Base on the "两岸三通" concept, should Simplified & Traditional Chinese be unified? if yes, how?

If I offended anyone, I apologize in advance for being not “politically correct.”





I don\'t care much about politics, in fact, I hated it. CCP vs. KMT is not my concern.



Quote:

our concepts about tradition and culture need to be updated anyway.



I did mention 50 years vs. 5,000+ years, I do agree with you tradition & culture need to be updated (transitionally); nonetheless, any tradition or culture changes should be based on evolution rather than revolution. wink: since you grew up in a simplified Chinese environment, I won\'t blame you of can\'t appreciate the beauty of Chinese characters, you just missed it.



Quote:

Perhaps we can begin to think a better way to preserve, develop and celebrate the Chinese tradition and culture. How about “multimedia” and computers?



Bravo, this is exactly my point. Now a day, people no longer need to use hand writing, typing is. So prior to this computer era, easier & faster might make sense, how about try to preserve our traditional culture by not to simplied Chinese characters in such a hasty way.



I would really appreciate that you can provide me with information as to:

The background, when and who simplified Chinese characters.



Thanks

summit



[ This Message was edited by: on 2002-07-22 08:08 ] ▲ Collapse

I would really appreciate that you can provide me with information as to:

The background, when and who simplified Chinese characters.



Thanks

summit









Hi Summit,



Here is one Question and answer from my Chinese FAQ page. I intended to post something here before but balked as one needs to write quite long to make his points on this sensitive matter. I hope this Q&A is pertinent to your request. If you are interested, you can view the full page of the FAQs at http://www.asiana.com/faqs.html where the link I mentioned below will work.



>>>>

7. What is the difference between Simplified and Traditional Characters?



Since the founding of the PRC in 1949, the Chinese government has been quite active in Chinese character reform. On February 2, 1956, the government published a document called A Scheme for the Simplification of Chinese Characters (汉字简化方案). This scheme consists of three tables. Table 1 lists 352 simplified characters that cannot be used as radicals. Table 2 lists 132 simplified characters that can be used as radicals, plus 14 simplified radicals. Table 3 contains 1,754 characters that were derived using the 132 radical-capable simplified characters and the 14 simplified radicals. The three tables simplified a total number of 2,236 characters.



In 1977, the Chinese government published the Second Scheme for the Simplification of Chinese Characters. Table 1 contained 248 characters. Table 2 included 605 simplified characters and 61 simplified radicals. However, since the simplification was so radical, it was met with strong resistance from the society. On June 24, 1986, that second scheme was rescinded. Later in 1986, the first scheme was republished with a few words in the tables adjusted. As a result, the total number of simplified characters stands at 2,235 now.



It should be pointed out that the 2,235 simplified characters are calculated based on New China Dictionary (新华字典) published in 1962 with about 8,000 character entries. Considering that the total number of Chinese characters is more than 85,000, if the radical-capable simplified characters and the simplified radicals are applied to all the Chinese characters, the resulting number of simplified character will be much larger than the above number.



In the Chinese character simplification movement, there is one anecdote that is generally overlooked by the public, that is, the character reform was not started by the Chinese communist government, but rather by the National government before the new government took over in 1949. In 1935, the Ministry of Education of the then National Government issued The First List of Simplified Chinese Characters (第一批简體字表) which contained 324 simplified characters and required educational authorities of all cities and provinces to implement them. However, due to strong objection from high officials of the Kuomingtang government, the first simplification effort of Chinese characters in modern time was put on hold in the next year and was never implemented.



Just recently, on December 27, 2001, The Ministry of Education and The State Commission of Language and Character Affairs published The First Compilation of Variant Words (第一批异形词整理表) to be implemented on March 31, 2002. This publication is not exactly about Chinese characters, but about words, i.e., character combinations. The list contains 338 sets of words with variant form(s). The recommended form is given at the beginning of the entry followed by a dash line, after which the variant form(s) are listed. Here are a few entries from the list. You can click here to view the complete list.



按语－案语

成分－成份



百废俱兴－百废具兴

订单－定单



百叶窗－百页窗

订货－定货



保姆－保母、褓姆

独角戏－独脚戏



车厢－车箱

勾画－勾划



It also includes an appendix that lists 44 sets of non-standard words with characters that are already abolished by the previously issued \"A Scheme for the Simplification of Chinese Characters.\" This appendix serves the purpose of reminding people to avoid using those abolished characters (designated by an *) in words. Here are a few examples:



抵触（＊牴触）

局促（＊侷促、＊跼促）



跖骨（＊蹠骨）

渺茫（＊淼茫）

▲ Collapse

As a non-native student of Chinese, I think this is a fascinating topic. I studied in the mainland, and I can tell you firsthand of the benefits of simplified characters to speed up learning.





I do wish that I can confer with my brother-in-law prior to sharing your learning experience in Mainland China. He graduated from 师大 in Taiwan. One serious question I need to know is: Can speeding up the learning or writing Chinese merely be achieved by smiplifing Chinese? (if this become the issue of my subject). Or, what it can bring is nothing but confusion? The idea of 触类旁通 is embeded in most of Chinese characters, which I am sure, do help a lot in learning Chinese.



Quote:

I have observed, however, that since this process was instituted under a Communist regime, it has been viewed with skepticism--and even enmity (I have a Taiwanese friend who calls them \'Commie Characters\')--by non-Mainland Chinese, and Taiwanese in particular.





The subject I raised is totally irrelevant of any political considerations, for culture preservation only. Might it be Commie or Taimmie who care ?



Quote:

In my opinion, based on my observations living in China for about 4 years, the simplification of characters did not itself produce any loss of culture.





Who is there to judge, by all means ?





Quote:

In fact culture, inasmuch as it is enshrined in the characters, is still alive and well. In some ways having a difference between everyday writing and more formal or artistic writing helps maintain the artistic integrity of traditional characters.





Truly enough, but Mr. Kevin Yang mentioned that all words are created for communication purpose only, let alone the artistic way; otherwise, it would be categorized under Piccaso\'s 抽象派\'s work, calligraphy ?

p.s.: i really appreciate that you used such a solemn word \"enshrined\" to describe Chinese characters. wink: need to check with dictionary as to what \"enshrined\" might imply.



[qutoe]

I also noticed, that much like Japan, those who aspire to \'higher\' culture and a deeper sense of tradition, make it a point to study the traditional writing, learning it in the context of calligraphy.

[/quote]



Have you also notice & observe the \"Tea ceremony\" in Japan?



Quote:

To me personally, I think it would be helpful if simplified Chinese were adopted more widely. At the very least, it would hlep dumb foreigners like me to be able to read non-mainland (or Singaporean) printed materials. I think if in hundreds of years of using traditional Chinese characters as an art form has not diluted the writing form\'s stature in Japan, surely the Chinese can be trusted to simplify everyday writing without losing respect for the traditional ways, and the values those characters enshrine.





May be in the future, I would publish a book name : Dummy Dummy for Dummies



really no offense, just for the heck of it.

Sincerely wish to be one of your friend



Summit ▲ Collapse

I would be evry pleased to further this discussion and exchange ideas with you. We may not completely agree with each other, however, by listening to each other, we will have a better understnading of the issue on hand.





I would like to thank you very much for the provided thourough & detail informative references. The issue of Simplified vs. Traditional Chinese is imposed upon us not arouse by us. As far as any pre-law or law school student might be aware of, Latin is the basis of English.



I will study all those subjects very carefully. One thing for sure, I do benefited from your recommendation.



Summit ▲ Collapse