Topzle Topzle

Chinese characters

Updated: Wikipedia source

Chinese characters

Chinese characters, also known as Han characters, Chinese script or Hanzi, are logographs used to write the Chinese languages and other Far Eastern languages from regions historically influenced by Chinese culture such as Japanese, Korean and (pre-colonial) Vietnamese. Unlike letters in the alphabets of most languages, which only transcribe the phonetics (phonemes) of speech (i.e. are phonegraphs), Chinese characters generally represent morphemes, the basic units of meaning in a language, thus making them the linguistic equivalent of words rather than letters, while the majority of "words" in the Chinese lexicon are in fact compounds and phrasemes (short phrases). The pronunciation of Chinese characters is transcribed phonetically via separate (usually romanized) transliteration systems such as the Pinyin, Zhuyin, Jyutping, Wade–Giles or Yale system. At the most basic level, Chinese characters are composed of strokes (the actual linguistic equivalent of letters), which are written in a fixed stroke order for each character. The strokes are then organized into radicals, which are the fundamental root components that represent either a semantic feature or a homophone (often based on the Middle Chinese pronunciations) of the character. Historically, methods of writing characters have included carving inscriptions on stone, animal bones (usually turtle shells) or bronze; drawing ink onto bamboo slips, fabric (typically silk) or paper; and printing with woodblocks or moveable type. Technologies invented since the 19th century to facilitate the use of characters include telegraph codes and typewriters, as well as input methods and text encodings on computers. Chinese characters constitute one of the four official working scripts of the United Nations, along with the Latin script (used by English, French and Spanish), Cyrillic script (by Russian) and Arabic script (by Arabic). Of the four independently invented writing systems accepted by historical linguistics scholars (the other three being the now-extinct Egyptian hieroglyphs, Sumerian cuneiforms and Mayan glyphs), they represent the only one that has remained in continuous use to modern times. Writing and reading of the frequently used daily vocabulary in the Chinese language requires literacy of roughly 3,000–3,500 characters, while literature and science professionals need around 5,000 characters; as of 2025, more than 100000 characters have been identified and included in The Unicode Standard. Over a recorded history spanning more than three millennia, the morphology, styles and meanings of Chinese writing characters have changed greatly. While Neolithic symbols has being discovered in pottery artefacts dated to as early as 6600 BCE, the first academically attested characters are oracle bone inscriptions made during the 13th century BCE in what is now Anyang, Henan province, used for divinations conducted by royal houses of the Shang dynasty. Character forms were originally ideographic or pictographic in style, but evolved as bronze script and seal script writings (including the large seal, tadpole and bird-worm variants) spread across China during the Zhou dynasty. Numerous attempts have been made to reform the script, including the promotion of small seal script by the Qin dynasty (221–206 BCE), although the eventual winner was the clerical script, which had matured by the early Han dynasty (202 BCE – 220 CE). The transition from the cursive seal script to more squarish clerical script (a process known as Libian) abstracted the forms of characters, obscuring their pictographic origins in favour of easier writing on bamboo slips, fabric scrolls and later on paper with an ink brush, which was invented during the late Qin dynasty and subsequently adopted ubiquitously as the standard writing tool due to its convenience. After the Han dynasty, the regular script emerged as a more straight-stroked evolution of the clerical script, and has been the primary style used for traditional Chinese characters, while the more artistic semi-cursive and cursive variants have been practised in calligraphy, and the neater Song and Fangsong variants are used as the standard typefaces in printing. Informed by a long tradition of lexicography, various countries of Greater China have standardized forms of Chinese characters used. While traditional characters are still used in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau and most of the overseas Chinese diaspora, simplified Chinese characters are used in Mainland China, Singapore and Malaysia. Historically during periods of Pax Sinica, Chinese characters were used to write Literary Chinese as an international lingua franca among various tributary states within the Chinese sphere of influence and trade network. Some of these non-Sinitic tributary states, particularly those heavily influenced by and actively borrowing from Chinese culture such as Japan, Korea and Vietnam, then adapted Chinese characters into their own local written languages, where the incorporated Chinese characters are known as kanji, hanja and Chữ Hán (as well as the variant Chữ Nôm) respectively. Writing traditions also emerged for some of the other minority languages of China, like the sawndip script used to write the Zhuang languages of Guangxi. Each of these written vernaculars used existing characters to write the language's native vocabulary, as well as the loanwords borrowed from Chinese. In addition, each invented characters for local use. In modern Korean and Vietnamese writings, Chinese characters have largely been replaced with the phonographic Hangul and Latinized alphabet as part of the desinicization efforts, leaving written Japanese as the only major non-Sinitic language still using them alongside the phonographic hiragana and katagana.

