ennime Tetraglot Senior Member South Africa universityofbrokengl Joined 5902 days ago 397 posts - 507 votes Speaks: English, Dutch*, Esperanto, Afrikaans Studies: Xhosa, French, Korean, Portuguese, Zulu
| Message 1 of 7 17 August 2009 at 4:34pm | IP Logged |
Apparently a new list of further simplifications was published by the PRC... I can't
read chinese but here is the news article.
04/09/content_11154357.htm">http://news.xinhuanet.com/focus/ 2009-
04/09/content_11154357.htm
Out of curiosity, does anybody has more info? how extensive is this revision? and any
opinions?
I'm not asking for a traditional vs. simplified discussion, just answer on this
particular revision please! let's not kick a dead horse, the poor thing is dead, let it
rest in peace... ^_^
1 person has voted this message useful
|
Cainntear Pentaglot Senior Member Scotland linguafrankly.blogsp Joined 6009 days ago 4399 posts - 7687 votes Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh
| Message 2 of 7 17 August 2009 at 4:41pm | IP Logged |
Uh-oh... the Unicode standards committee are going to be kept busy....
;-)
But more seriously: the news in English from Xinhua.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
pmiller Account terminated Groupie Canada Joined 5672 days ago 99 posts - 104 votes Speaks: English*
| Message 3 of 7 17 August 2009 at 10:13pm | IP Logged |
Where is the dead horse? I don't see it. (I just want to make sure it really is dead :)
1 person has voted this message useful
|
Nick_dm Newbie United Kingdom Joined 5711 days ago 24 posts - 26 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Cantonese
| Message 4 of 7 17 August 2009 at 10:37pm | IP Logged |
Ennime, I'm not sure that describing this as "further simplification" is accurate. I haven't read about it in detail
but in the article Cainntear linked to someone involved was quoted as saying "one of the problems we are trying
to address here is over-simplification of some characters".
An article in The
Economist in April claimed that "some characters will have more strokes added and thus be brought closer to
their earlier, more complicated forms".
Edited by Nick_dm on 17 August 2009 at 10:45pm
1 person has voted this message useful
|
pmiller Account terminated Groupie Canada Joined 5672 days ago 99 posts - 104 votes Speaks: English*
| Message 5 of 7 17 August 2009 at 11:21pm | IP Logged |
So backtracking then. I figured as much. As China grows wealthier it will feel increasing pride in its traditional culture, and will probably go back to traditional characters altogether. The additional complexity doesn't stop Taiwanese and other overseas Chinese from attaining literacy; why should it be any different for mainland Chinese?
1 person has voted this message useful
|
ennime Tetraglot Senior Member South Africa universityofbrokengl Joined 5902 days ago 397 posts - 507 votes Speaks: English, Dutch*, Esperanto, Afrikaans Studies: Xhosa, French, Korean, Portuguese, Zulu
| Message 6 of 7 18 August 2009 at 1:01am | IP Logged |
Nick_dm wrote:
Ennime, I'm not sure that describing this as "further simplification"
is accurate. I haven't read about it in detail
but in the article Cainntear linked to someone involved was quoted as saying "one of
the problems we are trying
to address here is over-simplification of some characters".
An id=13528023">article in The
Economist in April claimed that "some characters will have more strokes added and thus
be brought closer to
their earlier, more complicated forms". |
|
|
Ah the further simplification was mentioned on wikipedia (main page, news box) ergo I
took a tiny step and there conclusions were... perhaps not the best reasoning from my
part ^_^
1 person has voted this message useful
|
Yukamina Senior Member Canada Joined 6262 days ago 281 posts - 332 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Japanese, Korean, French
| Message 7 of 7 18 August 2009 at 6:10pm | IP Logged |
It sounds like they are adding to the number of simplified characters. As in, less common characters that didn't have a simplified form before will have one now.
1 person has voted this message useful
|