Like the Korean and Japanese written language?...a gradual introduction/change...i.e. the old symbolic writing is still used until people get the hang of it.
I think it looks much nicer, less cluttered and will be much easier to learn.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bopomofo
i prefer the original. more meaningful and look nicer.
nope. we shd go back to 甲骨文.
realli
sai lah..
then 我們 become women??
all become women then no birth, no men, how boring!
Originally posted by Gabriella:Like the Korean and Japanese written language?...a gradual introduction/change...i.e. the old symbolic writing is still used until people get the hang of it.
I think it looks much nicer, less cluttered and will be much easier to learn.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bopomofo
The advantage of retaining characters is that when language undergoes natural sound changes over time, we will still be able to read them.
In the short term, a phonetic script is always good. It helps to lessen the load of learning thousands of characters. In the long term (as in history archiving, scholarly works), languages that use the phonetic script always ends up looking like another language in itself and requires "translation".
The Korean and the Japanese system of writing both have their limitation as sound changes over thousands of years.
You can read up on the net too that the current Korean language is morphophonemic instead of pure phonemic one. Simply put, Korean looks like a phonetic alphabet to us, but actually it still does not correspond 1:1 in terms of the symbols and the sound.
The Japanese language is not a phonetic one but a syllabic one. The syllabic system works for Japanese language but will not work for either Korean or Chinese because the Japanese phonetic inventory is far far much simpler than either both of them.
I support the use of characters versus phonetic characters for Chinese.