Tag: Language Log

Categories
Culture History Language Learning Technology

Hànzì

Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

[This is a reposting of a post that was originally posted on November 23, 2020. It discusses how, in the big picture, we Mandarin field language learners should view Chinese characters, those seemingly essential but maddeningly difficult-to-learn-and-remember icons of worldly Chinese culture.]

“Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字)” is what Chinese characters are called in Mandarin. Actually, “Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字)” literally means “Han characters”, but as discussed in the MEotW post on “Hànyǔ (Hàn·yǔ {Han (Chinese)} · Language [→ [(Modern Standard) Mandarin]] 汉语 漢語)”, the Han are by far the largest ethnic group in China, and they are the dominant cultural force in China. Thus, Han characters are, in effect, Chinese characters.

漢字 汉字

Han culture has affected not only China, but also many of the surrounding nations. The words used by some of these nations to refer to “Chinese characters” are obvious echoes of “Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字)”:

  • Japanese: kanji
  • Korean: Hanja
  • Vietnamese: hán tự

Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) are still used a lot in modern Japanese writing. However, although Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) used to be the dominant writing system in Korea and in Vietnam, those nations have moved on to mainly use alphabetic writing systems.

The Korean Connection

Regarding the situation in Korea, the Awake! article “Let’s Try Writing in Hankul!” says:

BEFORE Hankul [or Hangul] was created, the Korean language did not have its own script. For more than a thousand years, educated Koreans wrote their language using Chinese characters. Over the years, however, various attempts were made to devise a better writing system. But since all of them were based on Chinese characters, only the well-educated could use them.

…

King Sejong spearheaded the creation of an alphabet that would both suit spoken Korean and be easy to learn and use.

…

Sadly, some scholars opposed Hankul, precisely because it was so easy to learn! They derisively called it Amkul, meaning “women’s letters.” They disdained a system that could be learned even by women, who back then were not taught to read in the schools. This prejudice against Hankul persisted among upper-class Koreans for some time. In fact, more than 400 years elapsed before the Korean government declared that Hankul could be used in official documents.

The Chinese Conundrum

How about the writing system situation in China itself? Do the Chinese languages need to be written using Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字)? Chinese traditionalists have influenced many people to assume so, but there is actually no technical linguistic requirement that any Chinese language be written using Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字)—writing Chinese languages using Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) is purely and merely a deeply embedded tradition.

Proof that the use of Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) is merely a tradition and not a technical requirement comes from the fact that Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音), a phonetic alphabetic system designed by a Chinese government team, is a good, workable full writing system for Modern Standard Mandarin.

Why has China held on to its traditional use of Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) when other nations have moved on to alphabetic writing systems? As mentioned in the MEotW post on “Zhōngguó (Zhōng·guó Central · Nation → [China | Chinese] 中国 中國)”,

Some wonder why China has held on to its archaic characters writing system instead of moving on to using a modern alphabetic writing system like almost every other nation does, even though outstanding native sons like Lǔ Xùn ((Lǔ Stupid; Rash (surname) 鲁 魯) (Xùn Fast; Quick; Swift 迅) (pen name of Zhōu Shùrén, the greatest Chinese writer of the 20th cent. and a strong advocate of alphabetic writing)) have advocated strongly for that. Perhaps the proud self-centredness of the only nation to name itself the centre of the world provides a clue….

When the Communists took over China a few years after World War II, their Plan A for China’s writing system situation actually did involve eventually moving on from the characters to an alphabetic writing system that would be developed, which turned out to be Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音). However, the government needed the help of the people already educated in Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字), and many of these people opposed this plan that they feared would involve leaving behind, or at least de-emphasizing, a cultural tradition that they were very proud of, that they had invested very much time and effort into mastering, and that gave them much prestige in the existing environment.1 In other words, the pride and prejudice of those who had already been educated in the Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) caused them to disparage and oppose the idea of a simpler alternative writing system, just as had been the case in Korea, as noted above. So, the simplification of the Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) is the farthest China has gotten so far with regard to official writing system reform, and even that has only been achieved in the face of much criticism and opposition.

