Yesterday, I saw that netizens sent Fang Zhouzi's so-called "rebuttal" to the author's video article on "Is Chinese more difficult to learn than poppy or easy to learn?" (Part II)" on Twitter, and received Fang Zhouzi's special "care", which is a little honored!
The guru has long told us that "it is not a bad thing but a good thing that is opposed by the enemy", and "it means that we are doing the right thing". Fang Zhouzi is not accustomed to many things in China, so many of his views on China are contrary to the perspective of the Chinese people, or they look at China from the perspective of the world upside down. For example, after the release of Huawei's new mobile phone partner 60, he has his own "unique insight":
Fang Zhouzi was disparaging about Huawei's new mobile phone, and couldn't understand the netizens' sarcastic humor about Raimondo
The facts have slapped him in the face, and the people of the United States and Western capital and technology institutions have racked their brains for how to get a 5.5 gigabit mobile phone and satellite calls in order to do everything possible to get Tsinghua University. Isn't this a direct affirmation of Huawei's technical level? Fang Zhouzi's spiritual leader, Raimondo, is not as stingy and narrow-minded as he is.
Both the Chinese government and the public strongly oppose the anti-human move of Japan's TEPCO and the forces behind it to discharge nuclear sewage directly into the Pacific Ocean. And Fang Zhouzi still looked at this problem backwards:
Fang Zhouzi's views on the issue of nuclear-contaminated water are indeed at odds with those of the Chinese people
According to his reasoning, he should go to the shore of Fukushima Ocean, drink some sea water there, get some seafood there and taste it himself, preferably a few full meals, and show up directly. But alas, we didn't see it.
Fang Zhouzi also made the following "high theory" on the content of the author's "Is Chinese More Difficult to Learn than Poppy?" (Part II):
Fang Zhouzi's "high theory" on the author's article
If there is a coming, there will be a relationship, so the author refutes as follows:
1. Fang said: "The basic unit of language is words, not words." This is just the opinion of the American poppy people or poppy religious believers, right? The so-called Swedish Saussure's linguistic view? The Angsa people have indeed never seen words, and the vast majority of them do not understand Chinese and Chinese, nor do they understand the significance of the top-level design of the hierarchy of Chinese language and writing. It can be said that most of them have never seen this kind of high-level Chinese composed of Chinese characters, they do not observe deeply like China, and there are many people who know Chinese Poppy very well, and they have not penetrated into Chinese to observe and think. If you don't know that the strokes of Chinese characters at the same level as the poppy letters are arranged in two dimensions, Chinese there is one more layer of direct ideographic Chinese character structure than the poppy text, and half a layer of ideographic or phonetic side structure, the whole Chinese building is constructed in a way that is one and a half layers more than the poppy script, and the language and words are concise and the expression information is intensive. People who stand on a one-dimensional line segment cannot see anything on the two-dimensional plane, let alone the colorful world at the three-dimensional level.
Fang Zhouzi grew up in China, but his understanding of the written language was very narrow. I can't see the basic elements in Chinese, and there is not even the helpless space of Poppy. No wonder the smell of Angsa is so strong, it turns out that it is a question of where the ass sits. In his sentence, there is no distinction between language and writing, and language learning seems to be in vain. The poppies and even the Swede Saussure, who knows a little bit of linguistics, generally rarely distinguish between the two concepts of poppy and poppy, which shows that their writing theory really has no foundation, such as an English, even the meaning of the text is included, so they only have linguistics, and rarely mention philology. What kind of high opinion can Fang Zhouzi have when he looks up to the thinking of such people? In fact, the reason why their low-level writing and theories are of high quality is related to the short history of the formation of poppy writing. After all, Johnson's English Dictionary, the first dictionary of the poppy kingdom, was published only 260 years ago, which is only 14% of the historical length of Xu Shen's Shuowen Jie Zi more than 1900 years ago, so I can't understand the higher-level writing theory. But Fang Zhouzi shouldn't be enough? Chinese and Chinese are both roughly distinguished. Theoretically, we not only have linguistics, but also philology, such as exegesis, rhetoric, poetry, and calligraphy. Therefore, the name of our Chinese students' textbook is "Chinese", and the word "language" has a comprehensive meaning and concise expression. For example, it is not called "Chinese" or "Guowen". Fang Zhouzi's sentence is about language in the front, and what he actually talks about in the back is words, but it is the same as the level of understanding of language and writing in his spiritual mother country, the lighthouse country, and the two are mixed together.
