# Are Simplified Characters necessary?



## Thomas F. O'Gara

Hello all.

I'm interested in some opinions from around the world on this subject. Was it really necessary for the PROC government to simplify Chinese characters?

Granted, it's quicker to write some characters in the simplified version. But as for learning them, I can't see where it makes a single bit of difference. There's just as many characters to learn as before, and the underlying system isn't really any simpler.  In fact, it may arguably be even more difficult to learn the simplified ones!

Any opinions?


----------



## Outsider

Here's an earlier, related thread: If you would like to learn Chinese, would you learn traditional or simplified Chinese .


----------



## Lugubert

For me, the main gain is that simplifieds are easier to read in small sizes, because they tend to be less cluttered. My university teacher (Göteborg, Sweden) used them, but explained every new character in terms of radical and phonetic, and always related them to the traditionals. We were supposed to read and write simplifieds, but one section of the test for the first as well as for the second semester was a number of characters in trad for which we should write the simplifieds. Learning this way added to a feeling for the writing, which wouldn't have come from just memorizing.


----------



## MingRaymond

Not necessary.


----------



## konungursvia

They were not necessary but were a reasonable and appropriate thing for a leftist government to do, as it made written Chinese more accessible to peasants in rural areas with only six years of primary education. It is well established that learning proper Taiwanese / Hong Kong / Traditional written Chinese takes eight years of primary schooling for the average kid.


----------



## Thomas F. O'Gara

Konungursvia:

I'm surprised to hear that it would make such a big difference.  I guess there was some justification for the change after all.


----------



## fuzzy_navel

Not necessary!  
Why the traditional Chinese characters are considered as "traditional" is because it was used during the long history.  The simplified form was created by the new government.  So I think if one wants to learn the Chinese culture deeply, one should learn the traditional form.  However, I did learn a bit of the simplified characters because it helps me to take notes a little faster in the classes!  For me, that is the only benefit for using the simplified form.


----------



## LeMakiyo

Lugubert said:


> For me, the main gain is that simplifieds are easier to read in small sizes, because they tend to be less cluttered. My university teacher (Göteborg, Sweden) used them, but explained every new character in terms of radical and phonetic, and always related them to the traditionals. We were supposed to read and write simplifieds, but one section of the test for the first as well as for the second semester was a number of characters in trad for which we should write the simplifieds. Learning this way added to a feeling for the writing, which wouldn't have come from just memorizing.


 
I agree with you completely.


----------



## Frank06

Hi,


konungursvia said:


> They were not necessary but were a reasonable and appropriate thing for a leftist government to do, as it made written Chinese more accessible to peasants in rural areas with only six years of primary education. It is well established that learning proper Taiwanese / Hong Kong / Traditional written Chinese takes eight years of primary schooling for the average kid.



If you have a look at character etymologies, you'll find that simplification of characters is almost as old as the characters themselves.

Groetjes,
Frank


----------



## Flaminius

I think of 漢字 simplification being on a par with spelling reformations in other langauges.  There are always bickering and deploring on rationalisation — how it severs the historical, cultural and regional ties.  I personally feel it was a pity that the simplification in the Continent, as well as that in Japan, has fragmented 漢字 (hanzi, kanji, hanja or Chinese character; take your pick) culture in North-East Asia.

From a learner's viewpoint, however, knowledge of simplified characters is absolutely necessary for me.  Without it, I understand very little of what is written in newspapers or any other media I have access to.


----------



## Lugubert

Frank06 said:


> Hi,
> 
> If you have a look at character etymologies, you'll find that simplification of characters is almost as old as the characters themselves.
> 
> Groetjes,
> Frank


I don't remember any examples right now, but some of the "simplifieds" are older than the corresponding "traditionals".


----------



## Thomas F. O'Gara

Out of all that has been said here, the only really cogent argument I see is konungursvia's comment about cutting the time down for literacy from eight years to six. Even there, though, I'm at a loss to explain the reason.