Chairman Máo Zédōng ((Máo Hair (surname) 毛) (Zé·dōng Marsh · East 泽东 澤東) (the founder of the People’s Republic of China)) (Wikipedia article) himself supported continuing to move on, from simplification of the characters to actually adopting Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) as a writing system. In a letter to an old schoolmate, he wrote:

…Pinyin writing is a form of writing that is relatively convenient. Chinese characters are too complicated and difficult. At present we are only engaged in reform along the lines of simplification, but some day in the future we must inevitably carry out a basic reform.2

Letter from Mao endorsing a transition from Chinese characters to alphabetic writing

(The above picture is from near the beginning of the book The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy, by John DeFrancis.)

While obviously what Máo ((Máo Hair (surname) 毛) (abbr. for Máo Zédōng, the founder of the People’s Republic of China)) foresaw regarding a writing system “basic reform” in China has not yet come true, American sinologist and University of Pennsylvania Professor of East Asian Languages and Civilizations Victor H. Mair wrote in a blog post:

So, those who are in favor of HP [Hànyǔ (Hàn·yǔ {Han (Chinese)} · Language → [(Modern Standard) Mandarin] 汉语 漢語) Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)] don’t need to be concerned, and those who are opposed to HP don’t need to be frightened. HP is ineluctably playing a greater and greater role in the educational, cultural, social, political, and every other aspect of the lives of Chinese citizens, and this is occurring without regard to anyone pushing it as a governmental program. It is happening because of the wishes of those who actually use it for a wide variety of helpful purposes.

Digraphia [the use of more than one writing system for the same language, in this case the use of both Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) and Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) for writing Modern Standard Mandarin] is emerging before our very eyes, enabling people to use the alphabet and the characters for whatever purposes they deem suitable. Nobody needs to take a vote or carry out a survey for this to happen.

Tourists or Missionaries?

Regardless of how worldly Chinese people view the Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字), how should we dedicated Mandarin field language-learners view them? It would be easy to fall back on the commonly accepted view, the tourist’s view, that the Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) are an integral and fascinating part of China’s precious cultural heritage that we should duly respect and even heap adulation upon.

However, as Mandarin field language-learners, we are not in the Mandarin field to be tourists just enjoying the exotic foreign culture. On the contrary, we must be more like missionaries or spiritual rescue workers involved in an urgent life-saving work, because lives are indeed involved. As ones involved in an urgent, life-saving work, we need tools, technologies, and systems that efficiently and effectively help us to get this work done without wasting time and effort when people’s everlasting lives are at stake. From this sober and pragmatic angle, the extraordinarily difficult-to-learn-and-remember Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) are far from ideal. Thus, while there is obviously value in learning as many Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字) as one is reasonably able to, it is fortunate that Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) exists and is available as a simple, effective alternative writing system for Mandarin, for the many times when it is not necessary to use Hànzì (Hàn·zì {Han (Chinese)} · Characters 汉字 漢字).

1. John DeFrancis, The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1984), p. 258. ^

2. Ibid., p. 295. ^

Categories
Culture Current Events History Science Technology Theocratic

app

app (a-p-p)

This week’s MEotW, “app” (sometimes written as “APP”), is now the organization’s official way to translate “app” in Mandarin, as much as there is an official way to do so. For example, it’s used in the Mandarin version of the 2024 Governing Body Update #5 video, at around the 11:06 mark—the subtitles say “app”, while the narrator says what sounds like “ay pee pee”.

“app” used in the Mandarin version of the 2024 Governing Body Update #5 video

(By the way, note that in this screenshot, the JW Library app is shown in Dark Mode—afters many years of people being used to using computer displays with white backgrounds that mimick paper, the organization is showing that there is nothing objectionable about the dark or black backgrounds enabled by computing device displays, backgrounds which can be easier on the eyes in some situations. After all, the default mode of the universe that Jehovah created is dark mode!)

