Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chinese: Simplified, Traditional, Mandarin or Cantonese (The Simple Answer)

mygengo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 23 posts

Re: Chinese: Simplified, Traditional, Mandarin or Cantonese (The Simple Answer)

#11

Post by robert_mygengo »

quant18 wrote: post #10
robert_mygengo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this is the point. You may wish to offer both Simplified and Traditional Chinese, but that's a choice — and the article is clearing up the confusion that most non-Chinese have about which relates to which nations.

Forgive me but this article seems to generate more confusion than it clears up. Statements like Cantonese and Mandarin speakers both use one of the writing systems mentioned above, and on paper, the languages can look quite similar are quite inept. Except a few subject matters (that do NOT get sent through five-cent-per-word web services --- like advertising slogans and written instructions for verbal Miranda warning…

The table in the article was designed to be clearer and simpler than the above explanation for most users, and also not to represent that Simplified Chinese is suitable for all customers, which would be a misrepresentation.

Re: Chinese: Simplified, Traditional, Mandarin or Cantonese (The Simple Answer)

#12

Post by Open-Juicer »

>>>So, in an effort to boost literacy, the People's Republic of China attempted to make learning characters easier through a series of simplification rounds that took place between the 1950s and 1970sThe fact is that people in Hong Kong and Taiwan have a much higher literacy rate than those in mainland China, yet they use Traditional Chinese. Mainlanders' low literacy rate is mainly a sign of lacking education, not Traditional Chinese being a barrier to literacy. Moreover, in a digital world, they make no difference in input speed.

What Hong-Kongers and Taiwanese are opposing to is not the communist simplifying Chinese Characters, but simplifying them in an ugly fashion. In most cases, it breaks the consistency in word formation as seen in Traditional Chinese. In other cases, it's not aesthetic and even absurd. There is a joke saying that the word factory(廠)in simplified Chinese (厂) explains why factories in mainland China are subject to collapse.

Speaking of economics, simplified Chinese indeed appeals to larger potential customers. However, PRC put lots of restrictions on foreign corporations. That's why even Google and Facebook failed to (and will continue to) dominate in China. On the other side, Hong Kong and Taiwan have the goodies of free markets.

Re: Chinese: Simplified, Traditional, Mandarin or Cantonese (The Simple Answer)

#13

Post by gaiusparx »

robert_mygengo wrote: post #9
gaiusparx wrote: post #8

I think the article is not a good summary. For translation work for written products, web, apps etc you need to do both Simplified and Traditional. Traditional is used in Taiwan and Hong Kong, with the rest of the world follow China's standard use of Simplified. For spoken language, Mandarin is the standard, the official one. The rest of spoken languages such as Cantonese, Hokkien etc are dialects depending on your p…

I don't think this is the point. You may wish to offer both Simplified and Traditional Chinese, but that's a choice — and the article is clearing up the confusion that most non-Chinese have about which relates to which nations.

Forgotten to mention, Simplified is a simplified version of Traditional, so words can be translated directly one to one. Simplified just makes the Traditional word easier and simpler to write. When you translate to either one, you basically already target both.

Re: Chinese: Simplified, Traditional, Mandarin or Cantonese (The Simple Answer)

#14

Post by est »

Open-Juicer wrote: post #12

>>>So, in an effort to boost literacy, the People's Republic of China attempted to make learning characters easier through a series of simplification rounds that took place between the 1950s and 1970s The fact is that people in Hong Kong and Taiwan have a much higher literacy rate than those in mainland China, yet they use Traditional Chinese. Mainlanders' low literacy rate is mainly a sign of lacking education, not…

> Moreover, in a digital world, they make no difference in input speed.

On the other hand, traditional Chinese on a The retina display on iPhone4 is good news for traditional Chinese.

Re: Chinese: Simplified, Traditional, Mandarin or Cantonese (The Simple Answer)

#15

Post by yuan »

Contrary to what the simplified/traditional categorisation might suggest, there is nothing non-traditional about the simplification scheme. Most, if not all, of the simplified characters are taken from existing forms, such as those used in cursive script(草书, aka grass script, cao style) and variants used in certain eras/regions which happen to be simpler in forms. There had being painstaking and rigorous process to validate established usage before any character was approved for inclusion, in order to ensure the coherency and continuity of the whole writing system. During the cultural revolution, there was an effort for further simplification, and in the revolutionary zest, the process was not so rigorous and many poorly designed and indeed ugly forms were invented and included. Thankfully, these late additions were later repealed and are no longer in use.

There was (or still is, politically motivated, I think) opposition to the simplification in Taiwan, but fortunately pragmaticism prevails and nowadays, even the current President Ma Ying-jeou advocates "识繁写简" (recognize complex, write simplified), because the practicality of the simplified version is undeniable.

