Content preview:
Only communication is the most basic function of Chinese characters; Any emphasis on these two subordinate functions can hardly win the support of the broad masses of the people. The return of some variant characters and traditional characters did not cause much controversy, because they were put forward from the actual use of Chinese characters, so they were recognized by the vast majority of people. The most controversial 44 Chinese characters just emphasize the subordinate function, so they are opposed by more than 90% people. Second, who has the final say in shaping Chinese characters? The shaping of this Chinese character is the concrete embodiment of the government's thought of governing for the people, which deserves our strong approval. However, in response to various objections, an expert from the State Language Committee publicly stated that "whether a word is changed or not depends not on the majority vote, but on whether it is reasonable." I'm afraid this answer is not appropriate. Because there is a big problem involved here, that is, "who has the final say in shaping Chinese characters". First of all, we have to admit that more than 3,000 experts are very serious about Chinese character shaping, and their plastic opinions are all reasonable, but this "truth" is only a "word theory" and a small truth. There is also a big truth, that is, whether the people accept it or not. Experts don't have the final say, but people who don't understand "word logic" have the final say. This is a misunderstanding. After all, Han ...