| Is the Chinese language dead? | |
|---|---|
| Mar 2, 2007 02:03 | #21   |
 | Aha. My opinion. We can't hold that a language is dead if it uses the existing words to express a new gismo, as the meaning is changing. 飞机 means airplane, rather than any existing things. That's it. Even the existing words change in its meaning. For example, 抽象--abstract Now, students in universities use the word to mean ugliness of a person. Many cases go this way. |
| Mar 2, 2007 02:13 | #22 |
| Aha, Here coms my opinion. i don't think Chinese is a dead language, Altough it uses the existing words to express a new gismo. 飞机-- airplane, uses the exsiting words to express airplane rather than any exsting things. |
| Mar 2, 2007 02:20 | #23 |
| Also, some words itself is changing in its meaming. 抽象--abstract is used by the students in universities to mean ugliness of a person. Many cases go this way. |
| Mar 6, 2007 09:53 | #24 |
| At the risk of being accused of heresy; I wonder if it would be of value for China to utilise a simple alphabet. Locally , over the years I have met several Orientals who speak limited Chinese but are illiterate. They would like to study more and improve their knowledge of the language but they have no desire to learn the characters. I have been tempted to publish popular Chinese poetry utilising the Roman alphabet. Would that provike outrage? I believe that many descendants of Chinese immigrants would be very interested in reading that form of publication. The problem is that China's strength in defending itself against western depravity has been the difficulty of learning the characters. Language difficulties are the last remnants of the psychological Great Wall. Should this wall be dismantled as China surrenders to Western Decadence or should it be raised to slow the tide ? |
| Mar 6, 2007 20:01 | #25 |
| Hi wearyrefugee, you'll be pleased to know that since the late 19th century many Chinese intellectuals have committed the exact same heresy of which you speak. Many systems of romanisation have been invented and Taiwan even has its own alphabetic system commonly called bopomofo (can't remember the official name). Hanyu Pinyin was invented back in the 1950s and is now the official romanisation system for the Mainland. Taiwan has a mess of different systems. But somehow, despite all these attempts to romanise Chinese, the characters have persisted. And don't worry, the characters have certainly not proven a hindrance for either Chinese or foreigners. Look at literacy rates in the Mainland, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Macao for proof. Also, there've been plenty of foreigners throughout history who've mastered written Chinese. The characters are not as difficult as people make them out to be, nor is the grammar. |
| Mar 9, 2007 13:02 | #26 |
| No offense taken, Apault. If you used the word buglarize and buglarized many times in your career, Roger, you must be a cop, a crook or a journalist. ;) I am certain none of those professions qualifies you as a linguistic specialist...which puts you in the same boat as me :) Much of the English speaking British empire resents American domination of the English language. American English is the living English language...non-American English speakers are really speaking dead languages. TIC, mostly. --- I hope everyone knows TIC means my tongue is in my cheek --- There is a certain amount of truth to that TIC remark though. America dominated the last century in terms of military might, technological advances, and social advances including entertainment (although I think most of those social advances moved us closer to the gutter) so it should be no surprise that Americans forced the evolution of the English language. ...based on what you said Apault...I imagine I'll find my discussions of Internet and encryption protocols, and network routing very interesting business when I teach a network analysis class in China. OYE!!! |
| Mar 9, 2007 16:15 | #27 |
| CHRISWAUGHBJ: >>>Clearly your knowledge of Chinese isn't what you would have us believe. As every regular participant here knows, I have just begun studying Mandarin Chinese, I certainly didn't LEAD anyone to believe anything other than that a curious thought came into my mind when discussing Chinese with a friend. I posted the thought here because many people are interested in the Chinese language here. ...and imagine that...this is a HOT THREAD...by golly gee... |
| Mar 9, 2007 19:35 | #28 |
| Sorry, Griz, that comment was a bit over the top in hindsight. My apologies. |
| Mar 10, 2007 10:33 | #29 |
| Apology accepted. |
| Mar 11, 2007 21:53 | #30 |
| With all due respect; you have asked your question. The question you posed, was answered early-on, in the nearly three week period since it was first posted. It was answered both by some of us lay-persons and by one member who has linguistic credentials that provide her with academic credibility. The overwhelming view is -- that the premise of you question was not valid -- and in fact, the Chinese language is very much [alive] and dynamic, as has been the Chinese culture which has harbored the language for thousands of years. Moreover, it was always my opinion, that your question was somewhat [provincial], and maybe even could be viewed as insulting, to those who are native Chinese writers and speakers. By the way, just for the record; I am not a ‘crook’ sir !!! Nor, am I in the “same boat” as you. |
Post a Reply to: Is the Chinese language dead?
Copyright © 1998-2024 All rights reserved.