Re: Chinese writing systems
|From:||John Cowan <jcowan@...>|
|Date:||Monday, November 4, 2002, 17:36|
Douglas Koller, Latin & French scripsit:
> One wonders how much this is actually true vs. how much it reflects a
> desire to feel separate and distinct from the mainland. When I lived
> in Taiwan, my Taiwanese partner would ask me to read letters for him
> from mainland relatives (I'm a non-native speaker) and would hand
> such letters to me like he was handling a piece of rancid fish.
MAYBE IT'S MORE LIKE THE EXPERIENCE OF READING ENGLISH IN ALL CAPS
AND IN A REALLY, REALLY UGLY FONT TO BOOT.
(Apologies for shouting.)
> I don't have proof per se, but I would imagine traditional -->
> simplified is easier than simplified--> traditional, and even *that*
> is not insurmountable.
Sure. After all, when the traditional system ruled everywhere, educated
people still learned lots of simplified forms -- cursive forms, shorthand
forms, semi-standard forms, etc. etc. Much of this material was drawn
on by the commission that developed the standardized simplified forms.
So it's mostly a matter of what order you learn what in.
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan <jcowan@...>
You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn.
You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn.
Clear all so! `Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)