Writing and Literacy in Chinese, Korean and Japanese

Last updated

Writing and Literacy in Chinese, Korean and Japanese (Victor Mair uses the acronym WLCKJ [1] ) is a 1995 book by Insup Taylor and M. Martin Taylor, published by John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Contents

Kim Ainsworth-Darnell, in The Journal of the Association of Teachers of Japanese , wrote that the work "is intended as an introduction for the Western reader to the writing systems of East Asia." [2] William C. Hannas of Georgetown University described it as "the first sustained treatment of writing in East Asia." [3] Nobu Akamatsu of Kochi University stated that the book was intended for "novices from various backgrounds" rather than academics with extensive experience related to East Asia. [4] Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy wrote that the book was not only intended for "the general public" but also for "academic readers". [5] Kathryn Allen of the University of Reading wrote that the comparing of the writing systems of Chinese, Japanese, and Korean was the more important aspect than the overview of the languages. [6]

In 2014 a revised version was published. [7]

Background

Insup Taylor, who was born in Korea, [8] and employed by the University of Toronto, [9] is in the psycholinguistic field. [10] She studied East Asian languages and did the bulk of the work. [11] She has fluency in both Korean and Japanese. [8]

The co-author is her husband. [11]

The book used primary sources written in each of the three languages as well as ones in English. [11]

Contents

The book has an introductory chapter about linguistics and writing systems. Beyond that, it has a section on each of the three languages: [11] Chinese is in Part 1, Korean is in Part 2, and Japanese is in Part 3. [4] Each section has an initial chapter with background information on the language, followed by one or more chapters about writing systems for that particular language and discussion on why each system still uses Chinese characters; each also has a bibliography for that section. The book does not have information on dialects. [11] On Vietnam it mentions the country on a single page but has no further discussion. [12]

The section on Korean also discusses the role of Hangul, [4] and of Hanja (spelled "Hancha"), as well as attempts to completely discontinue the latter and why such never happened. [13] The section on Japanese also discusses hiragana and katakana, [4] as well as mora and its role in haiku. [13]

The book has information from experiments in the psycholinguistic field. It also includes anecdotes and quotes. [2]

The book argues that Koreans should again begin to use Chinese characters. [8]

Reception

The reviews below consider the original printings and not the revised version in 2014.

Mair stated that he was unclear on how much of a role each of the co-authors had in the work. [14] He also criticized the "a sizable number of factual and interpretive errors" and "typographical and grammatical mistakes on almost every other page of the book," as well as a "sophomoric, preachy style and occasionally unidiomatic English". [1]

William J. Poser of the University of Pennsylvania wrote that "Overall, this is a valuable book." [15] Poster stated that the book "is not the best source" for people wanting details on phonology due to the book's "weakness" in that arena, [16] and Poser stated the "technical" details are weak. He praised the content about "cultural, educational, and psychological aspects of writing". [17]

Ainsworth-Darnell argued that the book is "poorly organized and difficult to follow" and that it is not "a truly useful introductory text." [2] Ainsworth-Darnell argued some of the explanations the book uses "often[...]are more puzzling than the truth." [18] She also criticized the "lack of objectivity and the Sinocentric bias that pervades the discussion of Japanese." [19]

Roy Andrew Miller stated that the work uses "an eager, naïve, and doggedly enthusiastic first-person narrative style that at first amuses, but soon thereafter wearies, the reader." [9] Miller concluded the book was "a point d'appui for interminable digressions" on obvious aspects of Asia. [9]

Hannas stated that in regards to the book's concept that Chinese characters are advantageous in writing systems, each argument in favor "either is spurious or is beneficial only in the trivial sense that the characters solve problems that their own use has created." [10]

Mary S. Erbaugh of City University of Hong Kong praised the "depth, scope" and "richness" of the underlying primary sourcing. [11]

T. H. Barrett, in Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , stated that much of the content is not revelatory but "firmly potted", that the book is "a bibliographic equivalent...] of a fast-food outlet" which would be "wholesome" and that "cannot be judged by gourmet standards". [12]

Jane Chu-mei Kuo and Suguru Akutsu, both of American Graduate School of International Management, stated that the work "is invaluable" for its information on "the impact written characters have had on the education systems and literacy in these countries". [20] Kuo and Akutsu argued that the authors "went too far in trying to teach the languages to the readers." [13] and that their information on language structure and phonetic systems is too detailed for a work that is supposed to be for the non-specialist reader. [20] Kuo and Akutsu argued that the book should have had sections based on the elements common to the languages instead of sections by language, as such would be " a more direct comparison" that would "keep the reader engaged in the examination." [21] The writing system being the first section, comparing and contrasting levels of literacy, styles of education, and phonetics, and then reasons why the writing style is advantageous. [21]

Janet S. (Shibamoto) Smith of University of California Davis described the book as "a valiant first attempt" but that "organizational problems, excessive repetition, and more-than-occasional inaccuracies make the work hard to recommend." [22]