An Unexpected Pronunciation

Yes, interestingly, as we can hear from the aforementioned video, when one refers to the JW Library app in Mandarin, in addition to using the English app name “JW Library” instead of a corresponding native Mandarin expression, one spells out the letters of “app” instead of just saying the English word “app”.

Why use three syllables to pronounce this exceedingly simple one-syllable English word in such an unusual and unexpected way? An Internet search turned up a Quora page discussing this question, which page contains the following excerpt that seems to summarize the points made in many of the replies:

Since the the original form “application” is not widely known, app is thought to be an acronym. In the aspect of pronunciation, closed syllables ending with p do not meet the Chinese pronunciation habit.

So, in other words, some believe that:

  • Being unfamiliar with the English word “application” that “app” is an abbreviation for, many Mandarin-speaking people erroneously thought that “app” is an acronym/initialism like “USA” or “PRC”, and acronyms are pronounced by saying the names of the letters in them. [2024-08-21: Thanks to reader SB for bringing up the matter of acronyms vs. initialisms. It seems that there is agreement that initialisms are, or can be, pronounced letter by letter, like “USA” and the Mandarin “app” are. However, there is not agreement about whether expressions pronounced that way count as acronyms, since some hold that only expressions like “NASA” that are pronounced as words should be considered acronyms.]
    • The fact that the Mandarin “app” is sometimes written in all upper case letters as “APP”, like an acronym/initialism would be written, lends credence to this theory.
  • Because Mandarin does not have words that end with a “p” sound, people who have only ever spoken Mandarin are not used to saying such words, and thus were naturally inclined to not just pronounce “app” like it is pronounced in English.
    • Some drag Chinese characters and Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) into discussion of this question, but these writing systems are just secondary visual representations of the actual primary factor relating to this issue, which is the system of sounds used in Mandarin speech. (I believe that technically, this is referred to as Mandarin phonology.)
    • Personally, I have doubts about this proposed factor, since other one-syllable English words ending with a “p” sound, like “jeep” (“jípǔ (jeep 吉普)”) and “Trump” (“Tèlǎngpǔ (Trump 特朗普)/Chuānpǔ (Trump (Tw) 川普)”), have been borrowed by Mandarin without requiring Mandarin-speakers to spell out their letters. I suppose it’s possible, as some have said, that putting “app” through this process results in a Mandarin expression that sounds confusingly similar to other expressions.

It’s also interesting that “app”, with its spelled-out letters, is used in Mandarin to correspond with the English word “app”, including in official media published by the organization, even though a native Mandarin expression meaning “app” does indeed exist. As shown in dictionaries, “yìngyòng (yìng·yòng apply · use | applied · used [(instance/etc.)] [→ [applied; for practical application; practical | application; practical use | (computing) app]] 应用 應用)” may be used to mean “app”, and just as “app” is short for “application”, “yìngyòng (yìng·yòng apply · use | applied · used [(instance/etc.)] [→ [applied; for practical application; practical | application; practical use | (computing) app]] 应用 應用)” is short for “yìngyòng chéngxù ((yìng·yòng applied · used (instance) → [application] 应用 應用) (chéng·xù {journey → [procedure]} · order; sequence → [(computer) programme] 程序) → [application programme])” (or “yìngyòng chéngshì ((yìng·yòng applied · used (instance) → [application] 应用 應用) (chéng·shì {journey → [procedure]} · pattern → [(computer) programme (Tw)] 程式) → [application programme (Tw)])” in Taiwan).

“Resistance Is Futile”

While Chinese traditionalists may futilely carry on about keeping Chinese culture “pure”, the common use of “app” in Mandarin is yet another example of Chinese culture naturally being influenced by Western culture, since the phenomenon of the modern mobile app followed on from the Western invention of the iPhone. Regarding the influence of Western culture on Chinese people, I have also noticed that some Chinese people seem to consider it “cool” to sprinkle in some English words here and there when they are speaking Mandarin, Cantonese, etc., even when they know the corresponding native Mandarin, Cantonese, etc. expressions.

