A well-known essay on Why Chinese is So Damn Hard recently reappeared online. I remember reading it back when it first
appeared, agreeing heartily with the main points it makes – yes, the writing system is too complex and
not very phonetic! Yes, classical Chinese is freakin’ impossible! Yes, the
tones are irritating!
I still agree with much of it – forget
Classical Chinese unless you’re doing it out of sheer love of the language or
studying it in a scholarly fashion. The writing system is ridiculous, not very phonetic and not even easy for native
speakers. I will go so far as to say that the writing system is one of the
hardest, if not the hardest, in the world.
Basically, I agree with everything the writer says about written Chinese
with one exception: the piece makes it sound like reading Chinese is as hard as
writing it – it’s extraordinarily difficult, true, but not quite as Sisyphean
as learning to write. I can recognize far more characters than I can write –
which makes reading approximately one order of magnitude easier than writing.
It’s spoken Chinese where I disagree with
what the writer is saying.
I don’t think the tones are as
insurmountable – they’re tough, they’re hard to remember, they’re arbitrary and
I agree that they go against how you’d normally stress words in the native
languages of many learners of Chinese, but there are only four of them and
these are challenges that a little hard work – no harder than figuring out how
to utter a decent “r” sound in French or sentence stress in Korean – can’t
overcome. While I agree that wrong tones can at times create nonsense or
misunderstood sentences, this isn’t as big a problem as the writer makes it out
to be: generally speaking even with a few misplaced or wrong tones, a listener
can get your meaning by context. With a little practice you can stress
important words in a sentence and still use their correct tone.
I also feel that the writer is not quite
correct about Romanization systems – they don’t all suck. Tongyong sucks, and
Wade-Giles sucks, and that random other one I sometimes see in Taiwan that
isn’t Tongyong sucks, but I think Pinyin is fine. I have friends who disagree,
and that’s their prerogative, but I find spelling in Pinyin to be much more
regular than spelling in English, the words as they are written, when
pronounced according to the rules of Pinyin do sound like what the word
actually is – unlike with other systems - and once you master its few challenges it
is a straightforward system to use (those issues are “x” vs. “sh”, the use of
“i” which changes its sound depending on what consonant it follows,
pronunciation of “c” and “q”, and “q” vs. “ch”. The umlauted “u” can be tough,
too). These are challenges but unlike English spelling, predictable in every
word. The rules of how to pronounce things written in Pinyin doesn’t change – I
daresay if you can’t master it after a bit of practice, that you aren’t trying.
It’s just not that hard.
In Chinese’s favor, word order is not
terribly rigid (there are rules, and then exceptions like the 把 construction, and
ways to change around word order by using passive voice and a mock passive, and
you can get your meaning across even if you change the order in many cases),
the grammar is fairly straightforward with a few exceptions – 把 and the group of verbs that use (v)起來 being
two personal bugbears of mine – and far more streamlined than anything in the
Indo-European tree, not to mention Japanese or Korean. Compound words are
formed fairly regularly and without all the weird prefix/affix/suffix squeezing
and spelling changes of English, and using words that as a composite create the
meaning you’re after when a needed piece of lexis escapes you is something you
can do fairly easily, and get your point across.
I would say the main difficulty in speaking
Chinese are all of the homonyms – unless you have a strong sense of context it
can be fairly easy to misunderstand someone who used a word that sounds just
like another word, especially if they’re speaking quickly, in a dialect or very
colloquially.
All in all though, it’s absolutely true
that learning to write Chinese is horrifically difficult, so much so that
Chinese will never be an international language, at least not a written one
because non-native learners, especially adults, will simply not be able to
master it in great numbers. Imagine a busy businessperson deciding to pick up
written Chinese for work and take classes in his/her slivers of spare time –
how far will they get? Not far at all. It just won’t happen.
It’s spoken Chinese where I think the
writer is downright wrong. It’s no harder – and in many ways easier – than
learning to speak many other languages.
Which forces me to add: it seems like the
writer is committing the same mistake that so many have: associating Chinese
mainly with the written form, and not focusing nearly enough on the spoken language.
Written Chinese is not the entirety of the Chinese language, and I wish people
would stop acting as though writing Chinese was the end-all and be-all of Chinese.
If you get adequate practice, immerse
yourself if possible and try to do a good job of learning to speak Chinese the
way you would learn any language, you can learn to speak it, assuming you
aren’t one of those folks with no aptitude for languages (in which case any
other language would be equally hard).