Infobox

Script type
Logographic
Period
c. 13th century BCE – present
Direction
Horizontal left-to-rightVertical right-to-left
Official script
3 sovereign states China Taiwan Japan Co-official script in: 1 sovereign state and 2 autonomous regions Singapore Hong Kong Macau Recognized script in: 2 sovereign states Malaysia South Korea
Languages
mw- li , li ChineseJapaneseKoreanVietnameseZhuang (among others)
Parent systems
(Proto-writing)Chinese characters
Child systems
mw- .inline, .inline dl, .inline ol, .inline ul, dl dl, dl ol, dl ul, ol dl, ol ol dd dd dd , dd dt , dd li , dt dd , dt dt , dt li , li dd dd dd , dd dt , dd li , dt dd , dt dt , dt li , li dd dd ol li BopomofoJurchen scriptKanaKhitan small scriptNüshuTangut scriptYi script
ISO 15924
mw- Hani (500), Han (Hanzi, Kanji, Hanja)
Unicode alias
Han
Unicode range
U 4E00–U 9FFF CJK Unified Ideographs (full list)
Simplified Chinese
汉字
Traditional Chinese
漢字
Literal meaning
Han characters
Transcriptions
TranscriptionsRevised RomanizationHanjaMcCune–ReischauerHancha
Hanyu Pinyin
Hànzì
Bopomofo
ㄏㄢˋ ㄗˋ
Gwoyeu Romatzyh
Hanntzyh
Wade–Giles
Han4-tzu4
Tongyong Pinyin
Hàn-zìh
IPA
[hɔn˧ tsi˨]
Romanization
Hon55 sii55
Yale Romanization
Hon jih
Jyutping
Hon3 zi6
Hokkien POJ
Hàn-jī
Tâi-lô
Hàn-jī
Teochew Peng'im
Hang3 ri7
Fuzhou BUC
Háng-cê
Middle Chinese
xanH dziH
Kanji
漢字
Revised Hepburn
kanji
Kunrei-shiki
kanzi
Hangul
한자
Hanja
漢字
Revised Romanization
Hanja
McCune–Reischauer
Hancha
Vietnamese alphabet
mw- chữ Hánchữ NhoHán tự
Hán-Nôm
𡨸漢𡨸儒
Chữ Hán
漢字
Zhuang
sawgun
Sawndip
𭨡倱

Tables

mw- Sequence and placement of the strokes in 永
2
2
Character
2
Stroke
3
3
Character
3
Stroke
4
4
Character
4
Stroke
5
5
Character
5
Stroke
Character
Stroke
1
2
3
4
5
Example Korean dictionary listings · Vocabulary and adaptation › Korean
Native translation
Native translation
Hanja
Native translation
Hangul
Sino-Korean
Hanja
Hangul
물; mul
Hangul
수; su
Gloss
'water'
Hanja
Hangul
사람; saram
Hangul
인; in
Gloss
'person'
Hanja
Hangul
큰; keun
Hangul
대; dae
Gloss
'big'
Hanja
Hangul
작을; jakeul
Hangul
소; so
Gloss
'small'
Hanja
Hangul
아래; arae
Hangul
하; ha
Gloss
'down'
Hanja
Hangul
아비; abi
Hangul
부; bu
Gloss
'father'
Hanja
Hangul
Gloss
Native translation
Sino-Korean
물; mul
수; su
'water'
사람; saram
인; in
'person'
큰; keun
대; dae
'big'
작을; jakeul
소; so
'small'
아래; arae
하; ha
'down'
아비; abi
부; bu
'father'

References

  1. 漢字; simplified as 汉字 Chinese pinyin: Hànzì; Wade–Giles: Han4-tzŭ4; Jyutping: Hon3 zi6 Japanese Hepburn: kanji Korean Rev
  2. Zev Handel lists: Sumerian cuneiform emerging c. 3200 BCEEgyptian hieroglyphs emerging c. 3100 BCEChinese characters eme
  3. According to Handel: "While monosyllabism generally trumps morphemicity—that is to say, a bisyllabic morpheme is nearly
