Its geometric form and the way it was intentionally made geometric score low in the intuition department and the athestics department.
Not everything should be considered in technical score in the linguistic department only. Hangul works for Korea, but it just doesn’t work for Taiwan.
Not for Taiwan.
Whatever it achieves, it lacks in other aspects.
[col]This is the beginning of the ai column.
あい 愛 ai
[color=#777777][strike]あいっ[/strike] [strike]oh[/strike][/color]
あいー 背 aĩ
[color=#777777][strike]あいむ[/strike] [strike]aim[/strike][/color]
[color=#777777][strike]あいん[/strike] [strike]ain[/strike][/color]
[color=#777777][strike]あいーん[/strike] [strike]aing[/strike][/color]
[color=#777777][strike]あいぷ[/strike] [strike]aip[/strike][/color]
[color=#777777][strike]あいつ[/strike] [strike]ait[/strike][/color]
[color=#777777][strike]あいく[/strike] [strike]aik[/strike][/color]
This is the end of this column.|This is the beginning of the au column.
あう 喉 au
[color=#777777][strike]あうっ[/strike] [strike]auh[/strike][/color]
[color=#777777][strike]あうー[/strike][/color]
[color=#777777][strike]あうむ[/strike] [strike]aum[/strike][/color]
[color=#777777][strike]あうん[/strike] [strike]aun[/strike][/color]
[color=#777777][strike]あうーん[/strike] [strike]aung[/strike][/color]
[color=#777777][strike]あうぷ[/strike] [strike]aup[/strike][/color]
[color=#777777][strike]あうつ[/strike] [strike]aut[/strike][/color]
[color=#777777][strike]あうく[/strike] [strike]auk[/strike][/color]
This is the end of this column.[/col][/quote]
The other columns in the あGROUP are i,o,u, ya, yu, yo, wa, wai, wi, we, and lastly 黃＝ん.
The above tables so far are a good sample of the columns of the あGROUP. No inconsistency.
Let’s have a facts-based discussion for once. Please support evidence that it is not intuitive. Some 82 millio Koreans worldwide find it quite intuitive for their language.
I’m not saying it’s a perfect fit for Taiwanese Mandarin, but hansioux’s proposal is worth considering instead of shooting it down off the bat based purely on subjective reasos.
[quote]Hangul works for Korea, but it just doesn’t work for Taiwan.
Not for Taiwan. [/quote]
What do you think makes it a bad match? And why do you feel Japanese kana are better?
They are intuitive to the 82 mil coz they have no choice, due to their particular circumstances and intra-national reasons.
Hangul looks like geometric to me. Hok you know the way it looks and the way it was designed, with a ruler of course. 
Oh yeah, It’s geometric. No question about it.
[col][]Good design.
[]Proven track record.
[]Good testimonials.|[]Flexibility
[]Strong user support
[]Backward compatible[/col]
It just works.
You should write campaign slogans.
“Hangul: It just doesn’t work.”
“Kana: It just works.”
[quote][col][]Good design.
[]Proven track record.
[]Good testimonials.|[]Flexibility
[]Strong user support
[]Backward compatible[/col]
[/quote]
That’s funny, this is exactly how I feel about Hangul. Go figure.
I personally find Hangul more visually appealing than Kana, but I don’t think that makes it better or worse. This is the idea of objectivity and cultural relativity.
I’m curious what you think of bopomofo.
Its geometric form and the way it was intentionally made geometric score low in the intuition department and the athestics department.
Not everything should be considered in technical score in the linguistic department only. Hangul works for Korea, but it just doesn’t work for Taiwan.
Not for Taiwan.
Whatever it achieves, it lacks in other aspects.[/quote]
Aesthetics is subjective and not objective. How well a script is designed should be objective. Hanjis are in geometric shape, it only makes sense to have geometric shaped Hangul annotate each hanji.
You’ve only cited aesthetics aspects of Hangul as the thing you don’t like about it, what about some concrete evidence that it is not suitable for Holo?
Hangul was invented to phonetically annotate Hanji, Kana was invented to annotate words of Japanese origin. Their different aim in design resulted in Hangul being a better match for Hanji when it comes to annotation.
Excellent question, Hok.
Bopomo is a plug-in of Kana.
It vouches for Kana. Kana’s got strong, positive testimonial from Bopomo.
Kana is an amazing system. It just works.
[quote=“hansioux”]
Aesthetics is subjective and not objective. How well a script is designed should be objective. Hanjis are in geometric shape, it only makes sense to have geometric shaped Hangul annotate each hanji.
You’ve only cited aesthetics aspects of Hangul as the thing you don’t like about it, what about some concrete evidence that it is not suitable for Holo?
Hangul was invented to phonetically annotate Hanji, Kana was invented to annotate words of Japanese origin. Their different aim in design resulted in Hangul being a better match for Hanji when it comes to annotation.[/quote]
Hansiox, hangul is not intuitive. it is not backward compatible. It’s visual performance decreases dramatically with any attempt to use it as furigana. (You know the reason. You can see it yourself.)