Unlike the spelling reform done, for example in the Soviet Union in 1918, the simplified characters do not make the writing system adhere more closely with the spoken language. More importantly in the case of Chinese, it doesn't reduce the number of different characters that you have to learn. It also does not create a more uniform system of putting characters together; it mainly siimplifies the component parts in characters made up of more than one component, or chooses the simplest way to write a character when there is more than one traditional version. And it doesn't even do that systematically.

IMHO a better tactic would have been to limit the number of characters that primary schools had to teach and provide a syllabic script that could be used like furigana in Japanese and put in small type next to characters that were not in this primary group to be a guide for the semi-literate. In fact, something like this was done in Taiwan for classical texts for presentation to secondary school students. Maybe the fact that they did it in Taiwan was enough to discourage the mainland from trying something similar, though.


----------



## Gavin

我觉得还是有必要用简化字的,繁体字写起来还是有点麻烦. 可能外国人学起中文来,觉得有两种文字体系有点不方便,觉得简化字也没有简多少笔画,其实我们中国人自己觉得用起来很方便. 其实你只要一种学好了,另外一种很容易就掌握了. 我从小学的是简化字,但是我现在读一些繁体字的历史书,如<<史记>> , <<三国志>> ,并不困难,有一些问题只是古代汉语的问题,并不是简化还是繁体的问题.  所以大家不用因为这个问题 而烦恼.     All people here discuss this qestion in English, for this is a qestion about Chinese, so I say something in Chinese.  I grow up in Mainland China, IMHO this is not a big problem , at least for Chinese people, I think you can just make up your mind to learn one of the two well, the other one is not the problem!


----------



## Thomas F. O'Gara

Gavin:

I'll agree that simplified characters are easier and faster to write, which is a considerable benefit.

I suspect that the foreign learner would be better off learning the traditional characters first.  IMHO it's much easier to learn the simplified ones after you know the traditional ones than it is the other way round.


----------



## boardslide315

Thomas F. O'Gara said:


> I suspect that the foreign learner would be better off learning the traditional characters first. IMHO it's much easier to learn the simplified ones after you know the traditional ones than it is the other way round.


 
But if your goal is only to be able to read the text used in mainland China, why not just learn simplified? Besides, most Chinese teach-yourself books and websites use simplified text as these characters are generally easier for a non-native to learn and recognize. 

This thread has made me wonder though, would someone from Taiwan or Hong Kong understand the simplified script just as easilly as they would traditional?


----------



## CrazyIvan

Lugubert said:


> I don't remember any examples right now, but some of the "simplifieds" are older than the corresponding "traditionals".


 
that would not be surprised, however, I believe what we are talking now is the overall simplied chinese character system, not only one or two characters as example.

As learning mandarine as my major lanuage in the early years of education, I was requested to check all the new words in dictionary.Most dictionary editors use 部首 as a major classification system. In such system, we break the word into several basic elements, called 部首, then add the number of strokes to find the exact word.

Lots of these basic elements become major words in the simplified system. In that case, these characters are surely "older" than any one esle. Since they are basic, they have been existed in the system for a long time.

However, I would say the traditional one is the one shows the evolution of this language through the history. People add this and that into a characters, make them being so complicated therefore can be distiguished a word from another.

One of the most precious heritage, 康熙字典, a dictionary edited by Ching Dynasty Emperor, recorded both traditional and simplied words. However, the simplified form is called 異體字(deviated form)


----------



## CrazyIvan

fuzzy_navel said:


> Not necessary!
> Why the traditional Chinese characters are considered as "traditional" is because it was used during the long history. The simplified form was created by the new government. So I think if one wants to learn the Chinese culture deeply, one should learn the traditional form. However, I did learn a bit of the simplified characters because it helps me to take notes a little faster in the classes! For me, that is the only benefit for using the simplified form.


 
Hello, Fuzzy_navel, 

Since we live on the same island, I have to tell something.

As other ferero points out. Some simplified characters do live longer than traditional ones. Please bear in mind that China in such a huge continent therefore we can really something for sure. Even in 康熙 dictionary you see some funny characters or resemblance of current simplified words!! Even Ching is the last dynasty of China but it is still something almost 400 years ago. 

