Ugly in places

[45rob54]

Looking at a newspaper written in traditional chinese, I find the text is actualy quite ugly. The way some characters are very simple while others are immensely complicated just makes it look rough and unbalanced. When one character is three or four quite thick strokes and the one next to it is a tangled knot of thin strokes that just look like a black square from a distance, it's not very pretty.

In my opinion, more complex characters should take up more space while simpler ones take up less. Or even that simple ones should be given slightly more complexity, so it looks more balanced.

I still believe the Chinese language has a lot further to go before it matches up to Latin languages.

Wouldn't it look odd if you had a load of simple characters like了, 儿 or 人 and then this came up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Biang.gif#file

[roddy]

什么废话

Hmmm, you could have something . . .

[45rob54]

Of course, I can't write it here, but what I mean in some characters could be given more more width if they are, essentially, 4 or 5 normal characters stuffed in together. A slightly different thing could be done vertically (see hieroglyphs).

[Lu]

Som characters large and some small, I think that'll look much more unbalanced. I actually like the difference. Like the name 劉坤一, I think it's beautiful how it has the shape of a >

And that biang2-character, is that really the one? A friend who has been to Shaanxi and told me about this character, according to him it was haibian de bian (traditional), with a roof as in jia. Compicated, but not that complicated. The wikipedia version doesn't make much sense to me.

[ala]

Chinese characters = semi-phonetic box script. Each character takes up the exact same amount of space, because they represent ONE syllable. It makes no sense to have a character spanning 2-3 characters if it's still going to be just one syllable. That's now how Chinese characters function in the Chinese language, they aren't abstract signs and symbols, it's a writing system used to record the language.

[randall_flagg]

Good question: Is that a REAL Chinese characters? Please tell me it's not? Anybody count the strokes on that one?

[Quest]

I still believe the Chinese language has a lot further to go before it matches up to Latin languages.

I prefer oranges over apples.

[agentzi]

(a bit oblique to the subject) but the exaggeration points to, imho, a supercalifragilisticexpialidociously antediluvian, i.e., 'retro-cool', character/字. (fyi: more background on this famous Xīān biángbiáng miàn @ http://www.xuezhongwen.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=254

[cjbaker]

biáng from biángbiáng面 (my favorite kind of noodles!) is really kind of a joke. I know a noodle restaurant that has it painted in calligraphy on the wall, but most people can't write it and it's not in Unicode, for example. Imagine a regional dish written with 30 Roman letters.

Also, a common aesthetic for text printed in Roman letters is that the ink density of a block of text should be as even as possible. I don't think this can really be done for Simplified or Traditional characters, but don't you think the aesthetic beauty of 汉字 makes up for that?

[(JR)]

I prefer oranges over apples.

well said.

I think its interesting the way we westerners tend to look at chinese language from a position of superiority. I think it's very problematic. I'd like to make 2 points:

1. There is plenty that could be "improved" about latin languages, specifically English, if you choose to think this way (I do not). For example, English spelling often does not give you all the information you need to correctly pronounce the word.

2. Most of my studies were done in Taiwan, therefore I'm prone to think Traditional looks much better than simplified (even though I can read both). Of course, I realize this is just a result of what I'm most accustomed to and is an arbitrary judgment.

[Ferno]

well said.

I think its interesting the way we westerners tend to look at chinese language from a position of superiority. I think it's very problematic. I'd like to make 2 points:

1. There is plenty that could be "improved" about latin languages' date=' specifically English, if you choose to think this way (I do not). For example, English spelling often does not give you all the information you need to correctly pronounce the word.

2. Most of my studies were done in Taiwan, therefore I'm prone to think Traditional looks much better than simplified (even though I can read both). Of course, I realize this is just a result of what I'm most accustomed to and is an arbitrary judgment[/quote']

{JR} from OT?

[Ncao]

There is plenty that could be "improved" about latin languages, specifically English, if you choose to think this way (I do not). For example, English spelling often does not give you all the information you need to correctly pronounce the word.

English isn't a latin language,it's Germanic.Latin languages are Spanish,Italian,French,Portuguese.

[Sophia_Shang]

Quote:

------------

Lu

And that biang2-character, is that really the one? A friend who has been to Shaanxi and told me about this character, according to him it was haibian de bian (traditional), with a roof as in jia.

------------

Of course we do not have such kind of character, and the traditional character of 边 is 邊

[Sophia_Shang]

Quote:

------------

Lu

And that biang2-character, is that really the one? A friend who has been to Shaanxi and told me about this character, according to him it was haibian de bian (traditional), with a roof as in jia.

------------

Of course we do not have such kind of character, and the traditional character of 边 is 邊

[nipponman]

Each character takes up the exact same amount of space, because they represent ONE syllable.

Exactly.

I still believe the Chinese language has a lot further to go before it matches up to Latin languages.

I think it is silly to compare latin/germanic written languages to written chinese. There is no way that you can equate the two, because they both solve the same problem (writing) differently within a different situation. English has many possible syllable combinations, thousands, mandarin only has around 1300. Now to size of characters, I think that all characters should be returned to some original state. For example 医 originally was 医, and was then complicated to 醫 and then simplified again. This may make characters look more balanced to you, though they look fine to me.

[Ferno]

I think it is silly to compare latin/germanic written languages to written chinese. There is no way that you can equate the two, because they both solve the same problem (writing) differently within a different situation. English has many possible syllable combinations, thousands, mandarin only has around 1300.

lol here we go again, characters "solving" Chinese's problem in its special situation. Characters created this situation. Saying that Chinese characters are well suited to spoken Chinese's situation, again, is like saying that heroin is well suited to the situation of an addict.

[geraldc]

How many other written languages can support multiple dialects simultaneously? Also calligraphy is still a flourishing in China, so I think they like the characters they've got. The only time you see people attempt calligraphy in the west is when they're scrap booking, or writing out place cards at weddings.

[Ferno]

sorry, are you talking to me? i didn't mention caligraphy

the only "dialect" Standard Written Chinese supports is Standard Spoken Mandarin.

[geraldc]

The calligraphy was in reference to Chinese characters being "ugly" whereas to many Chinese, they're actually works of art etc.

A Cantonese speaker can pick up any standard Chinese book, read it out aloud, and not be understood by someone who only understands Mandarin and vice versa, but they can both understand the written text.

[Ferno]

Standard written Chinese is based on Mandarin grammar, word order, and word choice - so reading it out in Cantonese isn't the same as reading it out in Mandarin. Look at ala's posts about Shanghaiese - 700 unique syllables (nearly half of those of mandarin), 2 tones, different grammar. There's no formal method of writing shanghaiese - you just write in Mandarin.

-You mentioned Cantonese because of Hong Kong, but HK and China use different character sets.

-A Cantonese speaker in Guangdong on the mainland, however, will never have a single lesson in Cantonese in school - education and business and higher level vocabulary are carried out in Mandarin, which he will become a fluent speaker of at a young age.

-The Guangdong person will be writing in Mandarin, he will never think of it as writing method for his native dialect.