Traditional or simplified? Debate on Chinese characters should be decided by pragmatics, not politics | SCMP | Paul Stapleton

LETTER TO SCMP:

LATER: PUBLISHED 15th JUNE

There's no need for the kerfuffle over use of simplified characters in Hong Kong. (Alex Lo and Paul Stapleton, recently). 

I learnt Chinese as an adult, first in Beijing in the mid-1970s. Being Beijing, I was taught simplified characters. In later full-time study in Hong Kong I learnt the traditional forms. I found this a pretty straightforward process. 

What is rarely mentioned by commenters is this: that simplified characters are most often derived from a cursive version of the traditional.  For example: 言 (yan) is written cursively as 讠. This character is also a common radical, so it is a part of many characters. In one stroke (as it were) you've learnt both forms of hundreds of characters. 

Learning a few basic rules for the connection between simplified and traditional characters allows anyone to be literate in both. In short order. 

By the way, if there's a sensible order in which to learn, it's simplified then traditional: walk before you run. (Though it's no big drama if it's the other way around). 

Take it from me: if I can learn both simplified and traditional forms of Chinese characters anyone can! 

Pf