Knowee
Questions
Features
Study Tools

The Mandarin writing system was different from hieroglyphics or cuneiform in that it -Select-

Question

The Mandarin writing system was different from hieroglyphics or cuneiform in that it -Select-

🧐 Not the exact question you are looking for?Go ask a question

Solution

The Mandarin writing system, also known as Chinese characters, differs from hieroglyphics or cuneiform in several ways:

  1. Type of Writing System: Hieroglyphics and cuneiform are both logographic systems, where each symbol represents a word or a concept. Mandarin, on the other hand, is a logographic system as well, but it also incorporates phonetic elements. This means that some characters not only represent a concept but also give an indication of the sound.

  2. Complexity: Chinese characters are generally more complex than hieroglyphics or cuneiform symbols. Each character can be composed of several strokes, and there are thousands of characters to learn.

  3. Evolution: The Mandarin writing system has evolved over thousands of years and is still in use today, while hieroglyphics and cuneiform are ancient writing systems that are no longer used.

  4. Contextual Meaning: In Mandarin, the meaning of a character can change based on the characters around it, which is not the case with hieroglyphics or cuneiform.

  5. Radicals: Mandarin uses radicals, or building blocks, to form characters. These radicals can provide hints to a character's meaning or pronunciation. This system is not present in hieroglyphics or cuneiform.

  6. Writing Direction: Hieroglyphics can be written in any direction: left to right, right to left, or top to bottom. Cuneiform is typically written from left to right. Mandarin is traditionally written from top to bottom, right to left, but in modern times it is also commonly written from left to right.

So, the Mandarin writing system is different from hieroglyphics or cuneiform in its complexity, evolution, use of contextual meaning, use of radicals, and writing direction.

This problem has been solved

Similar Questions

Ancient Chinese Characters were derived from:Group of answer choicespictographs - pictures drawn from naturelines and strokesHebrew alphabetancient hieroglyphs

The Chinese developed their own system of writing called logographic.Question 10Answera.Trueb.False

. DiscussionAll rhythmic measures in this study confirm the syllable-timing impression of Cantonese and Beijing Mandarin. Theresults show that Cantonese has more extreme rhythmicvalues than Mandarin, French and Italian, which presumablyis contributed by the absence of lexical stress in Cantonese. Asimilar situation is also found in Singaporean Mandarin whichhas far fewer unstressed syllables than Beijing Mandarin. Thedata in [7] shows that Singaporean Mandarin has the lowestnPVI_V value and the highest %V value among all thelanguages in their study, suggesting that SingaporeanMandarin is the most typical syllable-timed language. It willbe of interest to compare more syllable-timed languages withand without lexical stress to assess the effect of lexical stressin syllable-timing.The significant difference in %V values of the two stylesin Cantonese and Mandarin (read speech vs semi-spontaneousspeech) implies that speakers may slightly change theirrhythmic patterns according to speaking styles. This seemsquite possible because read speech and spontaneous speechcan differ in many aspects, including prosody. The stylisticdifference in %V can also be partly explained bysegmentation issues. Initial /j/ and /w/ were consideredconsonantal if there were acoustic cues for segmentation.However, in semi-spontaneous speech, many of these initialglides could not be separated from the following vowels sothey could only be considered vocalic. This contributed to ahigher percentage of vocalic portions in semi-spontaneousspeech. On the other hand, results indicate that Mandarinspeakers spoke faster in semi-spontaneous speech than readspeech. Benton et al. [2] also showed that in Mandarin, genre(news broadcast vs interview) indeed gave significantlydifferent values for various rhythmic measures, whichparallels the stylistic difference found in this study. So far,most studies on speech rhythm use only one speaking style,either read speech or spontaneous speech. More studiescomparing speaking styles are needed in order to furtherexplore the relationship between speech styles and rhythm.The data of Cantonese English and Mandarin Englishposes a challenge to the acoustic measures. The two Englishaccents sound syllable-timed. VarcoC and %V show that theyare closer to syllable-timed than to stress-timed languages, butΔC, nPVI_V and rPVI_C values all suggest that they arecloser to stress-timed languages. The parameters of ΔC, ΔS,nPVI_V, rPVI_C and rPVI_S can only categorise languagesaccording to the auditory impression of speech rhythm classesif the data of the two English accents was excluded. Thissituation highlights the issue of using acoustic measures todetermine speech rhythm of non-native speakers.Results of the averaged syllable durations suggest thatCantonese and Mandarin speakers employed a slowerspeaking rate when they read in English, which is a commonphenomenon of second language speakers. As a result, manyof their syllables would be lengthened compared to the speechof native English speakers. Careful listening to the accented-English speech samples reveals that such lengthening is notsimply due to final-lengthening because these lengthenedsyllables can occur in various positions within an utterance.As expected, difficult words were lengthened more than easywords, but simple words like ‘North Wind’ and ‘Sun’ couldbe lengthened too. Individual speakers differ in the degree ofsuch selective lengthening, but they all reduced their speakingrate in English compared to their native language. Thesespeakers, having a syllable-timed native language, did notreduce unstressed syllables like what native English speakerswould do. Such selective lengthening contributes to a higherdegree of pairwise variability and a larger standard deviationof various intervals, but in an opposite way compared tonative English speakers (having many lengthened syllables vshaving many reduced syllables). Impressionistically, the twoEnglish accents still sounds quite syllable-timed. A slowerspeaking rate and selective lengthening result in thediscrepancy between listeners’ impression and the conclusionbased on some acoustic measures.Normalisation procedures for speaking rate alone may notsolve this problem because the higher variability in duration iscontributed by both speaking rate and selective lengthening.Among the five normalised measures used in this study, onlyVarcoC shows evidence that the two English accents aregrouped with syllable-timed languages. White & Mattys [12]also found some discrepancy between subjective impressionof second language rhythm and the results based on acousticrhythmic measures. Therefore, more studies on secondlanguage rhythm are needed in order to address this issue.5. ConclusionsThis study confirms the syllable-timing impression ofCantonese and Beijing Mandarin with acoustic rhythmicmeasures. Results show that Cantonese has more extremerhythmic values than Mandarin, French and Italian because ofthe lack of lexical stress. A slower speaking rate and selectivelengthening in Cantonese English and Mandarin Englishcontribute to the discrepancy between subjective impressionof their rhythm and the results based on rhythmic measures.The VarcoC and %V parameters give the best classification ofspeech rhythm in this study

Which of the following language families is NOT represented in China?

Do text types differ between cultures? Can you think of any text-types in Chinese that are significantly different from English-language types?

1/1

Upgrade your grade with Knowee

Get personalized homework help. Review tough concepts in more detail, or go deeper into your topic by exploring other relevant questions.