Brian Schack's discussion (Letters, June 16, page 8) points out the difficulties of using Chinese ideograms but fails to identify the overwhelming reason for retaining this superior system. It is true that phonetic-based writing systems are easier to learn and inherently more naturally representative of the spoken word. Such systems are also dynamic in their instant ability to form new words for society to use. Writers can coin new words and everyone can at least know how they sound.
Pharmaceutical companies do this all the time. New products are given catchy names which easily roll off the tongues of consumers. Conversely for the reader, when an unfamiliar written word is encountered, a dictionary is not always needed. One can "sound-out" the unfamiliar letters and audible recognition often follows.
But these advantages are no match for the superior ability of written Chinese (traditional or simplified) to convey information efficiently. Chinese ideograms are far more efficient than phonetic words. This can be seen empirically by simply placing the Chinese and English versions of the same text side by side. The Chinese publication is often half the physical volume of its English counterpart. So, Chinese books and periodicals can be printed on less paper. That's not reason enough to call it a better system. But this efficiency lays the foundation for a better system.
Since the information is more densely packed, the Chinese reader can absorb the presented text far faster than an English counterpart. In fact, what Chinese people take for granted as "reading," we in the Western world would call "speed reading." Speed reading is big business in the US. Learning how to read text rapidly is a very desirable skill in today's information-laden world. Examine any English-language speed reading system and you will find it is based on the idea of recognizing words as "whole entities," rather than phonetically trying to sound-out words, syllable by syllable. Taking a group of letters together as a single unit and not as a sequential list of phonetic symbols is exactly what written Chinese is all about. Each symbol is a word.
Yes, it's a difficult system to learn and consumes much of a young student's time. But the rewards later are easily measured in saved hours that, over a lifetime, pay back the Chinese student many times over.
Mark Kelsey
Atlantic City, New Jersey
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
Taiwan no longer wants to merely manufacture the chips that power artificial intelligence (AI). It aims to build the software, platforms and services that run on them. Ten major AI infrastructure projects, a national cloud computing center in Tainan, the sovereign language model Trustworthy AI Dialogue Engine, five targeted industry verticals — from precision medicine to smart agriculture — and the goal of ranking among the world’s top five in computing power by 2040: The roadmap from “Silicon Island” to “Smart Island” is drawn. The question is whether the western plains, where population, industry and farmland are concentrated, have the water and
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
RSS