In the theory of Chinese philology, there is a proposition called "character standard", and Professor Xu Tongqiang has also published a large work for this purpose. Yuwen Dasheng, an expert who has been engaged in Chinese language teaching in the United States for a long time, believes that "the basic structural unit of the Chinese language is characters, and the vast majority of Chinese characters are words themselves, and characters and characters can form a large number of new words." In addition to a very small number of Chinese characters, such as the respective characters in the words "grape" and "embarrassment", the vast majority of single Chinese characters are also words, and they also have the function of poppy word, not only two-word words and multi-word words are the "Chinese words" of Chinese. The character standard is precisely one of the biggest characteristics and basic advantages of Chinese, such as prominent ideography, one word and one sound, and rich and flexible word formation. Monophonic Chinese characters can in turn promote the optimization of the Chinese language and control excessive language drift. Chinese characters can make our Chinese a "uniform beat" (Yuwen Daisheng's observation), the expressive pronunciation is roughly at the same speed, unlike poppy, the syllables are long and short, and the receiver of Chinese words understands the speaker's meaning according to the "even beat", and it is easy to hear clearly, and the speaker has a strong sense of rhythm when speaking. Each single tone in Chinese corresponds to each Chinese character, and the rhyme is prominent and the sound is bright. Such a high-order language with high information transmission efficiency and low bit error rate, as well as its high-level form of Chinese, why should its high-level linguistics be matched by Western low-level linguistic standards? Does the United States have such a high-end watch? The United States people grow into an eggplant, and we have a good big sweet watermelon, do we have to look the same as it?
If it is not enough to say that theory is not convincing, then look at reality. In reality, the actual understanding of most Chinese people in their own Chinese language is the character standard, mainly characters, how many people think that there are only words and no words? More wisely, Chinese does not have to deliberately seek a strict division of words, such as poppy words between words are not needed at all. However, Chinese characters, especially commonly used words, are precisely the most common word-forming elements of Chinese words, especially commonly used words, covering the main part of the word meaning.
There is no such thing as Chinese characters, and naturally there is no concept of character standard, and one mind to inform the Chinese people that the so-called word is the standard, which is caused by the acquired poppy brainwashing and misleading. Taking Chinese characters as the basic unit of writing is the higher realm of writing. The West wants to use concise text elements to form words, but the question is whether they have concise Chinese characters? No, only long strips of words. Some words can be combined in such a way that a new word is made up of a root or word, but if the root or word is too long, the new word will be longer. Neologisms that are particularly infrequently used can be constructed in this way, but common words that are constructed in this way to express verbose texts will become longer and longer. Therefore, the use of more sober neologisms can only abandon the method of compound word formation, and most of the synthetic word formation methods can only be abandoned, becoming more and more independent new words. So the poppy dictionary is getting bigger and bigger. And if there are many new words, it will take more effort for those who use this kind of writing to learn.
The formation of Chinese history also highlights the standard of Chinese characters. The vernacular script commonly used in modern Chinese is formed on the basis of spoken and classical Chinese. "Water Margin" and "Dream of Red Mansions" are vernacular novels. However, vernacular Chinese constitutes the main mainstream style of writing, which is only a matter of more than 100 years, and the Modern Chinese Dictionary has only been compiled for 60 years. Previously, there were only Chinese characters, and most of the written characters were written in classical Chinese. In the early period of ancient times, the literary language was more dominated by single words, and the development of two-word words and other forms gradually increased with the technological progress of the writing medium. In ancient times, there were no articles in China? Were the Chinese people unable to write histories, political commentaries, memorabilia, letters, and poems? Unless they were blind people who thought so, they could come to the conclusion that "it is impossible to compose a text without words alone." Judging from the actual history of the development of writing on the mainland, the basic unit of our early writing was dominated by a single script. It was only after the introduction of cheap paper that the number of two-word words gradually increased. However, because of the foundation of Chinese characters, the generation of two-word and multi-word words is a matter of course, which makes word formation more efficient, makes words smooth and excessive, or even seamless docking, so that Chinese does not have to desire the division of words, and is more intelligent. This kind of development and repeated polishing has further made the core of Chinese characters more stable and solid, but the shell remains malleable and flexible, and the growth of new words is faster and clearer, and it can be more detailed and expressive. Make Chinese characters more adaptable to changes in the outside world.