  4. This is the Middle Vietnamese pronunciation; the word is pronounced in modern Vietnamese as trăng.
  5. Guangxi Nationalities Publishing House 1989.
  6. "最古漢字 陶文、甲骨文再爭鋒第"
    https://web.archive.org/web/20200217182828/https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/paper/88017
  7. Handel 2019, p. 1.
  8. Qiu 2000, p. 2.
  9. Qiu 2000, pp. 3–4.
  10. Qiu 2000, p. 5.
  11. Norman 1988, p. 59; Li 2020, p. 48.
  12. Qiu 2000, pp. 11, 16.
  13. Qiu 2000, p. 1; Handel 2019, pp. 4–5.
  14. Qiu 2000, pp. 22–26; Norman 1988, p. 74.
  15. Handel 2019, p. 33.
  16. Qiu 2000, pp. 13–15; Coulmas 1991, pp. 104–109.
  17. Li 2020, pp. 56–57; Boltz 1994, pp. 3–4.
  18. Handel 2019, pp. 10, 51; Yong & Peng 2008, pp. 95–98.
  19. Qiu 2000, pp. 19, 162–168.
  20. Boltz 2011, pp. 57, 60.
  21. Qiu 2000, pp. 14–18.
  22. Yin 2007, pp. 97–100; Su 2014, pp. 102–111.
  23. Yang 2008, pp. 147–148.
  24. Demattè 2022, p. 14.
  25. Qiu 2000, pp. 163–171.
  26. Yong & Peng 2008, p. 19.
  27. Qiu 2000, pp. 44–45; Zhou 2003, p. 61.
  28. Qiu 2000, pp. 18–19.
  29. Qiu 2000, p. 154; Norman 1988, p. 68.
  30. Yip 2000, pp. 39–42.
  31. Qiu 2000, p. 46.
  32. Norman 1988, p. 68; Qiu 2000, pp. 185–187.
  33. Qiu 2000, pp. 15, 190–202.
  34. Sampson & Chen 2013, p. 261.
  35. Qiu 2000, p. 155.
  36. Boltz 1994, pp. 104–110.
  37. Sampson & Chen 2013, pp. 265–268.
  38. Norman 1988, p. 68.
  39. Qiu 2000, p. 154.
  40. Cruttenden 2021, pp. 167–168.
  41. Williams 2010.
  42. Vogelsang 2021, pp. 51–52.
  43. Qiu 2000, pp. 261–265.
  44. Qiu 2000, pp. 273–274, 302.
  45. Taylor & Taylor 2014, pp. 30–32.
  46. Ramsey 1987, p. 60.
  47. Gnanadesikan 2011, p. 61.
  48. Qiu 2000, p. 168; Norman 1988, p. 60.
  49. Norman 1988, pp. 67–69; Handel 2019, p. 48.
  50. Norman 1988, pp. 170–171.
  51. Handel 2019, pp. 48–49.
  52. Qiu 2000, pp. 153–154, 161; Norman 1988, p. 170.
  53. Qiu 2013, pp. 102–108; Norman 1988, p. 69.
  54. Handel 2019, p. 43.
  55. Qiu 2000, pp. 44–45.
  56. Qiu 2000, pp. 59–60, 66.
  57. Demattè 2022, pp. 79–80.
  58. Yang & An 2008, pp. 84–86.
  59. Boltz 1994, pp. 130–138.
  60. Qiu 2000, p. 31.
  61. Qiu 2000, p. 39.
  62. Boltz 1999, pp. 74, 107–108; Liu et al. 2017, pp. 155–175.
  63. Liu & Chen 2012, p. 6.
  64. Kern 2010, p. 1; Wilkinson 2012, pp. 681–682.
  65. Keightley 1978, pp. 28–42.
  66. Kern 2010, p. 1.
  67. Keightley 1978, pp. 46–47.
  68. Boltz 1986, p. 424; Kern 2010, p. 2.
