RE: RE. Text is bad?

Subject: RE: RE. Text is bad?
From: Hank Wong <hankwong -at- Remedy -dot- COM>
To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 14:45:06 -0800

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hart, Geoff [mailto:Geoff-H -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA]
> Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 7:51 AM
> Cc: 'taltom -at- simplywritten -dot- com'
> Subject: RE. Text is bad?

> Not in the least. English is far more precise and flexible
> than Chinese. I
> make no pretense of speaking for the Chinese, nor of being
> expert in the
> language, but there's no question that the Chinese system of
> writing is
> cumbersome and inefficient even for native Chinese.

There's no argument that Chinese writing is much more difficult to learn
than English.
But I think anybody who is actually familiar with both Chinese and English
will disagree
that English is more precise and flexible. Yes, the characters are harder to
write, but

they often express a lot more than an English word can. For example, in
Chinese we have what is
called "chen yu," which are sets of characters (usually, but not always 4),
express very complicated ideas. Ideas that in English could take 10, or 15
words, or more.
That's just one example.


Hank Wong
Senior Technical Writer, Web Products mailto:hankwong -at- remedy -dot- com
Remedy Corporation
"I find your lack of feedback disturbing." -Darth Vader as a tech writer

Previous by Author: RE: Booklets with Word97?
Next by Author: RE: Help! Need official support for non-standard capitalization
Previous by Thread: Re: RE. Text is bad?
Next by Thread: Any reviews of Directive and Canterbury?

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads