Jump to content

Talk:Debate on traditional and simplified Chinese characters

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ambiguity - Pro-Traditional characters

[edit]

It is criticized that 设 and 没 look similar in handwriting. 設 and 沒 look similar in handwriting as well. Fast handwriting is less readable in any language. That's no argument. "u" and "n" look similar in handwriting too. So should we make Latin letters more complicated? --2.245.104.175 (talk) 15:01, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

German Kurrentschrift and Sütterlin did exactly that: "u" is written with an extra stroke, to make it "ŭ", just so that it won't be confused with "n". Double sharp (talk) 14:52, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article should be deleted

[edit]

This "debate" itself is nonsense. Why? Because any written/spoken form in any language is inherently arbitrary. There is no requirement for a certain meaning or concept to have a certain specific written/spoken form. Arguing about which form is better is just pointless, because any form is inherently arbitrary. 159.192.72.163 (talk) 05:18, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

if that's your logic, then shouldn't most pages about langue be deleted? i don't see why the subjective nature of language would mean that this debate doesn't exist. and besides, once governments (such as china or taiwan) become involved, it's no longer about arbitrary forms, but official policy StudentOfEtherium (talk) 00:21, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

history section

[edit]

I think this page should have a history section. there's a section for modern history towards the bottom, but that only includes developments in the 21st century. a brief history on this page detailing the history of the issue before that point, such as Chinese policies, would improve it StudentOfEtherium (talk) 00:19, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]