Allen described the book as "a valuable contribution to understanding" Chinese, Japanese, and Korean, and which is "quite readable in its entirety yet could be used as a reference on specific points." [23]

Toshio Ohori  [ ja ] (大堀 壽夫, Ōhori Toshio) of the University of Tokyo described the book as "an excellent account of writing and literacy" that he "strongly recommended". [24] Ohori argued that at times the book should have directly used Chinese, Japanese, and/or Korean text instead of romanized versions of such. [25]

Christopher Seely of the University of Canterbury stated that overall, it is "a useful work" in its field despite stylistic errors. [26] criticized the work for frequently having an "unacceptably loose or otherwise inappropriate" "mode of expression", [27] and for having "contradictory, misguided, or confusing" statements as well as "inadequate correction of English expression." [28]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Chinese language</span> National language of China

Chinese is a group of languages spoken natively by the ethnic Han Chinese majority and many minority ethnic groups in China. Approximately 1.35 billion people, or around 16% of the global population, speak a variety of Chinese as their first language.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Chinese characters</span> Logographic writing system

Chinese characters are logographs used to write the Chinese languages and others from regions historically influenced by Chinese culture. Chinese characters have a documented history spanning over three millennia, representing one of the four independent inventions of writing accepted by scholars; of these, they comprise the only writing system continuously used since its invention. Over time, the function, style, and means of writing characters have evolved greatly. Informed by a long tradition of lexicography, modern states using Chinese characters have standardised their forms and pronunciations: broadly, simplified characters are used to write Chinese in mainland China, Singapore, and Malaysia, while traditional characters are used in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macau.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hanja</span> Korean language characters of Chinese origin

Hanja, alternatively known as Hancha, are Chinese characters used in the writing of Korean. Hanja was used as early as the Gojoseon period under the first Korean kingdom.

John DeFrancis was an American linguist, sinologist, author of Chinese language textbooks, lexicographer of Chinese dictionaries, and professor emeritus of Chinese Studies at the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Idu script</span> Archaic Korean language writing system

Idu is an archaic writing system that represents the Korean language using Chinese characters ("hanja"). The script, which was developed by Buddhist monks, made it possible to record Korean words through their equivalent meaning or sound in Chinese.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Roy Andrew Miller</span> American linguist (1924–2014)

Roy Andrew Miller was an American linguist best known as the author of several books on Japanese language and linguistics, and for his advocacy of Korean and Japanese as members of the proposed Altaic language family.

<i>Taegeuk</i> Traditional Korean symbol

Taegeuk is a Sino-Korean term meaning "supreme ultimate", although it can also be translated as "great polarity / duality". The term and its overall concept is derived from the Chinese Taiji popularised in the west as the Yin and Yang. The symbol was chosen for the design of the Korean national flag in the 1880s. It substitutes the black and white color scheme often seen in most taijitu illustrations with blue and red, respectively, along with a horizontal separator, as opposed to vertical.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sinosphere</span> Areas historically influenced by Chinese culture

The Sinosphere, also known as the Chinese cultural sphere, East Asian cultural sphere, or the Sinic world, encompasses multiple countries in East Asia and Southeast Asia that historically were heavily influenced by Chinese culture, norms and traditions. According to academic consensus, the Sinosphere comprises Greater China, Japan, Korea, and Vietnam. Other definitions may include the regions of modern-day Mongolia and Singapore, largely due to limited historical Chinese influences or increasing modern-day Chinese diaspora. The Sinosphere is not to be confused with Sinophone, which indicates countries where a Chinese-speaking population is dominant.

<i>The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy</i> 1984 book by John DeFrancis

The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy is a book written by John DeFrancis, published in 1984 by University of Hawaiʻi Press. The book describes some of the concepts underlying the Chinese language and writing system, and gives the author's position on a number of ideas about the language.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jindai moji</span> Purported ancient Japanese characters

Jindai moji or Kamiyo moji are characters said to have been used in ancient Japan. Some have claimed since the mid-Edo period that such ancient characters, for example such as Chikushi characters and Hokkaido characters, have been found in archeological remains, in Kofun and on mountains, but all jindai moji are generally considered to be forgeries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">University of Hawaiʻi Press</span> Academic publisher

The University of Hawaiʻi Press is a university press that is part of the University of Hawaiʻi.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Digraphia</span> Using multiple writing system for a language

In sociolinguistics, digraphia refers to the use of more than one writing system for the same language. Synchronic digraphia is the coexistence of two or more writing systems for the same language, while diachronic digraphia is the replacement of one writing system by another for a particular language.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Korean mixed script</span> Writing using Hangul and Hanja

Korean mixed script is a form of writing the Korean language that uses a mixture of the Korean alphabet or hangul and hanja, the Korean name for Chinese characters. The distribution on how to write words usually follows that all native Korean words, including suffixes, particles, and honorific markers are generally written in hangul and never in hanja. Sino-Korean vocabulary or hanja-eo, either words borrowed from Chinese or created from Sino-Korean roots, were generally always written in hanja, although very rare or complex characters were often substituted with hangul. Although the Korean alphabet was introduced and taught to people beginning in 1446, most literature until the early twentieth century was written in literary Chinese known as hanmun.