Speaking of “cool”, a recent Language Log blog post written by Victor Mair and entitled “The Englishization of Chinese enters a new phase” said the following about “cool”, and about our MEotW “app”:

He takes the well-known example of “cool” (I’ll summarize what he says here). Before the year 2000, if somebody mentioned in a praiseworthy way that something was “kù 酷”, which at that time literally meant “cruel; ruthless; brutal; oppressive; savage”, people would consider that he was mixing English “coo[l]” in his Chinese speech, because at that time English “cool” was still in the early stages of being absorbed into Chinese. Standard dictionaries listed only the negative, pejorative meanings of “kù 酷”; there was not a trace of the positive meaning of “neat; nifty” and so forth. However, with the passage of time and with more and more saying “coo[l]” in a positive, approbatory sense, it gradually became a Chinese word. Now, if you say that someone or something is “kù 酷” (i.e., “cool”), no one would think that you’re mixing English in your speech. The positive meanings “cool; neat; nifty” have now become the primary definitions for “kù 酷”.

…people are no longer feeling the need to syllabize, much less hanziize, English words. They just say them flat out, and nobody blinks an eye that they are English words in Chinese. They have already instantly become Chinese terms — at least in speech. Nobody has cared to figure out how they should be written in hanzi [Chinese characters]. Even if you write them, you write them with roman letters…the roman alphabet has become an integral part of the Chinese writing system

…

There are hundreds of such words in current Chinese discourse, and they are at diverse stages of absorption into Chinese, e.g., “app”, “logo”, and “Ptú P图” (lit. “P picture/image”).

Yes, along with the “JW Library” app name, “app” is yet another example of how English words and Latin alphabet letters—like those used in Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音)—are being incorporated into how people speak and write Mandarin Chinese “in the wild”, in the real world.

Anyway, as discussed in the 2024 Governing Body Update #5 video mentioned above, we stay neutral with regard to the world’s conflicts. While this obviously includes the world’s wars and political conflicts, in principle, this also applies to the world’s culture wars and its cultural conflicts and competitions. Our focus should be on how we can advance the interests of God’s Kingdom, and promote God’s righteous ways of doing things.—Matthew 6:33.

Categories
Culture Current Events Language Learning

xiǎnyǎn bāo

xiǎnyǎn bāo ((xiǎn·yǎn {appears; shows; displays; manifests; {[is] obvious; evident; clear; apparent; noticeable} (to)} · eye → [conspicuous; showy; eye-catching; glamorous] 显眼 顯/顕眼) (bāo wrapping → [bun (food)] 包) → [attention-seeker; goofball; one who stands out from the crowd to get attention]) ← Tap/click to show/hide the “flashcard”

With 2023 having just recently receded into history, it’s a good time to check out collections of some of the top Mandarin slang expressions used during 2023. A couple of articles that I found that discuss some of these expressions are:

The only expression that appears on both of these lists is “xiǎnyǎn bāo ((xiǎn·yǎn {appears; shows; displays; manifests; {[is] obvious; evident; clear; apparent; noticeable} (to)} · eye → [conspicuous; showy; eye-catching; glamorous] 显眼 顯/顕眼) (bāo wrapping → [bun (food)] 包) → [attention-seeker; goofball; one who stands out from the crowd to get attention])”, this week’s MEotW.

