Re: Subset of Unicode to represent Japanese Kanji?

From: John Cowan (jcowan@reutershealth.com)
Date: Fri Jul 14 2000 - 14:24:11 EDT


foster.feng@ni.com wrote:

> The problem with all kana (or all Roman ch) document is because there are so
> many words with same pronounciations. For example, the Roman Characters "KAMI"
> may mean God, or hair, or paper, or above. "HASHI" may mean bridge or chop
> sticks. If it is written in kanji, all God, hair, paper, above, bridge, chop
> sticks are represented in different kanjis, thus no ambiguity.

Which is to say, that if a typical Japanese document is read aloud, it is
a mass of ambiguity, and nobody has any idea what it says? I know this was
true for Classical Chinese documents, but is it really true for modern
Japanese ones?

If not, then an all-romaji or all-kana representation cannot be *logically*
insufficient; however, it is enough that people are not accustomed to it.

-- 

Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com> Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || http://www.reutershealth.com Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:05 EDT