Buddhist influences on print technology in East Asia are far-reaching. The history of writing in Asia dates back to the 13th century BC. China used bones and shells for religious inscriptions in the form of divinations. From these beginnings, numerous forms of writing and printing were developed. In many instances, as in Europe, it was religion that played a major role in the development of writing and printing techniques or which was the reason behind the usage of these techniques. Of the religions in East Asia, it was Buddhism that played the strongest role in influencing writing and, in particular, printing. There were other factors that influenced the creation of manuscript and print culture, but Buddhism had the largest influence in spreading the usage of print technology, which in turn led to an increase in the dissemination of secular printing and literacy as well as wielding an important influence on economics, government, and competing religions/philosophies.

Choe Hyeon-bae, also known by the pen-name Oesol, was an educationalist and scholar of the Korean language.

Character amnesia is a phenomenon where experienced speakers of some East Asian languages forget how to write Chinese characters previously well-known to them. The phenomenon is specifically tied to prolonged and extensive use of input methods, such as those that use romanizations of characters, and is documented to be a significant issue in China and Japan. Modern technologies, such as mobile phones and computers, allow users to enter Chinese characters using a phonetic transcription without knowing how to write them by hand. Whether or not the phenomenon is as widespread or troubling as some have claimed is the subject of debate.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Adoption of Chinese literary culture</span>

Chinese writing, culture and institutions were imported as a whole by Vietnam, Korea, Japan and other neighbouring states over an extended period. Chinese Buddhism spread over East Asia between the 2nd and 5th centuries AD, followed by Confucianism as these countries developed strong central governments modelled on Chinese institutions. In Vietnam and Korea, and for a shorter time in Japan and the Ryukyus, scholar-officials were selected using examinations on the Confucian classics modelled on the Chinese civil service examinations. Shared familiarity with the Chinese classics and Confucian values provided a common framework for intellectuals and ruling elites across the region. All of this was based on the use of Literary Chinese, which became the medium of scholarship and government across the region. Although each of these countries developed vernacular writing systems and used them for popular literature, they continued to use Chinese for all formal writing until it was swept away by rising nationalism around the end of the 19th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Literary Chinese in Vietnam</span> Classical Chinese as written in Vietnam

Literary Chinese was the medium of all formal writing in Vietnam for almost all of the country's history until the early 20th century, when it was replaced by vernacular writing in Vietnamese using the Latin-based Vietnamese alphabet. The language was the same as that used in China, as well as in Korea and Japan, and used the same standard Chinese characters. It was used for official business, historical annals, fiction, verse, scholarship, and even for declarations of Vietnamese determination to resist Chinese invaders.

The Columbia History of Chinese Literature is a reference book edited by Victor H. Mair and published by the Columbia University Press in 2002. The topics include all genres and periods of poetry, prose, fiction, and drama but also areas not traditionally thought of as literature, such as wit and humour, proverbs and rhetoric, historical and philosophical writings, classical exegesis, literary theory and criticism, traditional fiction commentary, as well as popular culture, the impact of religion upon literature, the role of women, and the relationship with non-Chinese languages and ethnic minorities. There are also chapters on Chinese literature in Korea, Japan, and Vietnam.

References

Notes

  1. 1 2 Mair, p. 267.
  2. 1 2 3 Ainsworth-Darnell, p. 57.
  3. ↑ Hannas, p. 590.
  4. 1 2 3 4 Akamatsu.
  5. ↑ Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy.
  6. ↑ Allen, p. 115.
  7. ↑ "Writing and Literacy in Chinese, Korean and Japanese". John Benjamins Publishing Company . Retrieved 2022-08-04.
  8. 1 2 3 Erbaugh, p. 377.
  9. 1 2 3 Miller, p. 431.
  10. 1 2 Hannas, p. 591.
  11. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Poser, p. 103.
  12. 1 2 Barrett, p. 400.
  13. 1 2 3 Kuo and Akutsu, PDF p. 76.
  14. ↑ Mair, p. 263-264.
  15. ↑ Poser, p. 105.
  16. ↑ Poser, p. 105-106.
  17. ↑ Poster, p. 104.
  18. ↑ Ainsworth-Darnell, p. 58.
  19. ↑ Ainsworth-Darnell, p. 59.
  20. 1 2 Kuo and Akutsu, PDF p. 75.
  21. 1 2 Kuo and Akutsu, PDF p. 77.
  22. ↑ Smith, p. 279.
  23. ↑ Allen, p. 116.
  24. ↑ Ohori, p. 174.
  25. ↑ Ohori, p. 177-178.
  26. ↑ Seely, p. 122.
  27. ↑ Seely, p. 120.
  28. ↑ Seely, p. 121.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.