Re: Chinese: Simplified, Traditional, Mandarin or Cantonese (The Simple Answer)

#16

Post by ch1rish »

quant18 wrote: post #10
robert_mygengo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this is the point. You may wish to offer both Simplified and Traditional Chinese, but that's a choice — and the article is clearing up the confusion that most non-Chinese have about which relates to which nations.

Forgive me but this article seems to generate more confusion than it clears up. Statements like Cantonese and Mandarin speakers both use one of the writing systems mentioned above, and on paper, the languages can look quite similar are quite inept. Except a few subject matters (that do NOT get sent through five-cent-per-word web services --- like advertising slogans and written instructions for verbal Miranda warning…

You make some good points, but I think the rule of thumb the article brings up still holds true: "choose translators located in the region you are marketing your product in." Yes, Traditional to Simplified mapping can be done easily by computer(the article actually provides a link to a site that does this for free), and yes, despite regional vocabulary differences for words like taxi, all words can be written in Traditional or Simplified and be largely understood by all of those in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Mainland. The article could have done a better job explaining this, and sometimes simply understanding is good enough.

That said, the article really has non Chinese speakers marketing their product in China in mind, and just as if I were marketing my product in the U.K. I would want British spellings, I would want local words to be used if I were marketing my product to a specific Chinese locale. And, in my opinion, the difference in vocabularies between HK/TW/CN are arguably greater than the English vocabulary differences between UK and the US. Simply put, if I were marketing my product to Hong Kong, I would not want to pay even $.05/word for a translation of a product description if I knew it was done by a Mandarin speaker from Beijing who was not versed in the regional differences, and had only converted the text from Simplified to Traditional. I think this holds true for both small boutique hotels, and "high volume group-buying websites."

Re: Chinese: Simplified, Traditional, Mandarin or Cantonese (The Simple Answer)

#17

Post by xiaoma »

I'd be very wary of paying any translator who messes up simple translations that they put into marketing materials. This is how the phrase "traditional characters" is written in each script:

(written in traditional): 繁體字 (written in simplified): 繁体字

Also, the bit about traditional characters being harder to learn reads like propaganda. Traditional character-using areas have higher literacy rates. Also, my own personal experience as a language learner has been that traditional takes longer to write, but it's more systematic in its structure and it's much easier to read.

One further thing worth pointing out is that mainlanders read traditional characters far better than Taiwanese and overseas Chinese read simplified.

Re: Chinese: Simplified, Traditional, Mandarin or Cantonese (The Simple Answer)

#18

Post by bane »

the People's Republic of China attempted to make learning characters easier through a series of simplification rounds that took place between the 1950s and 1970s.

And somehow they missed a far better target of Zhuyin Fuhao.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bopomofo

It would have not only vastly simplified the written language problem in China, but forced the nation to standardize on Mandarin as the spoken tongue (with the benefit of a standard pronunciation!)

Re: Chinese: Simplified, Traditional, Mandarin or Cantonese (The Simple Answer)

#19

Post by Open-Juicer »

est wrote: post #14
Open-Juicer wrote: post #12

>>>So, in an effort to boost literacy, the People's Republic of China attempted to make learning characters easier through a series of simplification rounds that took place between the 1950s and 1970s The fact is that people in Hong Kong and Taiwan have a much higher literacy rate than those in mainland China, yet they use Traditional Chinese. Mainlanders' low literacy rate is mainly a sign of lacking education, not…

> Moreover, in a digital world, they make no difference in input speed. On the other hand, traditional Chinese on a The retina display on iPhone4 is good news for traditional Chinese.

Chinese words being displayed incorrectly is based on a false assumption.

On Twitter, 140 Characters mean a lot in Chinese! why? In Chinese, almost every character is a word; In English, every character is just an alphabet, not a word, with minor exceptions of course. Chinese words are square blocks whereas English ones rectangle blocks. They shouldn't be of the same height.

I would argue that Chinese words convey more meaning per cm square. The same square space occupied by 5 rectangle capital alphabets is more than enough to display any Chinese character correctly.

BTW, you don't need to recognize every stroke to be able to identify a Chinese word. You can tell by its pictorial pattern, such as negative spaces.

Re: Chinese: Simplified, Traditional, Mandarin or Cantonese (The Simple Answer)

#20

Post by jhugg »

Open-Juicer wrote: post #19
est wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Moreover, in a digital world, they make no difference in input speed. On the other hand, traditional Chinese on a The retina display on iPhone4 is good news for traditional Chinese.

Chinese words being displayed incorrectly is based on a false assumption. On Twitter, 140 Characters mean a lot in Chinese! why? In Chinese, almost every character is a word; In English, every character is just an alphabet, not a word, with minor exceptions of course. Chinese words are square blocks whereas English ones rectangle blocks. They shouldn't be of the same height. I would argue that Chinese words convey mo…

I've always been super jealous at how much Chinese speakers can say in Chinese on Twitter.
Post reply on HN