwba 3y ago

Having few unique syllables doesn't mean tones are required, since syllables can be combined. Most Mandarin words are disyllabic or longer, and 400×400 = 160k is enough combinations for a quite large vocabulary. Unique characters being required to distinguish homophones in modern written Mandarin is mostly a circular effect due to the characters already being available, so people use them in ways that would be ambiguous when read aloud (as intentional puns or simply to be more concise.) If there had been no preexisting writing system and written Mandarin was a simple transcription of spoken Mandarin, introducing characters would be about as helpful as indicating the Indo-European roots of words in English writing, which is to say that some people might get a feeling of epiphany after realizing the connection between seemingly disparate words, but it would hardly be practical for everyday use.

Umofomia 3y ago
Evidence that Chinese can be perfectly understandable written without the use of characters can be seen in the Dungan language (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungan_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungan_language), which can be considered a dialect of Mandarin Chinese, but is written in the Cyrillic alphabet. > Unique characters being required to distinguish homophones in modern written Mandarin is mostly a circular effect due to the characters already being available, so people use them in ways that would be ambiguous when read aloud (as intentional puns or simply to be more concise.) Indeed, because of the way Dungan is written, it ended up evolving differently with respect to how new vocabulary is derived, often borrowing words phonetically from Russian instead of constructing them from Chinese morphemes that might otherwise be considered ambiguous when used individually.
carlmr 3y ago
>Most Mandarin words are disyllabic or longer, and 400×400 = 160k is enough combinations for a quite large vocabulary. While true, I'd bet that some combinations dominate because they sound better/are easier to pronounce. Also just because you can technically differentiate 160k sound pairs doesn't mean you can do it in a noisy environment. Japanese and Korean have a similarly limited number of syllables and have very long words compared to English. I'm guessing because they don't have tones. If you look at communication theory you don't only need distinct sounds, you also need error correction. Which requires extra bits of redundant information. Tones just make it possible to carry extra bits. Longer strings of syllables like in Japanese and Korean do the same. More complex syllables, like in English, too. It's just multiple different ways of carrying enough bits in speech to work in a noisy environment. Another analogy could be password strength. You can have a very long numeric password (Japanese & Korean), A password with a mix of a-zA-Z0-9 of medium length (English). A password with weird special characters but shorter (Chinese), and they all end up having the same entropy (given that the password rules are known to the attacker).

OJFord 3y ago

> but there are only around 400 unique sounds in Mandarin, ignoring tones. Even adding five tones still only increases this to ~1500 (not all are used). Compare this to English, where estimates are in the 10-15k range. Sure, but English needs them because there are only around 26 letters; compare this to Mandarin, where estimates are in the 400 range.

Dylan16807 3y ago
Why would a small number of letters make English need more syllables? If anything, letters being overloaded limits the number of syllables we can express.
- OJFord 3y ago
  I was mostly just joking/pointing out that the comparison's a bit.. not to say 'apples and oranges', but a bit arbitrary, it seemed to me could just as well be comparing letter count - or even that that makes more sense as a comparison for (disregarding tone) characters, but still arbitrary, the languages just work differently.

mchaver 3y ago

There are language with even smaller sets of unique sounds that do not have tones like Hawaiian: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaiian_phonology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaiian_phonology There are many common homophones in English that are distinguished by context. Conversation tends to have a lot of context. As a Mandarin speaker, I've never really experienced this context problem. You can make up some artificial examples in English and Chinese but they don't really reflect average communication. Like "The bat and the bow are on the table". It is important to know that a good percentage of words in Mandarin are multi-syllabic (not just one character). Mandarin can be written phonetically perfectly fine. Currently the most popular systems are Hanyu Pinyin (used in China, Singapore and Malaysia) and Zhuyin (used in Taiwan). Kids learn these systems in school before they learn characters. Chinese characters have a strong historical and cultural value, that's why they are still around.

ddeck 3y ago
I'm surprised you've never experienced this. Even names often require an explanation, because the pronunciation is insufficient to convey which words (i.e. characters) are used. >Mandarin can be written phonetically perfectly fine It can, and I use hanyu pinyin daily, but my point is that given the small space of possible sounds, it often has a great deal of ambiguity, and is mentally taxing to read. Have you ever tried reading an essay or book in pinyin? With syllabic spacing? There will be many places where it is simply not possible to know for certain what a particular word is. And then there are text books, scientific books. Chinese characters do indeed have strong historical and cultural value, but that is not why they are still around. They are still around because they are essential to the written language.
- soundnote 3y ago
  > They are still around because they are essential to the written language. This argument used to be made in Korea, yet the country seems to have transitioned to alphabetic writing without issue. A lot of the tax of reading phonetic scripts of Chinese or Japanese is that fluent speakers are simply not at all used to it, even if they can read it. For example: ᚦᛁᛋ ᚨᚱᚷᚢᛗᛖᚾᛏ ᚢᛋᛖᛞ ᛏᛟ ᛒᛖ ᛗᚨᛞᛖ ᛁᚾ ᚲᛟᚱᛖᚨ, ᛃᛖᛏ ᚦᛖ ᚲᛟᚢᚾᛏᚱᛃ ᛋᛖᛖᛗᛋ ᛏᛟ ᚺᚨᚹᛖ ᛏᚱᚨᚾᛋᛁᛏᛁᛟᚾᛖᛞ ᛏᛟ ᚨᛚᛈᚺᚨᛒᛖᛏᛁᚲ ᚹᚱᛁᛏᛁᛝ ᚹᛁᚦᛟᚢᛏ ᛁᛋᛋᚢᛖ. ᚨ ᛚᛟᛏ ᛟᚠ ᚦᛖ ᛏᚨᚲᛋ ᛟᚠ ᚱᛖᚨᛞᛁᛝ ᛈᚺᛟᚾᛖᛏᛁᚲ ᛋᚲᚱᛁᛈᛏᛋ ᛟᚠ ᚲᚺᛁᚾᛖᛋᛖ ᛟᚱ ᛃᚨᛈᚨᚾᛖᛋᛖ ᛁᛋ ᚦᚨᛏ ᚠᛚᚢᛖᚾᛏ ᛋᛈᛖᚨᚲᛖᚱᛋ ᚨᚱᛖ ᛋᛁᛗᛈᛚᛃ ᚾᛟᛏ ᚨᛏ ᚨᛚᛚ ᚢᛋᛖᛞ ᛏᛟ ᛁᛏ, ᛖᚹᛖᚾ ᛁᚠ ᚦᛖᛃ ᚲᚨᚾ ᚱᛖᚨᛞ ᛁᛏ. Same normal English, but Elder Futhark as the script. If you grew up reading that you'd read without issue. Now? It's a pain.