  69. Shaughnessy 1991, pp. 1–4.
  70. Qiu 2000, pp. 63–66.
  71. Qiu 2000, pp. 88–89.
  72. Qiu 2000, pp. 76–78.
  73. Chen 2003.
  74. Louis 2003.
  75. Qiu 2000, p. 77.
  76. Boltz 1994, p. 156.
  77. Qiu 2000, pp. 104–107.
  78. Qiu 2000, pp. 59, 119.
  79. Qiu 2000, pp. 119–124.
  80. Qiu 2000, pp. 113, 139, 466.
  81. Qiu 2000, pp. 138–139.
  82. Qiu 2000, pp. 130–148.
  83. Knechtges & Chang 2014, pp. 1257–1259.
  84. Qiu 2000, pp. 113, 139–142.
  85. Li 2020, p. 51; Qiu 2000, p. 149; Norman 1988, p. 70.
  86. Qiu 2000, pp. 113, 149.
  87. Chan 2020, p. 125.
  88. Qiu 2000, p. 143.
  89. Qiu 2000, pp. 144–145.
  90. Li 2020, p. 41.
  91. Li 2020, pp. 54, 196–197; Peking University 2004, pp. 148–152; Zhou 2003, p. 88.
  92. Norman 1988, p. 86; Zhou 2003, p. 58; Zhang 2013.
  93. Li 2009, pp. 65–66; Zhou 2003, p. 88.
  94. Handel 2019, pp. 43–44.
  95. Yin 2016, pp. 58–59.
  96. Myers 2019, pp. 106–116.
  97. Li 2009, p. 70.
  98. Qiu 2000, pp. 204–215, 373.
  99. Zhou 2003, pp. 57–60, 63–65.
  100. Qiu 2000, pp. 297–300, 373.
  101. Bökset 2006, pp. 16, 19.
  102. Li 2020, p. 54; Handel 2019, p. 27; Keightley 1978, p. 50.
  103. Taylor & Taylor 2014, pp. 372–373; Bachner 2014, p. 245.
  104. Needham & Harbsmeier 1998, pp. 175–176; Taylor & Taylor 2014, pp. 374–375.
  105. Needham & Tsien 2001, pp. 23–25, 38–41.
  106. Nawar 2020.
  107. Li 2009, pp. 180–183.
  108. Li 2009, pp. 175–179.
  109. Needham & Tsien 2001, pp. 146–147, 159.
  110. Needham & Tsien 2001, pp. 201–205.
  111. Yong & Peng 2008, pp. 280–282, 293–297.
  112. Li 2013, p. 62.
  113. Lunde 2008, pp. 23–25.
  114. Su 2014, p. 218.
  115. Mullaney 2017, p. 25.
  116. Li 2020, pp. 152–153.
  117. Zhang 2016, p. 422.
  118. Su 2014, p. 222.
  119. Lunde 2008, p. 193.
  120. Norman 1988, pp. 74–75.
  121. Vogelsang 2021, pp. xvii–xix.
  122. Handel 2019, p. 34; Norman 1988, p. 83.
  123. Norman 1988, pp. 41–42.
  124. Wilkinson 2012, p. 22.
  125. Tong, Liu & McBride-Chang 2009, p. 203.
  126. Yip 2000, p. 18.
  127. Handel 2019, pp. 11–12; Kornicki 2018, pp. 15–16.
  128. Handel 2019, pp. 28, 69, 126, 169.
  129. Kin 2021, p. XII.
  130. Denecke 2014, pp. 204–216.
  131. Kornicki 2018, pp. 72–73.
  132. Handel 2019, p. 212.
  133. Kornicki 2018, p. 168.
  134. Handel 2019, pp. 124–125, 133.
  135. Handel 2019, pp. 64–65.
  136. Kornicki 2018, p. 57.
  137. Hannas 1997, pp. 136–138.
