Logographic Languages are Inferior to Alphabetic Languages

[Technoss]

WRITTEN language, that is. Logographic language is that which uses unique characters or pictorals for words (EX: Chinese). Alphabetic Languages would include the languages that utilize sequences of prescribed symbols (an alphabet) to form words. Examples are Latin and the Romance languages.

 

The Criterion -To be "better" here is, by definition, to be:

 

1) more efficient - able to communicate more information using less ink, brush strokes, space, effort

2) more versatility - able to accommodate extra-lingual purposes, such as...

- computation

3) ease of learning - easier to learn

4) grammatical versatility

 

I contend existing alphabetic languages are better than existing logographic languages because:

 

1) greater efficiency - less brush strokes to form sentences and most words

2) more versatile - alphabetic languages are destined for computers. Imagine trying to make a binary computer with a logographic Chinese keyboard interface. I do not think it would be possible without creating an entirely new kind of interface on which a logographic system could be mounted. Come to think of it, that is exactly what has happened in the real world with regards to Chinese

3) Greater ease in learning - The major advantage here is the ability to "sound out" alphabetic words. Someone who speaks but has never seen the Chinese character for "cat" will never be able to know what it means without consulting someone who knows. Whereas, say, an English speaker that knows at least the sounds of the alphabet can sound out the word "cat," which is more or less phonetic, when seeing it for the first time.

 

Also, for logographic languages you must memorize unique, though perhaps somewhat related, thousands of different symbols. For alphabetic languages, you must learn each letter's sounds, exceptions to those sounds, and how they form words as wholes.

4) Alphabetic languages are capable of creating acronyms, which assist greatly in efficiency

 

 

 

[Deleted1205226User]

Interesting subject.

I feel that the need to compare and evaluate Languages in term of superior/inferior is artificial.
There's nothing like this, only complementarity and demonstration of the richness of human mind.

There is no naturally pure logographic Languages, Chinese has non logographic elements in it, similarly we use logography each time we write a numeral with its symbol instead of words.

Also, see the use and abuse of Logos and symbols in our modern communication.

One advantage of logographic Languages is that one sign = one phrase or one concept. Combining several logogram can convey the complexity of a thought when a book or two would be needed to approach it.

The Logogram system is older, "richer of experience" with many philosophical and Spiritual researches made and transcribed centuries BC.
Logograms are no produced or designed by chances. One can understand the growing of complexity of the thought process because it is illustrated by the growing complexity and combination of the signs.

Logographic and Alphabetic languages are processed by different parts of the brain. The more we combine these two approaches the more we enrich ourselves.

My bet is the future language (100 -200 years from now) will be and hybrid.