As they work with characers and not an alphabet, I was wondering how they actually read. Many say the spoken languages are separate from the written language, so when they read do they sound out the words that correspond to the characters in their head, or do they merely recognise the characters as concepts without sounding out the corressponding sounds in their head?
How do Chinese generally read?
It depends on the person. But to certain degree it does have some soundless component. The soundless component is stronger for some, weaker for others. Sometimes the graphical reaction time is so fast that it bypasses the sound part. I remember long-time ago they did a study of brain-wave activities of ideographic language users. The brain activities do differ from alphabetic-language users.
Granted, without a phonetic attachment, it is often hard to remember some characters: you may get used to seeing them, but you will have hard time remembering how to write them out. The definition of a "written language" still has to be attached to a speech, and this is agreed by all linguists (that's how archeologists separate a written language from hieroglyphic symbols: until these symbols start to have components representing sounds, they are not considered written languages.)
I personally like to cite an example like the character for "pain": 痛。Trust me, I speak and read quite a few languages, but reading the word "pain" in Chinese is just totally different from reading in alphabetic languages. The graphical impact of the characters really bypasses the aural step and strike directly into your heart, almost as if you are seeing an image of someone with tears flying around and biting their teeth.
Granted, without a phonetic attachment, it is often hard to remember some characters: you may get used to seeing them, but you will have hard time remembering how to write them out. The definition of a "written language" still has to be attached to a speech, and this is agreed by all linguists (that's how archeologists separate a written language from hieroglyphic symbols: until these symbols start to have components representing sounds, they are not considered written languages.)
I personally like to cite an example like the character for "pain": 痛。Trust me, I speak and read quite a few languages, but reading the word "pain" in Chinese is just totally different from reading in alphabetic languages. The graphical impact of the characters really bypasses the aural step and strike directly into your heart, almost as if you are seeing an image of someone with tears flying around and biting their teeth.
let's think like this
One day, a person draws a picture of his stove and he simplifies the picture into a few lines. Then he calls the simplified picture as the symbol of the latin word "Culina". (Kitchen)
The pronunciation of Chinese characters = Latin
Mandarin = Spanish
Other regional languages = other Romance languages
Cantonese = Italian
Kitchen in Latin = Culina
Kitchen in Spanish = Cocina
Kitchen in Italian = Cucina
When a Spanish person sees the symbol of the stove, he automatically pronounces it as "cocina".
When an Italian sees the same symbol, he pronounces it as "cucina".
After centries, many people don't know what the "stove" symbol represents because it is too simplified. But they still read the symbol in their own pronunciations.
One day, a person draws a picture of his stove and he simplifies the picture into a few lines. Then he calls the simplified picture as the symbol of the latin word "Culina". (Kitchen)
The pronunciation of Chinese characters = Latin
Mandarin = Spanish
Other regional languages = other Romance languages
Cantonese = Italian
Kitchen in Latin = Culina
Kitchen in Spanish = Cocina
Kitchen in Italian = Cucina
When a Spanish person sees the symbol of the stove, he automatically pronounces it as "cocina".
When an Italian sees the same symbol, he pronounces it as "cucina".
After centries, many people don't know what the "stove" symbol represents because it is too simplified. But they still read the symbol in their own pronunciations.
Most of the Chinese characters have both phonetic and pictographic (radical) components . We are so familiar with the characters that we don't need to read the concept of the words anymore. Everybody just read out loud when they see the character.
However, when there's a character we don't know, we guess the nature of the thing that's represented by it and look at the phonetic part for pronunciation.
There's even a special trend that people just type the sounds instead of the characters, especially when people want to avoid censorship or type obscenity online.
http://img.skitch.com/20100404-t8d6r1bni69ptu8qe8pkrhkt7m.jpg
However, when there's a character we don't know, we guess the nature of the thing that's represented by it and look at the phonetic part for pronunciation.
