Many students still learn the classical characters, eventually, along with the modern characters. And pretty much all students who major in Chinese in college will end up learning traditional Chinese, too.

Yes Firefly, but if it takes until college to learn it all, your point isn't as valid. The language isn't accessible if it takes that much study.

I think Firefly meant non-Chinese college students majoring in Chinese, not that the Chinese have to go to college to learn more Chinese.

Yes, that is what I meant. I've used a few different Chinese textbooks, and one series introduces traditional characters at the beginning of the second volume--the equivalent of second or possibly third year study. Traditional characters are like the equivalent of our cursive, only with far greater consistency and uniformity.

I thought the original point was how "logical" languages were.

Okay it sounds like you're comparing the paintings of Rembrandt to those of Banksy... two entities connected only by the medium in which they are expressed.

And yes I've read Beowulf, why is that not easy?

Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum,
þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.
Oft Scyld Scefing sceaþena þreatum,
5
monegum mægþum, meodosetla ofteah,
egsode eorlas. Syððan ærest wearð
feasceaft funden, he þæs frofre gebad,
weox under wolcnum, weorðmyndum þah,
oðþæt him æghwylc þara ymbsittendra
10
ofer hronrade hyran scolde,
gomban gyldan. þæt wæs god cyning!
ðæm eafera wæs æfter cenned,
geong in geardum, þone god sende
folce to frofre; fyrenðearfe ongeat
15
þe hie ær drugon aldorlease
lange hwile. Him þæs liffrea,
wuldres wealdend, woroldare forgeaf;
Beowulf wæs breme (blæd wide sprang),
Scyldes eafera Scedelandum in.
20
Swa sceal geong guma gode gewyrcean,
fromum feohgiftum on fæder bearme,
þæt hine on ylde eft gewunigen
wilgesiþas, þonne wig cume,
leode gelæsten; lofdædum sceal
25
in mægþa gehwære man geþeon.
Him ða Scyld gewat to gescæphwile
felahror feran on frean wære.
Hi hyne þa ætbæron to brimes faroðe,
swæse gesiþas, swa he selfa bæd,
30
þenden wordum weold wine Scyldinga;
leof landfruma lange ahte.
þær æt hyðe stod hringedstefna,
isig ond utfus, æþelinges fær.
Aledon þa leofne þeoden,
35
beaga bryttan, on bearm scipes,
mærne be mæste. þær wæs madma fela
of feorwegum, frætwa, gelæded;
ne hyrde ic cymlicor ceol gegyrwan
hildewæpnum ond heaðowædum,
40
billum ond byrnum; him on bearme læg
madma mænigo, þa him mid scoldon
on flodes æht feor gewitan.
Nalæs hi hine læssan lacum teodan,
þeodgestreonum, þon þa dydon
45
þe hine æt frumsceafte forð onsendon
ænne ofer yðe umborwesende.
þa gyt hie him asetton segen geldenne
heah ofer heafod, leton holm beran,
geafon on garsecg; him wæs geomor sefa,
50
murnende mod. Men ne cunnon
secgan to soðe, selerædende,
hæleð under heofenum, hwa þæm hlæste onfeng.
ða wæs on burgum Beowulf Scyldinga,
leof leodcyning, longe þrage
55
folcum gefræge (fæder ellor hwearf,
aldor of earde), oþþæt him eft onwoc
heah Healfdene; heold þenden lifde,
gamol ond guðreouw, glæde Scyldingas.
ðæm feower bearn forð gerimed
60
in worold wocun, weoroda ræswan,
Heorogar ond Hroðgar ond Halga til;
hyrde ic þæt wæs Onelan cwen,
Heaðoscilfingas healsgebedda.
þa wæs Hroðgare heresped gyfen,
65
wiges weorðmynd, þæt him his winemagas
georne hyrdon, oðð þæt seo geogoð geweox,
magodriht micel. Him on mod bearn
þæt healreced hatan wolde,
medoærn micel, men gewyrcean

How's that for reading?

Sorry to derail the derailment, but I'm afraid I have something relevant to post.

Zuckerberg sees The Social Network.

Hello, James, everyone.

Finally saw the film last night, and your review summed it up very well. The story it told was a very good one, but there's even more stories to be told about Facebook. But I think the film should be credited more for what it did than what it didn't do.

Although there's been dissent in some quarters. The WSWS seem to think the film turned Zuckerberg into a misunderstood genius. In my opinion, nothing could be further from the truth. I found the film Zuckerberg to be cold, obsessive, distant and enigmatic; and that, I think, is just how Fincher intended to portray him.

Also, as good as Eisenberg is, will he shake off his tag of "the poor man's Michael Cera?"

Yeah... it's a great poem alright...

Yeah, I could totally tell what was being said there

Sure, if you translate it!

Ah but see when you learn Chinese, you won't need to translate.

You are still making no sense whatsoever, do explain.

A person who speaks Chinese CANNOT simply read a passage of Old English. My only guess as to what you're on about is that if something is written in Chinese then someone who speaks Chinese can read it... in which case, well pointed out...

Ok let me try to explain:
A person who speaks and reads Chinese can read a document written in his language from 1000 years ago.
A person who speaks and reads English can not read a document written in his language from 1000 years ago.

I'm beyond certain that you're wrong.

Well that speaks to the errancy of your certainty

The implication is that the language hasn't undergone any changes, despite the entire country being absolutely nothing like it was 1000 years ago. That is why I believe you are wrong.

The language absolutely has undergone change, in terms of the pronounciation of some characters--different tones etc. and there are varieties today in pronunciation--the south of China pronounces things differently than Beijing, and both do differently than Taiwan.

But that's pronunciation. The meaning is still there.

Late to the thread, but... in Ken and PeachyPete's debate no one seems to have brought up the fact that the rower twins as portrayed in the movie almost always disagree on what to do - Cameron and that other dude are portrayed as stereotypical jock asses, Tyler is the one who is the moderate, reasonable one who prevents the other two from just beating up Zuckerberg.


Not true, if you've been on Chinese language forums or used QQ (equivalent of... ICQ or MSN) you'd know that. Chinese is more 'logical' than English, but only because English is so unlogical.

Reading a thousand-year old Chinese text is possible without translation, though. The language is obviously archaic, but it's comparable to Shakespeare, or perhaps sometimes Chaucer.

(Gah, now I sound like a smart aleck.)