We Have to Talk about This. Simplified vs Traditional Characters (Turn on ENG/CHT subs!) (自動翻譯繁體字幕)

[@benjaminmyerscello]

Ultimately, you should learn both sets of characters (as I did), but I DO have my preference, at least for non-native speakers! What are you learning right now? Whatever it is, keep it up!

[@akade1]

If you learnt to drive a car in manual transmission, you can most definitely drive in auto as well. However, the opposite cannot be said to be true. Then again, some people only want to drive an auto so they won't have a problem. Yet, they're missing out on the unique pleasure that only a manual car can provide.

[@benjaminmyerscello]

I agree. That’s why I say that at some point, if a student studies to the advanced level, they should probably learn both. But your point about some people simply wanting to drive an automatic transmission is another good one. I think it is similar to what I was saying when I said, whatever you’re doing right now, just keep doing it! Thanks for the comment!

[@bean3118]

That's an interesting point. In natural languages, redundancy isn't necessarily a negative thing. it is not limited to characters and languages, but to human's information processing in general. I'm Japanese, so of course the traditional hanzi are more easier to understand, but I kind of like the simplified hanzi too. By being expose to multiple variants, I feel that I can better understand the core essence of the Hanzi system.

[@timdietz350]

I think the question as to whether it helped improve literacy is a bit more difficult than simply looking at the rates in HK and Taiwan. Those are relatively tiny samples compared to Mainland, and there may be other factors in play that might affect education across these areas. It's difficult to make generalizations about a country the size and twice the population of Europe. Basically I think it's hard to say it did help or it didn't, or if literacy would be better or worse in Mainland had they not switched regardless of the rates in HK and Taiwan. But the point about the disadvantages still holds even if it's hard to quantify the advantages. One good reason to expand to learning traditional is that we typically see traditional characters in the US, which for American learners is what we'll encounter most of the time.

[@benjaminmyerscello]

Excellent points!

[@xuexizhongwen]

I agree that we can't know for sure how the literacy rate would have been affected without the switch, but I think it's highly unlikely that it would cause the literacy rate to be any less than it is today, simply because there is absolutely no evidence for such an idea. There's no reason to believe that it would've made any difference. And in fact, simplification may have even negatively impacted the literacy rate! Correlation does not equal causation. The literacy rate supposedly went up about the same time as simplification, but guess what else went up dramatically? Education.