Live data from Hacker News

If English were written like Chinese (1999)

zompist.com

51–60 of 100 posts

Re: If English were written like Chinese (1999)

#51
post #30

The increasing use of icons and emoji suggests that English will become like Chinese! (Ever try to look up an icon in a dictionary? This puts paid to the idea that icons are decipherable by people who don't know the language. Copyrighting the icons makes even that infinitely worse, as it prevents standardization.)

I'm not sure where you've seen this "increasing use of icons and emoji". When I encounter people (this is pretty much limited to teenagers) use emoji, they have very little communicative value. In the modern era the use of pictographs has become Chinese's Achilles' heel: the hanzi are not sortable. The very things that define the Chinese are what makes it stupidly difficult to get computers to grok the language.

> I'm not sure where you've seen this "increasing use of icons

Consider all the icons used for "print" as if the letters P R I N T are unclear. Even for non-english speakers, it's trivial to look up the word in a dictionary, and impossible to look up the icon. Ditto for replacing "ON" with |. It's just madness.

> and emoji.

Perhaps their recent appearance in Unicode, and the several screens of them that appeared on my iphone texting app.

Re: If English were written like Chinese (1999)

#52
post #36
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a part of the analogy which definitely applies -- Chinese script (even Simplified) often completely ignores Huffman coding-like principles. Otherwise we wouldn't have words like 繼續 "continue" (41 strokes).

For comparison, the letters in "continue" have approximately 15 strokes total.

続く is 14 strokes, so Japanese beats English!

I could go on ... and "go on" is only 6 strokes.

Re: If English were written like Chinese (1999)

#53
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure where you've seen this "increasing use of icons and emoji". When I encounter people (this is pretty much limited to teenagers) use emoji, they have very little communicative value. In the modern era the use of pictographs has become Chinese's Achilles' heel: the hanzi are not sortable. The very things that define the Chinese are what makes it stupidly difficult to get computers to grok the language.

They usually sort by number of strokes.

There are many ways to sort. Typically sorted first by radical, then by number of strokes.

There's more than one ordering of the radicals, and choices to be made when characters have the same radical and the same number of strokes

Paper dictionaries are very thumbable though, the current radical is usually highlighted in a way that makes it easy to flick through and find what you need

Re: If English were written like Chinese (1999)

#54
post #36
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a part of the analogy which definitely applies -- Chinese script (even Simplified) often completely ignores Huffman coding-like principles. Otherwise we wouldn't have words like 繼續 "continue" (41 strokes).

For comparison, the letters in "continue" have approximately 15 strokes total.

Or two strokes and a dot in cursive. A principle that also applies in Chinese and Japanese

Re: If English were written like Chinese (1999)

#55

People might be interested to know that Egyptian Hieroglyphics, despite looking even more like pictograms are actually an alphabet. Another cool fact, in hieroglyphics there is more than one way to write a word, because, unlike most alphabetic systems, some characters are multi syllabic and can represent two or more syllables.

Wasn't it rather a syllabary?

Re: If English were written like Chinese (1999)

#56
post #13

This is a fantastic guide / insight for how Chinese characters work, and does a great deal to dispel the myth that Chinese characters are virtually random - that each individual character requires independent memorization. As someone who has studied both Chinese and Japanese, this article read very fluidly. Curious how other readers have found this?

As someone with practically zero understanding of the Chinese writing system beyond the basic notion of what an ideogram is, it was very helpful in aiding understanding (assuming it is accurate).

Re: If English were written like Chinese (1999)

#58

This article is actually a lot better at explaining the characters system used in both china and Japan, than the articles that have hit the front page today and in the last week or so.

With the added bonus that it's accurate. Referring to these characters as they are originally: Chinese. Some people don't seem to be very happy about that fact.

Who? The word kanji literally means "Chinese characters" lol

Re: If English were written like Chinese (1999)

#59
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As a result Japanese people (probably Chinese too) have a hard time processing some of the English syllables. This creates difficulty in learning English for Japanese and Chinese." We can also say that American/English have a hard time processing some of the Japanese/Chinese syllables. All the languages I speak a little bit have distinctive sounds that are difficult for most non-native speakers to master unless you…

What I am saying is that in English, after learning 26 letters, you can read any combination of them. If you try to see how many possible syllables there are, there would be many thousands. Combinations like "eng" "lish" can't be properly put in Japanese phonetic characters because you can't put "eng" directly, you have to use "en gu ri shu", inserting vowels all over the place. Japanese can't properly learn English…

> What I am saying is that in English, after learning 26 letters, you can read any combination of them. If you try to see how many possible syllables there are, there would be many thousands. Combinations like "eng" "lish" can't be properly put in Japanese phonetic characters because you can't put "eng" directly, you have to use "en gu ri shu", inserting vowels all over the place. Japanese can't properly learn English because their brains are trained with much fewer possible syllable sounds and they can't make the jump.

This claim is significantly misleading.

Every language has its own phonotactics, which includes allowed and forbidden sequences of sounds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonotactics

English and Japanese both have their own phonotactic structures. While English's phonotactic rules are much more permissive than those of Japanese, and allow more different sounds to be used and to be combined in more ways, and while these differences do affect what native speakers of each language can easily say (or recognize other people saying!), it's a mistake to say that English allows everything while only Japanese has restrictions.

Both languages have restrictions, and both have restrictions that some other languages don't have. For example, Slavic languages allow consonant clusters that English doesn't. Hindi allows distinctions of aspiration in arbitrary locations where English requires particular aspirations in particular positions or at least considers this distinction non-phonemic (and hence extremely hard for English speakers to learn to appreciate even when both sounds in question are part of their phonetic inventory).

If, from noticing the more extensive restrictions on sound structure in Japanese, you get the impression that English speakers can pronounce any sequence of letters from our alphabet, you're missing something significant about how English works.

Edit: as other people have noted in this thread, these differences between these languages are also probably not originally due to differences in writing systems. Often languages that share the same writing system have different phonotactic rules (and different sound inventory, for that matter). It's more likely that many of the important differences predate the writing system, although it's true that the writing system can influence how people learn and think about their language and how it changes over time.

Re: If English were written like Chinese (1999)

#60
post #52
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For comparison, the letters in "continue" have approximately 15 strokes total.

続く is 14 strokes, so Japanese beats English! I could go on ... and "go on" is only 6 strokes.

You could just use the ellipsis, and use only three strokes. Or even simpler, an em-dash at one stroke. :)
Post reply on HN