As a result Japanese people (probably Chinese too) have a hard time processing some of the English syllables. This creates difficulty in learning English for Japanese and Chinese, and in turn, it leads to isolation. It's like a "cultural moat" separating ideographic languages from phonetic ones. If they tried to give it up, it would be sad, because of all the history and beauty it has, but on the other hand, in these countries children in the 5th grade can't properly read a newspaper because they need to already know 2000 characters and many more combinations of characters by rote. By comparison, a first grader can read a newspaper in English.
In terms of programming, Chinese is like Perl (even Perl6! - huge, complex, mysterious, beautiful) and English is like Lua (small, elegant, expressive).
"There is a standing joke among sinologists that one of the first signs of senility in a China scholar is the compulsion to come up with a new romanization method"[1]. That's how much they are bothered by the huge initial cost of learning it.
[1] "Why Chinese Is So Damn Hard" - http://www.pinyin.info/readings/texts/moser.html
We can also say that American/English have a hard time processing some of the Japanese/Chinese syllables. All the languages I speak a little bit have distinctive sounds that are difficult for most non-native speakers to master unless you put a lot of practices. It escalates to another level to speak a whole sentence, that is, a sequence of sounds. That is why it is easy to tell if a person is a native speaker of a language in most cases.
It is true that Indo-European languages are difficult for Japanese and Chinese to learn. It is due to other reasons, which would be a long answer.
Chinese speakers learn Pinyin from primary school and so know exactly how an alphabetic writing system works. Indeed, many Chinese who are not fully literate in Hanzi know how to read Pinyin.
Furthermore, Japanese children in the fifth grade can already read about 850 characters -- this is not as difficult a feat as I think you imagine.
consonant (optional) + vowel/diphthong + n/ng (optionally)
(Note that older Chinese "dialects" such as Cantonese or Teochew retain many more distinct syllables. For example, the infamous "shi shi shi shi" "poem", consisting only of "shi" sounds in Mandarin (neglecting tones), contains 11 distinct syllables (neglecting tones) in Teochew.)
English or German, on the other hand, have somewhere around 8000 distinct syllables. (Think of "strict", "fractal", "Angstschweiß", "Hampsthwaite", "strengths", etc.)
A child exiting reception grade in China, i.e. entering Grade 1, is expected to know 1000-1500 characters. They certainly don't know all combinations of characters these words form, but the learning starts young.
This is completely false. I spent seven years working in Taiwanese schools, and saw a few precocious seven year olds reading newspapers and virtually any 5th grader able to. It's very similar to the situation in English speaking countries, though I would say that first graders growing up with characters are probably a bit behind their English-speaking counterparts and a bit ahead by the time they're in fifth grade. This only applies to developed places like Japan, Taiwan and Hong Kong. Obviously a poor child from rural China will have a different set of challenges and be behind.
(Ever try to look up an icon in a dictionary? This puts paid to the idea that icons are decipherable by people who don't know the language. Copyrighting the icons makes even that infinitely worse, as it prevents standardization.)
http://ce.linedict.com/dict.html#/cnen/home
See the paintbrush next to the magnifying glass in the search field.
Really useful when you want to use "that squiggly thingy" but don't know the TeX command.
In the modern era the use of pictographs has become Chinese's Achilles' heel: the hanzi are not sortable. The very things that define the Chinese are what makes it stupidly difficult to get computers to grok the language.
Consider all the icons used for "print" as if the letters P R I N T are unclear. Even for non-english speakers, it's trivial to look up the word in a dictionary, and impossible to look up the icon. Ditto for replacing "ON" with |. It's just madness.
> and emoji.
Perhaps their recent appearance in Unicode, and the several screens of them that appeared on my iphone texting app.
Phonecian is partly derived from Egyptian hieroglyphics. I love this stuff.
As someone who has studied both Chinese and Japanese, this article read very fluidly. Curious how other readers have found this?
Another cool fact, in hieroglyphics there is more than one way to write a word, because, unlike most alphabetic systems, some characters are multi syllabic and can represent two or more syllables.
Well, maybe that was the point, though -- that the priorities of the language may change over time, and eventually you're dealing with 2000 year old Cockney rhyming slang baked into your written language. But that's just the opinion of one guy sitting on his Vannevar.
Took me a minute and some Googling. Did you just make that up? It's in perfect spirit.
I'm not sure how you'd sort emoji though, since there's no stroke order.
I've read in some places that the scribes attempted to use the same rebus for cognate words but I everything I could find online was a re-hashing of wikipedia (or wherever the wikipedia article is sourced from) which states "However, the phonetic component is not always as meaningless as this example would suggest. Rebuses were sometimes chosen that were compatible semantically as well as phonetically."
I'm not sure how important this really is or how many characters that share a common rebus are cognate. But to my aesthetic senses I much prefer characters to contain etymological information than just the pronunciation when the character was first written.
He did, however, write an article[0] about spelling reform later in life, in which he sincerely advocated the use of a simplified "longhand, written with the shorthand alphabet unreduced." That is, he proposed the use of Isaac Pitman's phonographic alphabet—the basis of what was then the most popular shorthand in the English language—without the brief forms, phrasings, and abbreviations that allow stenographers to write (by omission) at the sound of speech, but slow down the reading back of what they've written; in Twain's preferred shorthand, every sound would be on the page.
[0] - https://books.google.com/books?id=KoBYAAAAYAAJ&dq=what%20is%...
(Unfortunately, the Project Gutenberg transcription of this essay does not include the plates of Twain's shorthand. This is why I've linked the Google Books scan.)
Thanks for the link, unfortunately Google doesn't seem to want to show me the content. I wonder if they are implementing some kind of region coding (I'm in Norway).
I always wonder whether people advocating phonetic spelling have ever encountered someone who speaks a different dialect. In Twain's case it is pretty certain that he did as the Huckleberry Finn books include dialect dialogue. How did he think such people would use a phonetic script or worse a phonological one? Did he expect everyone to suddenly start speaking the American analogue of what in the UK we call Received Pronunciation (RP)? If not then surely another person's script would be even harder to read than it is already.