So why do foreigners struggle so much with Chinese? Why do relatively fewer foreigners who begin learning Chinese get very far? Why is it such a problem if speaking Chinese is no harder than other languages, and in many ways easier?
Because teaching methodologies for Chinese
SUCK. They S-U-C-K suck. They are aeons
behind the latest ideas in teaching for EFL and the various popular Romance
languages as well as German. I don’t know where Chinese teachers train to
become “teachers” but I don’t have much respect for the pedagogy they’ve
learned. I’ve written about it already here and here so I won’t repeat myself
too much, but I will give examples:
To learn a language effectively, you need:
- = Many and varied opportunities
to practice: this means the receptive skills (listening, reading) in both
extensive and intensive ways (ie generally/for pleasure or for
comprehension/detail as one would do in class, the productive skills (speaking
and writing – both for fluency and accuracy in terms of speaking, and free as
well as guided for writing) – I felt, in Chinese class, that I was afforded few
chances to practice and they certainly weren’t varied or targeted
- - Varying interaction patterns
with a focus on letting students do as much as possible, with as little
teacher-led time as possible – my Chinese classes were so teacher-centered that
it was amazing we spoke at all other than to read from the textbook
- - Practice in different types of
activities (there’s a world of difference between a discussion question and a
‘make a sentence’ or ‘guess the word’ game, as between writing a restaurant
review and creating a poster) - yeah,
none of this. “Write ten sentences for homework using these words” and the
occasional throwaway question was the closest we ever got to that.
- - A strong knowledge of how
students best practice (example: asking students to read out loud, especially
in turn, is one of the worst ways to handle reading) – we read every single
reading out loud, and honestly, I didn’t understand most of them. Not because I
couldn’t understand them, but the medium of practicing them made it hard to
follow
- - Opportunities to create
original speech – yeah, very little of that and when it did happen, it was
mostly written and assigned as homework
- - Some testing, but not allowing
testing to take over the main thrust of the course – we had dictation quizzes
daily, tests after every unit and a test every three units. FAR too much
testing. Of course there was a section in the feedback form that allowed you to say there was too little testing, but no bubble you could tick to say there was too much, and no room to write it yourself.
- - Tailoring grammar and time
spent on it to how important/useful the grammar is, and trying to present it in
ways that show students how to use it in the real world – not at all. All
grammar was taught with equal weight in the same ineffective “do this exercise,
there now you know the grammar” way.
- - Opportunities to practice, at
great length, the grammar taught in various “situations” or activities –
basically none of that, maybe a workbook exercise or two
- - Knowing how much vocabulary an
average student can absorb in a given class time – the teachers would cram as
much unit vocabulary into us as they could in any given class, and yes, I had
trouble remembering it all because it came too fast, without enough practice,
in a very dry form, not contextualized enough and without enough good examples of
natural usage. We went around and read it in turns, which encouraged people to basically not pay attention and was not a good way to keep students engaged or interested. It certainly did not facilitate actually remembering the vocabulary.
…and a hell of a lot more.
I mention these because these are all of the things that I observed, in my time
at Shi-da, that the MTC does not do, and they’re supposed to be one of the
better institutions. Chinese teachers ‘round the world still seem to think that
having students go around and read vocabulary examples with sentences in turn,
with no opportunities to actually create sentences, and then quickly going
through a few grammar exercises and rounding it up nicely with quizzes and
tests is a fine way for students to learn Chinese…but it’s not working. It
doesn’t work. It can’t work. And yet that’s how Chinese is taught in so many
places.
Oh yes, and I’ve said in
previous posts that Chinese language programs lean far too heavily on Chinese
for textbook/academic purposes and not for daily use, and that they seem to
care far more about perfect writing than fluent speaking – both of which are
fine for those learning Chinese for academia, but an utter mess for someone who
just wants to speak Chinese already. And those who are learning it for academia?
Either they are quite erudite but sound like a textbook (sorry J – but you’ve
improved a lot in that area!) or they just don’t speak it well at all (as with
a few people I’ve met, and heard stories about, as in ‘how did she get into the
graduate program when she can barely string together a sentence in Chinese?’).
THIS is why foreigners aren’t doing a good job of learning Chinese – not because spoken Chinese is all that inherently difficult.
Get some good Chinese
teachers to really make changes in how the language is taught, and get classes
with real practice on all levels of the language, and you’ll see a massive
uptick in foreigners’ ability to master the language: the spoken language, at
least. The problem isn't the language - it is 100% the piss-poor methodology. There's no excuse for it.