However, I agree with your arguments about culture contents. Indeed in traditional chinese system it has far richer culture heritage over the simplified system. It aslo reflects to the chinese learning experiences of some other ferero's ....While using traditional characters, you are "understanding" this language, not only "memorizing" the strokes.  I think this is very important for language learning.


----------



## CrazyIvan

Gavin said:


> 我觉得还是有必要用简化字的,繁体字写起来还是有点麻烦. 可能外国人学起中文来,觉得有两种文字体系有点不方便,觉得简化字也没有简多少笔画,其实我们中国人自己觉得用起来很方便. 其实你只要一种学好了,另外一种很容易就掌握了. 我从小学的是简化字,但是我现在读一些繁体字的历史书,如<<史记>> , <<三国志>> ,并不困难,有一些问题只是古代汉语的问题,并不是简化还是繁体的问题. 所以大家不用因为这个问题 而烦恼. All people here discuss this qestion in English, for this is a qestion about Chinese, so I say something in Chinese. I grow up in Mainland China, IMHO this is not a big problem , at least for Chinese people, I think you can just make up your mind to learn one of the two well, the other one is not the problem!


 
Hello, Gavin,

Since you are from mainland, I would like to ask you a question.

Would you like to preserve your culture or not? or you create a language simply for the convience for foreigners to learn?

My questions may seem provocative, but I hope people in China have a chance to think over it. Over the history, intrepreations of characters are written in traditional chinese. Those scholars broke words into pieces in order to give percise meaning of this word, or they add certain parts into it to make a new words for people. Of course it is difficult, since China has great number of population as well as geographic variaty, however, ancenster chinese managed to work them out. I do not think throwing them away is a good idea.

However, I agree with you that for the convinence of learning, simplied may be helpful. But traditional characters are still the key to the essence of this culture.


----------



## boardslide315

CrazyIvan said:


> Would you like to preserve your culture or not? or you create a language simply for the convience for foreigners to learn?



 Should using the simplified script really be viewed as a loss of culture? It seems to me that any person living in mainland China can learn the traditional characters if they please, and just because these characters are not used every day does not mean they have been 'thrown away.' There must still be places in the mainland where people can go to learn the traditional text if they desire to do so. 

Traditional characters are indeed more rich and detailed, but they were designed in a time so different from our own that their practicality today should be reconsidered. While I am not a native speaker, it seems like the traditional text I have seen on websites is sometimes so small it looks like random ink blots on the screen...it cannot be argued that the transition from paper and ink to electronic computer screen has been a large one, so why not make the adjustments to compensate for this leap in technology? 

I would also like to add that I admire your cultural pride…I am wondering if your patriotism is typical of everyone in Taiwan, and if it is somehow connected to the reluctance of your people to adopt the Pinyin Romanization system that has been proven to be so beneficial to foreigners, including myself. (I hope if I have made any incorrect assumptions here you will not be too quick call me an ignorant American. I am basing my opinions solely on books and my experiences with the two Taiwanese people I know.)


----------



## Aoyama

> They were not necessary but were a reasonable and appropriate thing for a leftist government to do, as it made written Chinese more accessible to peasants in rural areas with only six years of primary education. It is well established that learning proper Taiwanese / Hong Kong / Traditional written Chinese takes eight years of primary schooling for the average kid.


   Konungursvia is basically right. Simplification of ideograms was a tool to provide better literacy among poor people, with good results. 
  The problem is that other simplifications have been made by Japan (also using *hanzi/kanji*), sometimes ending up to be the same simplification, sometime different. 
    As Lugubert pointed out, the final result of all that is that any serious learner of chinese or japanese (or both) will be better off mastering _all versions _, at least to be able to _read_ each version, a must in order to gain access to old texts.


----------



## Thomas F. O'Gara

Actually, learning one system when you know the other is not such a tremendous burden - a day or two of work at most. There are (or at least there used to be) cheap pamphlets run off giving the equivalents, which help in the few cases where you can't easily deduce one from the other.

