On 7/14/2011 2:39, Warp wrote:
>    I have always wondered why in Japanese, and probably also in Chinese,
> there's no strict one-to-one-to-one correspondence between a kanji symbol,
> its meaning and its pronounciation.

Because Chinese writing is at least 5000 years old or so. The same writing 
system has been evolving for about as long as the pyramids have been around, 
so rather a lot older than Judaism, for example.  You expect anything used 
by a billion people for 5000 years is going to be logical and consistent? :-)

> The whole writing system seems to be
> designed precisely for that: One symbol has (exactly) one meaning and one
> pronounciation, making it completely unambiguous.

I'm sure it started out that way. Now spread it slowly across warring 
empires that spanned five time zones, let it stew for a few thousand years 
without any means of communication faster than horses, and see if everyone 
still agrees on the meaning and pronunciation of everything.

> So the whole idea with the kanji writing system seems
> to be completely wasted, making it overly complicated for no good reason.

I don't think saying "the whole idea with the kanji writing system." I think 
saying "a logically designed ideographic writing system would have these 
beneficial properties." But it wasn't logically designed, any more than 
human bodies were.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Coding without comments is like
    driving without turn signals."

Post a reply to this message