Before the Europeans had not yet formed their written language, their expert masters did not dare to flout Chinese characters like Fang Zhouzi. In his article "The Enlightenment - Western Civilization, Born in the 18th Century, the Product of "Sinicization" under the Guidance of Confucianism" (see https://www.ict88.com/page/view-post?id=518), Mr. Zhu Xuanzhi, who has lived in the poppy country for many years, uses a large number of Western historical materials and scholars' research results to restore the following history of Europeans' exploration of "real characters":
Screenshot of Mr. Zhu Xuanzhi's article
At the other end of China's territory, the people who brush the dishes are indeed head-on. Maybe Fang Zhouzi didn't adjust his perspective, and he looked at Chinese culture and writing with his head down, and he was not used to the word standard.
Second, Fang said: "For foreigners who learn Chinese, it is still useless to only learn words and words. The main obstacle to learning Chinese is precisely that there are too many words, and it is necessary to be literate and master vocabulary, while learning English only requires mastering vocabulary. ”
Who says you can't learn words when you learn words? Not only do foreigners have to learn words when they learn Chinese, but Chinese students still have to learn words. It's just a question of who is the design and whether the design is smart and efficient. Fang Zhouzi himself was setting up a false target, and fired a shot vigorously, feeling that he had hit the target. Fang Zhouzi was in a hurry to celebrate the victory without waiting to read the third part I wrote, so what was the hurry? In the third part, I talked about the number of entries included in the Modern Chinese Dictionary. The sixth edition included 69,000 entries, but the seventh edition added only 400 entries. With less than 70,000 entries, even compared with the more than 400,000 entries in the Oxford English Dictionary, the former is only 1/6 of the latter. Why aren't all Chinese words included in the dictionary? The reason is simple: no. With a dictionary and a word standard, there is no need to include so many entries. More than 90% of Chinese words are constructed with explicit ideographic Chinese characters, and more than 90% of them do not need to be explained, as long as they understand the combined meaning of the two. This kind of intelligent structural design can make the Chinese people self-taught. Now that you have mastered the ideographic connotation of Chinese characters, why do you need to spend your brain time to memorize Chinese words in order to understand them?
It's just that Fang Zhouzi may not understand, it is efficient to learn words and then enter the words to learn words, "sharpening the knife is not wrong to cut wood", and the relationship between adjectives is very appropriate. When Chinese children mainly learn words before the third grade (the most commonly used words, I advocate that it is best to concentrate more on literacy in the first and second grades, which is another matter), the children of the poppy country have indeed begun to rush ahead. However, after Chinese children master the commonly used words, such as mastering the 1000 most commonly used Chinese characters, the speed of learning words and the whole language will catch up, and the word coverage rate will be higher than that of the latecomer at the age of 10. This is precisely the result of the intelligent design of the structure that uses Chinese characters as the basic unit.
Fang Zhouzi was heartbroken for foreigners, believing that foreigners "the main obstacle to learning Chinese is precisely that there are too many words, and they need to be literate and master vocabulary, while learning English only requires mastering vocabulary." In fact, it is intimidating foreigners to learn Chinese, and their hearts can be cursed. Indeed, there are many foreigners who have seen so many strokes of Chinese characters for the first time, and they speak like singing, and it is true that some people are scared to pee and run away after the first two days of learning. In fact, this is precisely Fang Zhouzi's advocacy of "Chinese Chinese is difficult to learn" and misleading the superstition of poppy. According to Yuwen Dasheng's teaching experience, as long as the method is appropriate (such as not using superfluous Latin pinyin) and the concept is correct, the Chinese efficiency of foreigners learning Chinese is very high.
