How can China be so smart if their written language is literally drawings of houses and cats and shit.
>>16821459The drawings can be combined, put under/above another, put next to each other to modify meaning and consist of standardized strokesJust like the sign you posted, which consists of this sort of "roof" and the sign below it.
>>16821459U no rike drawing?
>>16821459precisely because of thislittle kids are forced to memorize thousands of elaborate symbols since elementary schoolso they get used to studying very hard from a very young agethe symbols themselves are also made out of smaller symbols which each have their own meaning and their combination usually "makes sense"
>>16821555it's a roof and a pig under it and it means homemakes sense as in antiquity a home included domesticated animals such as pigs
>>16821730I legit kek'ed
I think it's inspiring.
>>1682145990% of the time the pictographic value has as much to do with the current meaning as the pictographic origins of our letters. If you want to understand how Chinese writing really works read this:https://zompist.com/yingzi/yingzi.htm(There are a few nitpicks I have, but most of them are addressed at the end.)
chinese text has more information/character than other languages, so the equivalent piece of text should be shorter (char count) than e.g. english, right?do native chinks read text much slower or is chinese quicker to absorb information?
>>16822628The same information can fit in fewer characters, but the characters take up more space/pixels; Latin script remains legible down to something like 5x3 pixels while Chinese characters need 12x12 at absolute bare minimum and preferably at least 16x16.
>>16822265this is fun, thanx anon or should I say ㄉㄢ ㄢ
>>16822628Ah, the old CISC vs RISC argument.
>>16822628Studies show that information uptake is at about the same rate but interestingly enough chinese is a much denser language for LLMs because each token can correspond to one words
>>16821459>An impractical thing with aesthetic value? NOOOOOOO YOU HAVE TO REPLACE IT LE EFFICIENT THING
>>16822739Would you argue for keeping English spelling as is, too?
Like half the population was illiterate until the 60s
>>16822628all languages convey information at approximately the same timehttps://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw2594
>>16823564That's about spoken languages, not writing. Chinese could perfectly well be written in an alphabet and still be Chinese (and indeed it is in Braille and among the Dungans of Central Asia), and as shown >>16822265 here English could perfectly well be written in a Chinese-style logographic system and still be English.
>>16821459Literally not /sci/
>>16823591Surely linguistics has at least some relevance to /sci/?
