Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- From: "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 20 Mar 2007 07:09:50 -0700
On Mar 15, 7:01 pm, Oliver Cromm <lispamat...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
* Peter T. Daniels wrote:
On Mar 14, 8:01 pm, LEE Sau Dan <dan...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
"Oliver" == Oliver Cromm <lispamat...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Oliver> Now I learned Chinese characters within Japanese, and the
Oliver> Japanese use of them is a bit more stretched: a character
Oliver> represents a family of morphemes with similar meanings,
Oliver> and can represent any other morpheme of similar meaning
Oliver> *exceptionally*.
So, the use of these characters in Japanese writing is very
ideographic.
No, it is logographic. Any kanji in any particular context stands for
one and only one word. (Any deliberate ambiguity would be called
"poetry.")
Now that is a hardline approach: As long as it's representing language
at all, it isn't ideographic. That leaves nothing to discuss.
Fine. Language isn't constructed from "ideas"!
But in the exceptional cases in Japanese I mentioned, the word it
represents is actually noted in Kana. So the Kana represent the word,
and the fact that the Chinese character is supposed to represent that
word this time is explicitly. That's about as ideographic as it can get.
A whole sentence can of course never be written ideographically, because
it represents the grammar of Japanese (or the language at hand).
I guess you're using "ideographic" in some private, unexplained sense.
For me, the decisive point is that this is really exceptional - I don't
remember seeing two words of the kind in one sentence.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- From: Oliver Cromm
- Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- 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: Oliver Cromm
- 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: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- From: Oliver Cromm
- intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- Prev by Date: Re: Why these naked woman look so beautiful
- Next by Date: Re: intrinsic advantage of Latin alphabet over bopomofo (for Chinese)??
- 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
|