Worst of all, Hangul’s core and only user has discontinued its support for 字. This is not a system that we Taiwanese want to associate with.
You can try, but trust me, it’s not going to gain traction.
Kana is inherently weak for finals in syllable sounds. How would you write 台北 (Taigi pronunciation) in Kana?
だいばく? You’ve turned two syllables into four and added a vowel sound on the end that has no business being there.
More importantly, you’re overly complicating something that doesn’t need to be complicated. You can either use bopomofo, which is already familiar to 100% of Taiwanese people, or Latin letters which are already familiar to 100% of Taiwanese people, instead of kana, which is familiar only to a portion (I don’t know the exact number of course) of Taiwanese people.
Have you ever wondered why you’re not happy with the way you look? You’ve tried everything. pinyin, all-chinese, all-roman, and you still can’t get the hard, flat stomach that you’ve always wanted?
In 10 minutes i’m going to show you the secret. It is that simple.
BTW this is the first time I’ve ever heard that Bopomofo was based on Japanese kana. Can you give me a source for this?
Let me start with why Hangul is great for annotating Hanji.
It would take equal amount of space to annotate each Hanji. With modified Kana, like historic ones found in 台日大辭典, some Hanji takes upwards of 3 Kana characters plus an array of diacritic to annotate. It would make side by side annotation (such as ruby/XHTML annotation in the HTML5 standard) extremely difficult, as font size for annotation for each character might have to change to fit, or each characters would have to be spaced apart for the annotation to fit. It is an issue with romanization, so if you are going to ditch romanization, you should choose a system that doesn’t have that problem.
The Kana based annotation has to add additional tonal system to Kana where one doesn’t exist. Such tonal system uses a sort of tie bar system that goes across multiple Kana characters at once. It is incredibly difficult to do, especially if needed to be annotated vertically. Hangul already has tonal annotation, it was built in when King Sejong invented the system. Even though the system is not in use for the Modern Korean language, it is already built in to unicode, for example 성〮 , and more tonal marks can be added or combined with Hangul if needed. The Kana system simply doesn’t have these features built in.
To make Kana work with Holo, some Kana’s pronunciation were changed. Making it incompatible with the original Japanese pronunciation. With Hangul there would be no such problem.
With Kana, the entering tones are extremely difficult to mark. The /ʔ/ ending characters has to be represented by multiple small script kana, such as ァ、ィ、ゥ
ェ、ォ、ヲ. Hangul would only need ㅎ to do the job. e.g. 較 갛
[quote=“Hokwongwei”]You’ve turned two syllables into four and added a vowel sound on the end that has no business being there.
[/quote]
No. You don’t. lol.
In 10 minutes I’m going to show you the most common misconceptions.
If you know bopomo, that’s even better. Then you’ll have no problem reaping the full power of Kana. But even if you don’t know bopomo, Kana is going to take care of you. And if you decide to mix in a little bit of bopomo just for legacy support for a little while, Kana will still work seamlessly with it, all while Kana continues to work for your future, absolutely.
Misconception No.1. - You have to obey 台日大辭典.
WRONG. The truth is, you don’t. 台日大辭典 gave you a glimpse of the power of Kana, like a fancy demo to peak into the lab of a scientist. But it is NOT recommend that you use the intermediary product in real life.
In 10 minutes, I’m going to show you why.
Misconception No.2. Bopomo is the magic pill that God sent to humanity by accident.
WRONG again. Bopomo is a carefully designed PLUG-IN. And I emphasize, a PLUG-IN to the Kana system. Bopomo is a supplement to the Kana system.
Well, we all know how supplements work. You can’t take them and expect result without putting in real work. In 10 minutes I’m going to show you why this plug-in was created, and how it was designed to enhance the Kana system.
Misconception No.3. There is only one way to do Kana and therefore is hard.
NOT TRUE. Kana is so flexible that you can do it at home, in the office, and in the gym. This is because kana is built on some VERY BASIC PRINCIPLES and is customizable. As long as you understand the principles and do it consistently, you can make Kana fit your schedule. You don’t even have to sacrifice your social life for Kana.
In 10 minutes, I’m going to show you how to customize Kana to fit your unique lifestyle.
Bopomofo was invented by Zhang Taiyan, a native of Jiangsu, China. It definitely resembles Japanese kana in both form and function, but it is neither based on nor complementary to Kana. There is in fact nothing to indicate it was not invented by Chinese scholars for the Chinese language.
If you are claiming that they are in fact connected, please provide a source; otherwise I have no reason to believe you.
Okay guys, before I show you the power of Kana, you must have a lot of doubt.
This is perfectly normal. I’ve been there and I understand.
But let’s question ourselves.What’s the most important thing that we want?
Yes that’s right. We want result.
It is the result that matters.