There's even a special trend that people just type the sounds instead of the characters, especially when people want to avoid censorship or type obscenity online.
http://img.skitch.com/20100404-t8d6r1bni69ptu8qe8pkrhkt7m.jpg
That's why Chinese deserves hundreds of PhDs about psycholinguistics, dyslexia, speech-writing philosophical debates, etc. So far a lot of linguistic theories have followed the western tradition (Saussure, Bloomfield, Chomsky...) but has related little to the rest of the world.
I do think Chinese, while logographic, is a hugely deep orthography, with shape, sound, and meaning all present. English orthography does bear some resemblances because the most chaotically spelled words are distinguished from each other by all three elements, except that their components are letters, not logographic elements.
Some English words share the same shape, but different sounds and different meanings. Some only share the same sounds, some the same meanings. As long as one element is identical, they already fit the why Chinese orthography is formulated in the course of its development.
(Think of French too)
I do think Chinese, while logographic, is a hugely deep orthography, with shape, sound, and meaning all present. English orthography does bear some resemblances because the most chaotically spelled words are distinguished from each other by all three elements, except that their components are letters, not logographic elements.
Some English words share the same shape, but different sounds and different meanings. Some only share the same sounds, some the same meanings. As long as one element is identical, they already fit the why Chinese orthography is formulated in the course of its development.
(Think of French too)
Xie: "Some English words share the same shape, but different sounds and different meanings. Some only share the same sounds, some the same meanings. As long as one element is identical, they already fit the why Chinese orthography is formulated in the course of its development."
That's called morpho-phonemic writing, man.
Take a look at my Tadpolenese website and you will see the only morpho-phonemic writing system for a Chinese dialect.
That's the very funny part. All Chinese know that their writing system is morpho-phonemic. They all learn English, which is yet another morpho-phonemic language in writing. Funny thing is, they never complain about having to write in Chinese or English. However, when it comes to romanizing Chinese, their minds behave like kindergarteners. And then they complain about homophone problems, and then they complain about romanized writing cannot be used for Chinese. Some even complain that today's Hanyu Pinyin is too complicated and must be further simplified. Give me a break.
Tadpolenese is light-years ahead of the pack. Frankly, it is the only really readable romanization of a Chinese dialect, in the 500 years or so of Chinese romanization. Nothing else comes even close.
That's called morpho-phonemic writing, man.
Take a look at my Tadpolenese website and you will see the only morpho-phonemic writing system for a Chinese dialect.
That's the very funny part. All Chinese know that their writing system is morpho-phonemic. They all learn English, which is yet another morpho-phonemic language in writing. Funny thing is, they never complain about having to write in Chinese or English. However, when it comes to romanizing Chinese, their minds behave like kindergarteners. And then they complain about homophone problems, and then they complain about romanized writing cannot be used for Chinese. Some even complain that today's Hanyu Pinyin is too complicated and must be further simplified. Give me a break.
Tadpolenese is light-years ahead of the pack. Frankly, it is the only really readable romanization of a Chinese dialect, in the 500 years or so of Chinese romanization. Nothing else comes even close.
Good point about English. It's worth noting that even in the west we don't sound out the letters of a word once we know it well; we just recognise its shape and read its shape. The letters help really just for getting to know a word in the first place.
Letters and shapes: "The letters help really just for getting to know a word in the first place."
The following piece appeared on internet many years ago.
"Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in
waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht
the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a
toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is
bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the
wrod as a wlohe."
The following piece appeared on internet many years ago.
"Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in
waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht
the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a
toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is
bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the
wrod as a wlohe."
<<That's why Chinese deserves hundreds of PhDs about psycholinguistics, dyslexia, speech-writing philosophical debates, etc.>>
Why? That's all Western PC bullshit. Pandering to the stupid.
No more "dyslexia". Just "read, or die".
Why? That's all Western PC bullshit. Pandering to the stupid.
No more "dyslexia". Just "read, or die".