Re: PinYin - Reformed Latin-script Mandarin writing

From: "Jonathan Chang"

>     Just last night, my father & I were talking about language &
> Chinese. We discussed the Chinese (mainland) moving toward
> the Romanized _PinYin_ system.
Mao's dream, n'est-ce pas?

>     Both my father & I see PinYin as a step backwards (& to the
> "Western" side).
While I can understand (and, indeed, empathize with) the argument, one
wonders if Vietnamese consider themselves less "Eastern" because they
eschewed the characters for the Roman alphabet. I wish the question weren't
so politically loaded.

> But I see its uses:
>         - spreading the standard Mandarin dialect in China
>             (for good or bad is highly debatable
>             [personally, I identify with Cantonese
>             ... tho' I do not speak it])
I would think the increased commonality of radio and TV (normally broadcast
in Mandarin) would also work to this end. While major dialects like
Cantonese, Shanghainese, and (say) Chongqingese, in terms of sheer numbers,
local pride and identity, and the prestige associated with certain dialects
(oh, and did I mention money?), may be able to withstand the encroachment of
Mandarin (which I have no problem with as a lingua franca throughout the
country), I fear others, like Nanchang dialect (where I lived) may get
crushed in the process, and that would be a shame.

There seems to be a grassroots movement on both sides of the strait to
revitalize local dialects and establish dialect literature, including
devising local dialect characters where none exist in Mandarin. We'll have
to see how well it survives, but I'm hopeful.

>         - making standard Mandarin _somewhat_ more "accessible"
>         to foreigners, MSL (Mandarin as a Second Language) learners,
>         and, eventually, AI-augmented computer technology
>         - making it easier for mass media in the West to report
>         on China
One might have wished that you hadn't drawn such a clear-cut distinction
between "foreigners" and "MSL learners" since there is quite a degree of
overlap.

>     PinYin is not the best solution for a Romanized Mandarin, but
> it's a Chinese solution in a fruitful road (hopefully) toward an
> "auxilary Mandarin".
You may want to troll the archives for discussions John Cowan and I have had
on this very subject.

>     PinYin could never really replace the ancient logographic (written)
> language. The literal & literary riches of the logographic Chinese
stretches
> from the archaic Oracle Bone Script (circa 3000 BCE, approximately) to
> contemporary Chinese "concrete/language" poetry. That is nearly 5,000 some
> years of history.
I certainly wouldn't dispute this. I am a Chinese character fiend, and can
be transported to fits of ecstacy just mulling over some obscure 40+-stroke
character. I wouldn't want to overplay it, but the sheer age of the
characters affords them a mystico-symbolic aura like the "gua" of the I
Ching or the arcana of the Tarot, even though one might overlook it reading
the front page of "Renmin Ribao".

>     Maybe the "West" needs to create its own logographic system. Now
> that would be a language reform. ;)
But for the better? This I might dispute.

Kou