  138. Ebrey 1996, p. 205.
  139. Norman 1988, p. 58.
  140. Wilkinson 2012, pp. 22–23.
  141. Norman 1988, pp. 86–87.
  142. Norman 1988, pp. 155–156.
  143. Norman 1988, p. 74.
  144. Handel 2019, p. 34.
  145. Qiu 2000, pp. 301–302.
  146. Handel 2019, p. 59.
  147. Cheung & Bauer 2002, pp. 12–20.
  148. Norman 1988, pp. 75–77.
  149. Li 2020, p. 88.
  150. Coulmas 1991, pp. 122–129.
  151. Coulmas 1991, pp. 129–132.
  152. Handel 2019, pp. 192–196.
  153. Taylor & Taylor 2014, pp. 275–279.
  154. Li 2020, pp. 78–80.
  155. Fischer 2004, pp. 189–194.
  156. Hannas 1997, p. 49; Taylor & Taylor 2014, p. 435.
  157. Handel 2019, pp. 88, 102.
  158. Handel 2019, pp. 112–113; Hannas 1997, pp. 60–61.
  159. Hannas 1997, pp. 64–66.
  160. Norman 1988, p. 79.
  161. Handel 2019, pp. 75–82.
  162. Handel 2019, pp. 124–126; Kin 2021, p. XI.
  163. Hannas 1997, p. 73.
  164. DeFrancis 1977, pp. 23–24.
  165. Kornicki 2018, p. 63.
  166. Phan 2013.
  167. Handel 2019, pp. 145, 150.
  168. DeFrancis 1977, p. 19.
  169. Coulmas 1991, pp. 113–115; Hannas 1997, pp. 73, 84–87.
  170. Handel 2019, pp. 239–240.
  171. Handel 2019, pp. 251–252.
  172. Handel 2019, pp. 231, 234–235; Zhou 2003, pp. 140–142, 151.
  173. Zhou 1991; Zhou 2003, p. 139.
  174. Zhou 1991.
  175. Zhao 1998.
  176. Kuzuoğlu 2023, p. 71.
  177. DeFrancis 1984, p. 242; Taylor & Taylor 2014, p. 14; Li 2020, p. 123.
  178. Hung 1951, p. 481.
  179. Demattè 2022, p. 8; Taylor & Taylor 2014, pp. 110–111.
  180. Kornicki 2018, pp. 273–277.
  181. Yong & Peng 2008, pp. 55–58.
  182. Norman 1988, p. 73.
  183. Su 2014, pp. 47, 51.
  184. Su 2014, p. 183; Needham & Harbsmeier 1998, pp. 65–66.
  185. Xue 1982, pp. 152–153; Demattè 2022, p. 37.
  186. Yong & Peng 2008, pp. 100–103, 203.
  187. Zhou 2003, p. 88; Norman 1988, pp. 170–172; Needham & Harbsmeier 1998, pp. 79–80.
  188. Yong & Peng 2008, pp. 145, 400–401.
  189. Norman 1988, pp. 27–28.
  190. Demattè 2022, p. 9.
  191. Lee 2015b.
  192. Lee 2015a, The Brain Network for Chinese Language Processing.
  193. McBride, Tong & Mo 2015, pp. 688–690; Ho 2015; Taylor & Taylor 2014, pp. 150–151, 346–349, 393–394.
  194. Chen 1999, p. 153.
  195. Zhou 2003, pp. 60–67.
  196. Taylor & Taylor 2014, pp. 117–118.
  197. Li 2020, p. 136.
  198. Wang 2016, p. 171.
  199. Qiu 2000, p. 404.
  200. Zhou 2003, pp. xvii–xix; Li 2020, p. 136.
  201. Zhou 2003, pp. xviii–xix.