My point in starting the thread was to query whether establishing the simplified system was really worth the effort. I see now that there is some value to it.

While it's a digression, I have to agree with Boardslide on the topic of Pinyin - the Wade Giles transliteration that is still used in Taiwan is cumbersome. And to think that the Russians invented Pinyin!


----------



## CrazyIvan

Thomas F. O'Gara said:


> While it's a digression, I have to agree with Boardslide on the topic of Pinyin - the Wade Giles transliteration that is still used in Taiwan is cumbersome. And to think that the Russians invented Pinyin!


 
Coincidentally I involve into such a government project to unified our pinyin system, which had great progress so far.

Yes, previously, the Pinying system in Taiwan is such a big mess. As far as I know, 4 or 5 systems are on the road 4 years ago.

But now things has changed.

We did invent another pinyin system to unified all these versions. A system with great similarity to chinese one with some modification. Some good example is if in China you will see Zhong instead Jhong, Aslo, Xin, instead Sin. These two are major changes. 

Since I serve my social service right now in such agency, I understand how much efforts they have invest into system modification. Now, at least in urban areas, the road sign are clear. hospitals, tax service center, as well as police station has gradually put their service into bilingual way.

Pinying is such a big issue in Taiwan since it involve politics and ideology into it. I do not think it is a good idea to pull politics into this topic as well.

All I want to say is, hey, Pinying is working in Taiwan.


----------



## CrazyIvan

boardslide315 said:


> Should using the simplified script really be viewed as a loss of culture?


 
Learning it and understand it are two different thing. 

Take my english study for example, in senior high I learn english, I can read and perceive enligh through mandarine or Taiwanese,I guess its meaning, I thought I understand those vacabularies and the culture English should represent, but I am wrong.

Words can have A LOT of different meanings, and aslo, with different people, different tone, it can mean so many differnt things.

I only realized this while I lived with people from all differnt countries in my year of exchange student.

That is why, I am arguing, that using it is not equals to understand it with cultural sense.



> It seems to me that any person living in mainland China can learn the traditional characters if they please, and just because these characters are not used every day does not mean they have been 'thrown away.' There must still be places in the mainland where people can go to learn the traditional text if they desire to do so.


 
I think some books are still in liberary, however, I doubt there is a systematic eduation of traditional chinese.

I know chinese eduation system little so I really cannot help.



> Traditional characters are indeed more rich and detailed, but they were designed in a time so different from our own that their practicality today should be reconsidered.


 
Wait a minute. Traditional characters are desgined in a time so different from nowadays?

if you say 50 years ago, a period while all chinese who can read and write are doing traditional ones, are long time ago, I have no words to say.

Plus, characters are evolving. elements and be added while meaning can be recreated. This system is not like an aging person who are walking toward its end. That is my main argument.



> I would also like to add that I admire your cultural pride…I am wondering if your patriotism is typical of everyone in Taiwan, and if it is somehow connected to the reluctance of your people to adopt the Pinyin Romanization system that has been proven to be so beneficial to foreigners, including myself.


 
As my previous article, pinying system in Taiwan is working, without great notice from Taiwanese natives since we do not need it. However, lots of my foreign friends sense teh changes and do appreciate this system.

As for culture pride, I have no culture pride. This language is "chinese" characters. Preserve it or not is their decision. Given the history background I just happen to learn the tradtional one and I like the way it looks. But this is not part of culture I would like to represent, at least not for the moment.


----------



## Aoyama

> And to think that the Russians invented Pinyin!


 Well, that's a scoop ! They may have collaborated in the elaboration of the system (and I have never heard about that), but they _invented_ it ! 我的天!


----------



## Anatoli

It's pinyin, not pinying 

 拼音 pīnyīn


----------



## Aoyama

Absolutely, but can we really _pin_ it on the Russians ?


----------



## boardslide315

CrazyIvan said:


> That is why, I am arguing, that using it is not equals to understand it with cultural sense.


