Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- From: Joachim Pense <snob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 19:15:49 +0100
Am 14 Mar 2007 13:08:08 -0700 schrieb Peter T. Daniels:
On Mar 14, 12:52 pm, Joachim Pense <s...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Am 14 Mar 2007 05:25:07 -0700 schrieb Peter T. Daniels:
I don't, either - Chinese kept its 100 or so ideographs and added a few
thousand semantically annotated phonographic characters (is there an
agreed term for characters that represent sound?).
Actually, you have that backward. The phonetic portion disambiguates
the semantic portion, not vice versa.
What's the basis for this view? Historically, yes, of course, but how
do you support it synchronically?
Synchronically, there is no such function. Characters simply have both
components. Neither has priority.
I think it might be wrong historically as well. After the pictographs,
they started using characters to denote homophones of the originally
denoted words. Only later, when the limitations of this became
obvious, the method of combining a semantical and a phongraphic
component was introduced. It doesn't make sense to give any of them
historic priority. As for logical priority, the selectivity of the
components speaks for priority of the phonographic portion - see
Oliver's post.
Joachim
.
- References:
- intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- From: 欲無言
- Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- From: Richard Herring
- Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- From: Oliver Cromm
- Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- From: Herman Rubin
- Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- From: LEE Sau Dan
- Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- From: Oliver Cromm
- Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- From: Joachim Pense
- Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- Prev by Date: Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- Next by Date: Re: Etymology of Houbit and haben
- Previous by thread: Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- Next by thread: Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|