Isn't it a bit misplaced to take the time when he was scared to pee and run away when he first learned his Chinese language? Not too rigorous and scientific? Difficult to learn at the beginning may not be difficult to learn later, easy at the beginning may not be easy later. Long-distance races always have to be judged by the whole race, right?
If a nation wants to save trouble and thinks that as long as it can communicate, then there is no need to even invent writing, it is too troublesome. But the wise people do not think so, they think that if they start to lay a good foundation and start to suffer a little hardship, if they save trouble and are efficient, and go into a smooth road, then it is the best way to learn, the best language design, and how quickly and well the shortcut to master the culture. The ideographic characteristics of Chinese characters in the basic unit of Chinese are highly efficient word formation, and most of them can be synthesized according to the meaning of the word, which is the wisdom of its top-level design. Although the words of birds and beasts are simple and trouble-free, birds and beasts can never be upgraded to the level of human intelligence.
3650 commonly used words, most of them have regular word formation, is it a lot of work to learn?Chinese characters are difficult to learn at first, but whether you are a Chinese foreigner, learning 3650 Chinese characters is easier than learning 2-35,000 words, right?
Originally, the premise of the comparison of learning efficiency mentioned in the full text of my Weibo was that native speakers of the poppy country learn poppy and native Chinese speakers learn Chinese, and make comparisons under this premise. As for the comparison between languages and scripts that foreigners learn that are not their native language, it can also be said that it is more difficult to learn poppy from mainlanders. In practice, the success rate is also very low, and the cost is very high. The eighth-grade exam is only 6,000 words, which is only at the level of a six-year-old child in the country of poppys, so how can it be successful? Chinese people learn poppy and poppy, and only after entering junior high school do they really encounter difficulties. The grammar is complex, the verbs are irregular and varied, there is no rhyme, and the length of the syllables is not the same. According to my survey, at least 56% of people think that poppy after junior high school is not only difficult to learn, but also very much hateful. Another 30% directly think that poppy is difficult to learn. For details, please see my third part of the survey.
Some people may say that knowing a single Chinese character does not necessarily mean that you will definitely recognize its compound words. Words and words cannot be simply equated. Of course, this is common sense. But can poppy words and phrases be equated? Can words and idioms be equated? If you know poppy words, you will know poppy idioms?
In terms of high-frequency word coverage, the concept of word coverage will of course be slightly different. The coverage rate of Chinese characters given by me in Chinese is not exactly equal to the coverage rate of Chinese words, but it can be roughly discounted, and the basic conclusion is not much different. According to this estimate, 3650 Chinese characters are recognized, and the readable coverage rate of commonly used articles is more than 99.6%, so the theoretical coverage rate of new words is about 99.6%×99.6%=99.2%, which is still a conservative estimate. The neutral estimate is 99.8% × 99.8% = 99.6%, which still requires the number of 10,000 words to be memorized.
3. Fang said: "People who think that Chinese is easier than English are completely ignorant, and foreigners who have never been in contact with learning Chinese are there to be obscene."
I don't need to refute this paragraph, right? Know a few foreigners, know a few foreigners who are learning or have studied Chinese, is there a threshold? Do you need the title of doctor of biology? Do you need to go to the United States to do a special investigation? I have friends around me who have directly taught foreigners to learn Chinese and Chinese, and they understand it much more thoroughly than you. Are you the only one qualified to analyze how foreigners learn Chinese and Chinese?
Mr. Fang Zhouzi: Your major is biology, and it may be useful for the United States to develop genetic and biological weapons, such as helping them edit the SARS coronavirus, then you do have expertise. But when it comes to the issue of language and the comparison of Chinese poppy language and writing, I think you can forget it, and you may not be able to see that it is ugly. If you look at China and Chinese backwards, it will be even more far from the truth.
Being opposed by traitors is a good thing and a glorious thing for any serious Chinese. As far as contemptible people are concerned, being taken care of by someone Fang makes a big difference. It seems that this matter needs to be done in depth.