Traditional vs. Simplified Chinese
Nowadays, we— I mean Chinese people or the people who are learning the Chinese language—are forced to face a situation in which there are two types of Chinese characters and both of them are currently in use in different countries. One is the simplified system, which was officially promulgated and executed in the 1950s, and has been used in mainland China, Singapore and Malaysia. Most of the simplified characters are based on the traditional characters but have left out some of the components. For example, the number of strokes in each character has been reduced in order to make it easier for people to learn. The other system is the traditional one, which is currently used in Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau.
The use of two different systems was not considered a serious issue before. Since the economy of mainland China has developed more rapidly over the last few years, there are more and more people and companies that have business relationships with them. Chinese is becoming a necessary and well-known language indeed, so the debate about which system is more useful or if they should be merged together has begun.
Most traditional proponents prefer focusing on preserving the essence and aesthetics of traditional Chinese characters. Because of this simplification—the system of removing and merging that was promulgated by the government of China, there are more simplified characters which are ambiguous. This is not only confusing, but it also leads to the loss of the original individual meaning and the phonetic and pictographic features of each character. As a result, most of the Chinese people who use the simplified system are losing the ability to read the old books, poems or any ancient information written in traditional Chinese. Proponents of the traditional system are also concerned that this will cause a gradual loss of cultural heritage and the connection to their past.
On the other hand, the proponents of simplification have different perspectives. They indicate that the simplification of the characters is more beneficial to the development of literacy or economy in China, because it is easier to learn and expand. In addition, the simplified Chinese can be written efficiently, which is more practical in business, and even in general communication.
As a person who was taught in the traditional way but also recognizes the simplified form, I completely agree and understand the advantages and disadvantages of using either of them. However, being too partial towards one of them is not good to see. In my opinion, a language in some level is just one of the ways to communicate, and writing is one feature of it. We use it to express thoughts and needs, share ideas and feelings, so that we can get together and have different kinds of relationships. This, I think, is the most fundamental reason for using languages. Still more, every language is constantly changed a little bit in every generation by the people who are using the language at the time.
Therefore, I hope either traditional Chinese or simplified Chinese will continue to be used, or maybe we can find a way to have both of them. For example, the simplified form could be in general usage while experts or other people who want more thorough knowledge have the freedom to study and use the other in public. Even though some people don’t write using one of them, at least they will be able to recognize it. Chinese is originally from the same root after all. If we could look at the benefits instead of the politics, keeping the good things that we already have, while solving some of the defective problems, we would have an improved system of Chinese characters. Like the old Chinese proverb said “One chopstick is always more easily broken than a bundle of them together.” We shouldn’t forget it.
