Hello everyone ,i am a freshman here.i am a Taiwanese in Taoyuan working in Taipei.almost ur native language word system is a “voice oriented system”,but Chinese word system is not.it’s a “visual oriented system”.its so hard to transfer ur thinking way to the different system that many people are afraid learning Chinese.if u have trouble learning Chinese,i think maybe i can help u.i have many tips .knowing the rule of word system will help u study Chinese language better and speeding up.
What do you mean “visual oriented system”? Are you implying that Chinese is entirely ideographic?
Tetsuo, you need the visual oriented system to discover the beautiful Han culture. I could tell you about it, but that would just reinforce your audio oriented training.
I can’t be certain, but I think Tetsuo just got bitch-slapped virtually.
I’m not sure if I got bitchslapped or not. I know the post a) had nothing to do with the question, and b) made little to no sense, but on the other hand it does seem like a more pseudoscientifically worded “You foreigners don’t understand Chinese culture,” which earns it bonus points.
Well, if this thread doesn’t develop a topic orientation mighty quick, it’s gonna get floundered on the basis of “no information”. Or, at best, if I’m in a good mood, moved to Language Exchange.
Actually, on a serious note, I am confused by how a visually oriented systems connotes a ideographic system. or am I missing something? what is meant by visually oriented? sounds like mumbo jumbo. aren’t written words by nature visually oriented?
hi about answering ur question,i will type some Chinese words for explaining.first the writing/speaking system in traditional Chinese culture is divided to two parts. one is"中文" the other is"中國語"."文"means word system and “語” means language.
the word system can be indepedent mapping to many language even their syntax/grammer are very different.for instance :Chinese vs. Japanese,i love u in chinese =i u love in japanese.but in past ,chinese and japanese can write in the same word system and understand for each other.
[quote=“urd”]first the writing/speaking system in traditional Chinese culture is divided to two parts. one is"中文" the other is"中國語"."文"means word system and “語” means language.
the word system can be indepedent mapping to many language even their syntax/grammar are very different.for instance :Chinese vs. Japanese,I love u in Chinese =i u love in Japanese.but in past ,Chinese and Japanese can write in the same word system and understand for each other.[/quote]
Japanese used to be written almost exclusively in classical Chinese… so in the past, they’d’ve been writing the same language.
Tetsuo, I think he’s just talking about how alphabetic languages have phonetic information w/out semantic information, but Chinese has semantic information with minimal phonetic information. (So, Jack, “visual” would probably mean “ideographic” in the sense that you can read it while pretending there’s no phonetic information, so long as everybody has the same idea of what word goes with what character; it’s not phonetic.)
Does this constitute a vastly different way of thinking? Not really; but it’s annoying for learners. See the much-debated other thread about how hard it is to learn Chinese.
I’m pretty sure Tianzi was being sarcastic. Describing an inscrutable “visually oriented system” that makes many people “afraid of learning Chinese”? [quote=“Tetsuo”]Does seem like a more pseudoscientifically worded “You foreigners don’t understand Chinese culture,”[/quote], doesn’t it? But I don’t think Urd meant it to be condescending, since it is something that you need to know to learn Chinese… I don’t know if “afraid” is quite it though, probably more “frustrated”.
I was being sarcastic. I didn
Don’t worry, I wasn’t offended - “You foreigners don’t understand Chinese culture” is a running gag around this place, I figured you were in on it And thank you for the kind words
Tetsuo, I think he’s just talking about [color=red]how alphabetic languages have phonetic information w/out semantic information, but Chinese has semantic information with minimal phonetic information.[/color] (So, Jack, “visual” would probably mean “ideographic” in the sense that you can read it while pretending there’s no phonetic information, so long as everybody has the same idea of what word goes with what character; it’s not phonetic.)[/quote]
precisily speaking,that’s right ,and i also know it ,too.but it’s not my point here.my point is that Chinese word System"中文"is also constructed by [color=red]alphabets[/color] .but these alphabets are [color=red]visual alphabets not phonetic[/color] ones.many very different phonetic system are mapping to the same Chinese word system(mm.Chinese visual alphabet system maybe more precise).u can understand a Chinese classic article almost without knowing how to intonate it.even u can write a sentence by Chinese word system but intonate it by English language.
back to the original post i posted .why i claim learning the rule of Chinese word System is a good way ?a Chinese word is assembled by 1~n Chinese(or say Han) alphabets.they are visual signals.and the alphabets are semantic ones themself.if u have a Chinese computer.u’ll see those alphabets in keyboard"手,田,木,人,日,金,火…etc".just them.
for example "手"the alphabet means “by hand”.if a word including “手” ,“抄,打,搥 " (the left part is a transform of"手”)u’ll know these word is about doing something by hand.another example:the alphabet ,"心"u know that it means mind."忘,忙"are including “心” but their structure are different.one is left-right(left part of"忙"is also a transform) ,and another is top-bottom.so they adroitly perform different meanings.“忙”=u work so busy that ur mind is dying."忘"so busy that ur mind died.and then u forget what u are doing.they describe different mind states.(more:性,情,感…etc)that’s just introduce about some alphabets and rules.the amount of the Chinese alphabets are 700~900 with each original means.all the Chinese words are assembled by them into a square space.learning it well let u can from a part judge the whole.just this because Chinese word system is a visual one.