  202. DeFrancis 1972, pp. 11–13.
  203. Zhong 2019, pp. 113–114; Chen 1999, pp. 70–74, 80–82.
  204. Chen 1999, pp. 150–153.
  205. Bökset 2006, p. 26.
  206. Zhong 2019, pp. 157–158.
  207. Li 2020, p. 142.
  208. Chen 1999, pp. 154–156.
  209. Zhou 2003, p. 63.
  210. Chen 1999, pp. 155–156.
  211. Chen 1999, pp. 159–160.
  212. Chen 1999, pp. 196–197.
  213. Zhou 2003, p. 79; Chen 1999, p. 136.
  214. Li 2020, pp. 145–146.
  215. Taylor & Taylor 2014, p. 275.
  216. jōyō kanji
    http://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXNASDG22043_U0A121C1CR0000/
  217. The Nikkei
    https://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXLASDG24H0N_U7A920C1000000/
  218. Lunde 2008, pp. 82–84.
  219. Hannas 1997, p. 48.
  220. Hannas 1997, pp. 65–66, 69–72.
  221. Choo & O'Grady 1996, p. ix.
  222. Lunde 2008, p. 84.
  223. Taylor & Taylor 2014, p. 179.
  224. Hanja for Use in Personal Names
    https://www.chosun.com/national/court_law/2021/12/26/OZCAQQTHSFANXKF4UU2C7GEBQM
  225. Handel 2019, p. 113; Hannas 1997, pp. 66–67.
  226. Hannas 1997, pp. 67–68.
  227. Chosun NK
    http://nk.chosun.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=155532
  228. Chosun NK
    https://nk.chosun.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=7252
  229. Lunde 2008, p. 81.
  230. Shang & Zhao 2017, p. 320.
  231. Chen 1999, p. 161.
  232. Tam 2020, p. 29.
  233. Fischer 2004, p. 166; DeFrancis 1984, p. 71.
  234. Recueil de travaux relatifs à la philologie et à l'archéologie égyptiennes et assyriennes
    http://archive.org/details/recueildetravaux27masp/page/244/mode/2up
  235. Tao Te Ching
    https://ctext.org/dao-de-jing/ens#n11671
  236. I Ching
    https://ctext.org/book-of-changes/xi-ci-xia#n46944
  237. Explaining Surnames
    https://dl.ndl.go.jp/en/pid/1287529/1/2
  238. Urh-chih-tsze-tëen-se-yin-pe-keáou: Being a Parallel Drawn Between the Two Intended Chinese Dictionaries
    https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_2va5Ayf9u-sC/bub_gb_2va5Ayf9u-sC/page/n29/mode/2up
  239. Technical Introduction
    https://www.unicode.org/standard/principles.html
  240. The Unicode Standard, Version 17.0.0
    https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr38/#BlockListing
  241. Dictionary of Frequently-Used Taiwan Minnan
    https://sutian.moe.edu.tw/zh-hant/introduction/
Image
Source:
Tip: Wheel or +/− to zoom, drag to pan, Esc to close.