http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Zev Handel (검색결과 3 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
Towards a Comparative Study of Sinographic Writing Strategies in Korean, Japanese, and Vietnamese*
Zev Handel 훈민정음학회 2009 Scripta Vol.0 No.1
This comparative study of the adaptation of Chinese characters for writing the languages of Japan, Korea, and Vietnam concludes that language-typological VLPLODULWLHV DQG GLϱHUHQFHV ZHUH D SULPDU\ PRWLYDWRU DQG FRQVWUDLQW 7KH &KLQHVH ZULWLQJ V\VWHP DW WKH WLPH LW ZDV ILUVW ERUURZHG ZDV SULPDULO\ ORJRJUDSKLF ,Q Japan and Korea, where the indigenous languages were typologically distinct from the isolating, monosyllabic Chinese language but similar to each other, the processes of adaptation were remarkably parallel (although also marked by VPDOO EXW VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ,Q 9LHWQDP, where the indigenous language was typologically similar to Chinese, the development of writing took a notably GLϱHUHQW SDWK Through a systematic analysis of the methods by which logographs in one writing system can be repurposed as logographs or phonographs in a second writing system, it is argued that typological factors played a crucial role in shaping what may be called the major sinographic writing systems of Asia: Japanese PDQ·\ڟJDQD Korean hyangchal, and Vietnamese FKࡢ Q{P 7\SRORJLFDO IDFWRUV also shaped subsequent script developments, explaining why kana syllabaries developed in Japan but not in Korea and accounting for the complexity of Vietnamese Q{P JUDSKV 7KHVH FRQFOXVLRQV KDYH EURDGHU LPSOLFDWLRQV IRU RXU XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH JHQHUDO PHFKDQLVPV RI VFULSW FKDQJH
-
Can a Logographic Script be Simplified?
Zev Handel 훈민정음학회 2013 Scripta Vol.0 No.5
In the 1950s and 1960s, the government of the People’s Republic of China undertook, in two stages, a carefully planned “simplification” of the logographic Chinese script. Drawing on a variety of historical precedents, over 2,000 individual graphs were modified in an attempt to make the script easier to learn and use. This was the first significant change in the official form of the Chinese script in nearly two millennia, and resulted in the script variety that is widely used today in mainland China, commonly termed “simplified Chinese characters.” Drawing on recent psycholinguistic experiments that attempt to characterize the cognitive functions involved in Chinese script processing, this study revisits long-standing questions about the efficacy of character simplification and provides some additional theoretical insights into the nature of logographic writing. The central conclusion of this study is that meaningful simplification of a logographic script is possible, but that today’s simplified character script cannot be characterized as an effective reform by any reasonable metric—it is only “simpler” in the crudest of senses. After evaluating the results of recent studies on the cognitive processing of Chinese characters, I introduce the concept of semantic orthographic depth and argue that a true simplification of a logographic script should be based on regularization of semantic and phonetic components, rather than on reduction of the number of graphs or the reduction of the number of strokes per graph. Furthermore, there is reason to believe that a well functioning logographic script has cognitive advantages over purely phonographic scripts. As a thought experiment, I apply these conclusions to sketch out a scheme for what genuinely effective logographic reform of the Chinese script might have looked like.
-
Logography and the classification of writing systems: a response to Unger
Zev Handel 훈민정음학회 2015 Scripta Vol.7 No.1
In response to Unger (2014), I argue that Chinese does not merely lie along one end of an undifferentiated continuum of writing systems plotted according to the degree of phonological representation found in its graphs. Rather, two features of Chinese writing make it categorically distinct from even orthographically “deep” alphabetic writing systems like English: (1) the high prevalence of graphs that represent distinct meaningful linguistic units (i.e. morphemes) and (2) the use of graphic components (variously termed significs, determinatives, taxograms, classifiers, radicals) to represent the general semantic domains of those represented morphemes. These features have implications for how Chinese writing is processed in the brain, how it changes over time, and how it has been adapted for the written representation of other languages. For these reasons we should recognize that Chinese writing is distinct from phonographic systems of writing. Any dispute over which term is most appropriate for characterizing Chinese and the other writing systems of its type—logographic, morphographic, morphosyllabic, etc.—is secondary in importance to the recognition of the validity of this categorical distinction.
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