 I agree...that is why I don't understand why it is necessary to continue teaching traditional characters. But again, I am not basing this opinion on much experience, and if you say it is easy for you to read traditional characters on a computer screen, I believe you. 

 50 years ago may not have been a long time ago, but it was a very different time. However, I was mainly referring to ancient China, where the idea for characters first began. They were written on large pieces of paper with ink brushes, correct? To try to force this kind of written language onto a tiny spot on a computer screen (or even a standard piece of lined paper) seems like they are pushing tradition a little too far. 

 But enough of that, I am very interested in what you have said about pinyin…So a system similar to Hanyu Pinyin is slowly being used in Taiwan? And when you say that urban places in Taiwan are “bilingual,” do you mean they display both traditional characters and Pinyin? 

    One more thing, I am still unsure if a person who knows the traditional characters is able to read the simplified ones…


----------



## Aoyama

I remember that 35 years ago, Taiwan used the *Zhu yin fu hao* system, that we had to master, together with pin yin. A waste of time, nobody needs two transcription systems. Chauvinism aside, Taiwan should adopt China's pin yin, not for political reasons but for practical (and cultural) reasons, simply for sake of clarity. Luckily, Japan as followed this road more than a hundred years ago (with the so-called *Hepburn romaji* transcription).


----------



## Fabio_Bao

I like traditional Chinese more than simplified version. However, I highly recommend you to learn simplified Chinese for the reason below:
1、Simplified Chinese is more efficient and easier to write.(That's right "The underlying system isn't really any simpler", just as the capital letter and the small letter).
2、There would be no problem to read traditional Chinese if you've mastered simplified version.
3、When you in Chinese mainland，you can fully benefit from simplified version.(If you're in Taiwan, traditional Chinese is the best choice).


----------



## boardslide315

Fabio_Bao said:


> 2、There would be no problem to read traditional Chinese if you've mastered simplified version.


Ah, 谢谢, that's what i wanted to know


----------



## CrazyIvan

Aoyama said:


> I remember that 35 years ago, Taiwan used the *Zhu yin fu hao* system, that we had to master, together with pin yin.


 
Not many peole know the history of this "pretty-old" system, however, this is a system started in 1926 from the Northern Government of China, one government even earlier than CKS.

Zhu Yin Fu Hao, to be translated in to English, is  "symbols for marking sound" it looks like ㄅ ㄆ  ㄇ  ㄈ  which is  "b, p, m, f " in Romanization.



> Chauvinism aside, Taiwan should adopt China's pin yin, not for political reasons but for practical (and cultural) reasons, simply for sake of clarity. Luckily, Japan as followed this road more than a hundred years ago (with the so-called *Hepburn romaji* transcription).


 
I do not see your culture rationale.

By the way, all I want to say is again, we do have pin yin, a similiar system in words such as "Zh"--> "Jh", "X"-->"S"


----------



## CrazyIvan

Fabio_Bao said:


> I like traditional Chinese more than simplified version.


 
 


> 、Simplified Chinese is more efficient and easier to write.



People type nowadays, right?  





> 、There would be no problem to read traditional Chinese if you've mastered simplified version.


 
I do not know this but I have Chinese friends with difficulty to read my writing..(maybe I just scribbled words in a "artisitic" way )


----------



## brionies

agreed.

And simplified is not as beautiful as traditional.


----------



## barbaria

they aren't necessary because just look the simplified and the old style. Obviously, they do look different and the simplified is more quicker than the old style but when a foreigner learn chinese they will realise that they don't look a single bit different and as hard as the old style. in my opinion the chinese characters may change into the alphabet like the vietnamese or indonesian... for easy to learn.


----------



## Fabio_Bao

CrazyIvan said:


> I do not know this but I have Chinese friends with difficulty to read my writing..(maybe I just scribbled words in a "artisitic" way )


 
I don't agree exactly. I used to work with some Taiwanese. Most of my colleagues(including me)had no problem when reading the traditional Chinese besides write.



barbaria said:


> in my opinion the chinese characters may change into the alphabet like the vietnamese or indonesian... for easy to learn.


 
That's a great dream!


----------