So I was right. Christ, it’s amazing how many people actually buy into this, especially native speakers.
Chinese characters have a phonetic element.
No written language can exist entirely independent of the spoken language.
For the love of God, someone more eloquent and educated in this area please take over from here. Please!
I was about to jump in, but then I read this. Ah well.
How about just someone else?
Urd- I think you’ll find that Tetsuo is pretty good at Chinese, and many foreigners in this forum are a little more than beginners. You’ll even find one or two of us who can tell you something about Chinese that you don’t already know.
Not that you don’t speak much better Chinese than we do, but that we have studied the language in a different way. Just as some local teachers can explain some grammar points of English better than some native English teachers can, you may be surprised at how much some foreigners know about Chinese.
For example, what you are saying about Chinese being more visually oriented-- we’ve discussed this a lot already. You’d be surprised to find that Chinese speakers read characters with a very strong link to their pronunciations. Each Chinese symbol represents a meaning (unlike English letters, which only represent sounds) but they also are connected to a specific sound as well. Whenever you see a character both the meaning and the sound are activated in your mind.
So, what is it about the writing system and how it is organized that you want to share?
“How about just someone else”? Oh please, stop being so damned modest
So, what is it about the writing system and how it is organized that you want to share?[/quote]
that’s just what i am share “visual way studying Chinese as a base”(not each native guys know it,but classical school"私塾.學堂" must teach).but did it seems that i am correcting somthing:“oh u foreigners dont know yet”? i didnt deny some symbols sometimes mean sound.but it’s not the base of the system.because sometimes it didnt mean a voice.even some words intonate the same in old Chinese language but different in “nomal” Chinese language now.ex:“四” “死” how the difference between the new and old one Chinese intonating may be similar to the difference between English and Latin.but maybe the same single word intonates different in different languages ,but we still can get its original meaning from its visual structure even each of us from very different cultures(asia cultures).for instance the word"劍"in normal Chinese we intonate it"jien".in Taiwanese it’s “gian”.in Japanese it’s "tsu.ru.gi "or “kenn”.all are different.but we all know what the weapon means.duing to different culture evloving ,the word may evlove new different extention.for instance in japanese "劍"denote “be serious doing something” -->“真劍勝負”.its means more violent action,but in Chinese “劍” means more in “holy”.its more calm and peace(“劍” almost is a decoration fixing to officiaries .not a useful weapon).even a word i didnt know how to intonate it,i still can know what it means by its visual structure.
so after talking about so many what i am talking about?[color=orange]"文"in Chinese is structural in visual way,“語” in Chinese isnt structural[/color] (english is better than Chinese here.france is better than english…).[color=red]if u need a efficient way to learn Chinese or u want to “write and read” more than “chat”,studying "文"more is a better way i commended .[/color]
maybe u had known it before.oh…urd “你當我們是第一天學中文是吧？”.uhmm…i am sorry that u are already in senior class(maybe higher than me) .i am "班門弄斧"in front of u.i just hope if someone is getting trouble learning Chinese ,what i posted may help he/she.
What you are not understanding is that many of the regular posters to this forum can easily recite the string of consonant changes that led from Archaic to Ancient to Modern Chinese, can trace the phonetic changes in and out of the various dialects, and indeed have graduate degrees in Chinese, Chinese philology, Chinese linguistics, pedagogy of Chinese, or similar topics. So it is not a very earth-shaking announcement to say that Chinese has an ideographic or visual element.
I wouldn’t argue Chaucerian English with someone who had studied it in great detail. Same principle goes here. Nor does a thorough knowledge of that sort of English help much in teaching the modern form. Interesting, yes. Occasionally applicable, sure. But for the average beginner – way too deep.
If you have specific – preferably short and easy – hints for people learning Chinese, that would probably be more welcome in this forum. But frankly, if you are not a bona fide expert in the fields I mention above, I would probably advise you not to pursue this. Sometimes I just have to let Tetsuo out of his cage, you know.
Then explain to me this: how can a written language - a full, coherent, systematic written language - come about without being intimately connected with the spoken language? Are you seriously trying to say that written Chinese is a seperate language? Even heirohlyphics had a phonetic base.
Yes, it’s said “jian” in Mandarin, “gian” in Taiwanese, “gin” in Cantonese, “ken” in Japanese. Spot anything there? They’re all phonetically similar. The exception in your list being Japanese “tsurugi”, but that comes not from any ideographic content, but from it being adopted as “ken” from Chinese and then applied to the native Japanese word - which existed prior to the character - for the same thing.
Not the sharpest tool in the box, are you. That’s like saying French is ideographic because once a French person has learned the word “restaurant,” when they see it in English they know what it means even if they don’t speak English.
I wouldn’t recmmend talking down to this crowd. There are people here who could quote you chapter and verse from Chinese classics you’ve probably never even heard of. Then there are those like me, who have manage to, without your miraculous and sage-like insight, managed to learn and make a living off of “more than ‘chat’” Chinese.
EDIT: Oh, and the word is pronounce not intonate. If you’re going to insist on teaching us how to learn a second language, please try to lead by example.
poor bloke he was only trying to help…