Differences between modern written Chinese from mainland China and Taiwan

[Mark Yong]

I have begun to make a comparison between books and literature coming from both mainland China and Taiwan. My sampling pool may be rather limited, but what I have noticed is that the grammer used for written Chinese in texts of Taiwanese-origin seems to be a little different from those of mainland Chinese. In particular, the Taiwanese texts employ a much more formal grammar (some of the grammar and syntax almost appproximates to 文言文), compared to the 白話文 used in the mainland Chinese texts, where the grammar approximates closer to spoken standard Mandarin. Would this be a correct observation?

[zhwj]

Would you mind sharing with us your sample set? What kind of literature are you looking at?

For fiction and essays, I haven't noticed that much of a difference overall, though my experience with literature from Taiwan is considerably less broad than what I've read from the mainland. Fiction from Bai Xianyong, Zhang Xiguo, Zhong Zhaozheng, and essays from Long Yingtai don't seem any more or less archaic than mainland writers. Poet and essayist Yu Guangzhong has spoken out against increasing the wenyanwen education in Taiwan schools.

There's a thread on the forums somewhere that compares Harry Potter translations from the mainland and Taiwan, with the conclusion that the Taiwan translation sounded more literary, but I couldn't say whether that was representative of anything more than translator skill - I have friends who seek out translations from Taiwan because the translators are simply better in many cases.

[Jose]

I tend to agree with Mark Yong here. It seems to me that formal expressions, like for example using 尚未 for 還沒, are more common in the HK / Taiwan press than in mainland newspapers. Besides, titles for books and films from Hong Kong tend to use classical-style four-character names, which I think are not so common in mainland China. Just compare the original names of Wong Kar-wai's films with those by Zhang Yimou or any mainland director.

An interesting reference is this one: http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/chifreq/ , which has different frequency lists for characters for the mainland, HK and Taiwan, and also for different periods. I have found that the 之 character, very common in the more formal styles of language, is indeed more frequent in both HK and Taiwan than on the mainland, which seems to confirm Mark Yong's view.

[zhwj]

That's a fascinating corpus analysis in your link, Jose. I can't see where they list the titles for the 80s/90s articles - from the rankings, it's pretty obvious that aside from any grammatical differences (preference for 和 over 与, for example), the mainland articles certainly have subject differences from Hong Kong and Taiwan. The relative rankings of 发、展、资、业 and so on suggest certain things about related word frequencies - though I do wonder what explains the less frequent use of 人 on the mainland...

[gato]

I read China Times, a Taiwanese newspaper, quite regularly, and I notice, too, that its articles tend to have more classical grammar and vocabulary.

Jose's site also says that "了" is used 56% more frequently in mainland writings than in Taiwanese ones. Since "了" is from vernacular Chinese and not a part of wenyanwen, that would also confirm a preference for wenyanwen in Taiwan.

[Mark Yong]

Hi, ZHWJ,

My sample of Taiwanese-originated texts are 智揚出版社 editions of several Chinese classics (which I happen to own). Now, admittedly, books on Classical Chinese are hardly a fair reference point for comparing modern Chinese writing. However, I am referring to the modern Chinese translations and commentaries therein. Even there, the use of 之 over 的, 亦 over 也是, etc. is clearly visible. I have taken a look at some of the mainland Chinese editions of the Classics, and most of the modern Chinese commentaries use standard 白話文.

Regards,

Mark