Its Constituent Morphemes

The first morpheme in this expression is “xiǎn (appear; show; display; manifest; {[is] obvious; evident; clear; apparent; noticeable [→ [[is] illustrious; powerful; influential]} 显 顯/顕)”, which here means “appears; shows; displays; manifests; [is] obvious/evident/clear/apparent/noticeable (to)”. Some other expressions that include this morpheme are:

  • míngxiǎn (míng·xiǎn {[is] clear; distinct} · {[is] obvious; evident; clear; apparent; noticeable} → [[is] clear; obvious; evident; distinct; manifest] 明显 明顯)
  • xiǎnrán (xiǎn·rán {[is] evident; obvious; clear}·ly 显然 顯然)
  • xiǎnshì (xiǎn·shì {to be evident/obvious} · show 显示 顯示)

When “xiǎn (appear; show; display; manifest; {[is] obvious; evident; clear; apparent; noticeable [→ [[is] illustrious; powerful; influential]} 显 顯/顕)” is put together with “yǎn (eye 眼)”, which means “eye”, the resulting expression “xiǎnyǎn (xiǎn·yǎn {appears; shows; displays; manifests; {[is] obvious; evident; clear; apparent; noticeable} (to)} · eye → [conspicuous; showy; eye-catching; glamorous] 显眼 顯/顕眼)” effectively means “conspicuous; showy; eye-catching; glamorous”.

The last morpheme of this expression, “bāo (wrapping [→ [including; containing | assuring; guaranteeing | bundle; package; pack; packet; parcel | bag; sack | bun (food)]] 包)”, literally means “to wrap”, but one of its effective meanings is “bun”, that is, a bun that’s food, as opposed to, say, a hair bun. Some other expressions that include this morpheme are:

  • bāokuò (bāo·kuò wrap · {draw together} → [include; consist of; comprise; incorporate] 包括)
  • miànbāo (miàn·bāo {[wheat] flour} · {wrapping [→ [bun]]} → [bread] 面包 麵包)
  • bāozi (bāo·zi {wrapping → [bun]} · [suf for nouns] → [steamed stuffed bun] 包子)

It’s evident that “bāo (wrapping [→ [including; containing | assuring; guaranteeing | bundle; package; pack; packet; parcel | bag; sack | bun (food)]] 包)”, with its meaning of “bun”, is used as a term of endearment in “xiǎnyǎn bāo ((xiǎn·yǎn {appears; shows; displays; manifests; {[is] obvious; evident; clear; apparent; noticeable} (to)} · eye → [conspicuous; showy; eye-catching; glamorous] 显眼 顯/顕眼) (bāo wrapping → [bun (food)] 包) → [attention-seeker; goofball; one who stands out from the crowd to get attention])”.

As a Whole

What are the constituent morphemes of “xiǎnyǎn bāo ((xiǎn·yǎn {appears; shows; displays; manifests; {[is] obvious; evident; clear; apparent; noticeable} (to)} · eye → [conspicuous; showy; eye-catching; glamorous] 显眼 顯/顕眼) (bāo wrapping → [bun (food)] 包) → [attention-seeker; goofball; one who stands out from the crowd to get attention])” being used to mean when they’re put together in this expression? The article in The World of Chinese that’s mentioned above says:

One type of dazi [shallow friend] many prefer these days is the 显眼包 (xiǎnyǎnbāo), or goofball. The term refers to people who stand out from the crowd and constantly seek attention. Although once considered a neutral term, it has gained a positive connotation recently, as many appreciate their vibrant energy in an often ultra-competitive society.

As for the article in Sixth Tone that’s mentioned above, it says this regarding this expression as a whole:

显眼包

Class Clown

Literally meaning “eye-catching,” 显眼包 (xiǎn yǎn bāo) and its variations appear in a number of Chinese dialects. The term became widespread online after Guo Beibei — a phenomenally popular internet celebrity who later lost her account for violating short video platform Kuaishou’s rules on “vulgar” content — began using it to describe herself. Now, it’s become a byword for attention-seekers, goofballs, and anyone who is willing to get weird for a like.

