3

Are the Chinese characters really pictorial?

There is a discussion Here. What is your opinion? Please see the link and come back to give your insight. To be specific so that the question would be able to survive, please provide some good examples with your answer.

The real question behind the issue is that "Is it possible to have a language that is really pictorial or ideograph without any sound indication?"

  • 1
    May be: 一二三日月山田人口土木水火门弓 – PdotWang Feb 16 '15 at 17:15
  • 2
    I highly recommend the book Visual Speech. It makes a compelling argument that there have never been any non-phonetic full writing systems. The author was the late sinologist John DeFrancis. – Stumpy Joe Pete Feb 17 '15 at 6:07
6

No. Chinese writing certainly has an early origin in logograms, but so does the Latin alphabet we use – the "A" is actually an ox head, tilted 90 degrees, and borrowed from the first Sumerian cuneiform script.

Since classical times, only a few percent of the Chinese language retains such logograms, while the vast majority (+90%) of characters are phonetic compounds, essentially a rather large and fuzzy alphabet with functional elements as hinting.

几 might be a table, but 叽, 饥 and 肌 haven't got much to do with a table, but are used phonetically.

| improve this answer | |
0

For so many things there are so many pure theoretical models like pictorial language, micro kernel operating systems or complete democracy. But in reality what works better are often hybrids.

Chinese sure has its pictorial aspect but it also uses many other approaches since its comes a long way to what it is today.

As @倪阔乐 pointed out, latin letters also have pictorial origins, but I don't think Indo-European languages count as pictorial languages since the letter doesn't carry meaning today even though its form was inspired by things in reality. Where Chinese characters commonly do (but not always) although some of those pictorial components have gone through heavy revisions.

For example, when I was reaching for another question, the one about left and right, if found out the top part of 左 and 右 comes from the shape of hand which used to be the same symbol of 又. The 工 and 口 are added later and the top parts were revised.

So it seems to me the question about whether or not Chinese is pictorial really depends on your definition of being pictorial. It is pictorial if you consider whether or not the construction of the character or basic meaning unit of the language have a visual root connect to its meaning. It is not if you consider whether or not if it is as pictorial as ancient Egyptian.

| improve this answer | |
-3

My answer is YES, but only for Traditional Chinese.

look at these video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRi4uDCOHfQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rc3SftYcors

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_NCdH5BscE . . .

and so on.

The path of from picture to word is only presented in the Traditional Chinese.

If you are learning it and you have a teacher, you can ask it "how this word came from".

Teacher may told you the story. This is the fastest way to learn Chinese.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.