[Regarding the person mentioned in the above quote, I found an article about her on the website of The China Project. The article says that she has many fans who are homosexuals, although it does not mention whether she herself is homosexual. For what it’s worth, I remember that a sister who grew up in San Francisco (which famously has a significant homosexual population) once commented that she has observed that many homosexuals are quite self-centred. Perhaps that contributes to such ones liking standing out and getting attention.]

Good and Bad Ways to Stand Out

The world—which we know is ruled behind the scenes by Satan the Devil—has its celebrity culture, and it has an attention economy. (1 John 5:19) In contrast, in 1 Thessalonians 4:11, the apostle Paul gave Christians this advice:

Make it your aim to live quietly and to mind your own business

So, generally, Christians should not seek to stand out or get attention for themselves. Sometimes, though, true Christians naturally stand out because of being no part of Satan’s world, e.g., when avoiding celebrating holidays with pagan roots, or when refusing to participate in politics or war. More positively, in a world permeated by Satan’s spirit, Christians may also naturally stand out because of reflecting God’s spirit, applying God’s principles, and sticking to God’s standards. As Jesus, said, his true disciples should ‘let their light shine’.—Matthew 5:16.

Standing out because of not following human conventions and traditions is not necessarily a bad thing. Indeed, it’s sometimes necessary, and exactly the right thing to do, with Jesus himself setting the perfect example by his not following the traditions of the scribes and Pharisees of his day, which went beyond God’s requirements. However, actually going beyond God’s standards and requirements, as Satan, the demons, Adam and Eve, the Pharisees, and others who show a similar spirit have done, is indeed bad. So, it’s vitally important for us to cultivate the wisdom to be able to tell the difference.

Standing Out in the Mandarin Field

Comparing the two articles linked to above, I noticed that the The World of Chinese article renders Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) in a much better way than the Sixth Tone article does—the The World of Chinese article properly treats Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) as a separate, alternate full writing system with spaces between whole words rather than between every syllable, while the Sixth Tone article just treats Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) like a mere pronunciation aid for the characters. Still, in a Language Log blog post of his own, Prof. Victor H. Mair made the following interesting comment regarding the expressions presented in the Sixth Tone article:

Three of the ten items either feature roman letters or consist entirely of English. Remember what Mark Hansell said years ago about roman letters becoming a part of the Chinese writing system:

Mark Hansell, “The Sino-Alphabet: The Assimilation of Roman Letters into the Chinese Writing System,” Sino-Platonic Papers, 45 (May, 1994), 1-28 (pdf)

Roman letters certainly stand out among Chinese characters.

As for characters themselves, one of the possible meanings of “xiǎnyǎn (xiǎn·yǎn {appears; shows; displays; manifests; {[is] obvious; evident; clear; apparent; noticeable} (to)} · eye → [conspicuous; showy; eye-catching; glamorous] 显眼 顯/顕眼)” is “glamorous”, and Chinese characters are considered glamorous by some. With their eye-catching visual designs, they are by nature—and probably by design—xiǎnyǎn (xiǎn·yǎn {noticeable (to)} · eye → [glamorous] 显眼 顯/顕眼), as are idols and images used in idolatrous worship.

In the Mandarin field, is it going too far to use Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) at times instead of always using characters? Is that being too xiǎnyǎn (xiǎn·yǎn {noticeable (to)} · eye → [conspicuous] 显眼 顯/顕眼) in a world where so many people use and promote characters? Should we just go along to get along? Well, as has been discussed on this blog and elsewhere, Chinese characters are from humans, not from God, and thus the traditions surrounding characters are no more binding on God’s true servants today than the traditions of the Pharisees were on Jesus, and I hope none of us would have told Jesus to “go along to get along”! (As I recall, the apostle Peter tried to tell Jesus something similar once, and Jesus, um, didn’t respond positively.) So, it is fine to take advantage of the practical benefits of Pīnyīn (Pīn·yīn {Piecing Together of} · Sounds → [Pinyin] 拼音) when you can to help you serve God more effectively, and to just use characters when you have to.