Discuss the Article : The Commonly Used Chinese Characters & How To Learn Them
<a href='/article/992/how-to-learn-10-of-commonly-used-chinese-characters-in-10-minutes' target='_blank'>The Commonly Used Chinese Characters & How To Learn Them</a>
How does learning 2500 characters sound? That's how many reaching basic Chinese literacy takes! Fortunately this article can help you strategize to make this high goal completely manageable in less time than you would imagine.
>>>>>It's true, you didn't say that explicitly, but that's what most people would understand as implication from the article.......
I am not sure that most people would understand it as the same way as you do. It is just your assumption so far, isn't it?
Italki articles are contribution from teachers voluntarily. The opinions in the articles are teacher's personal opinions from their working experience. No italki user is supposed have to agree with these opinions, I suppose.
The articles has been appoved by Italki before they are published. If you think the article has cause some misleading or any other harm, please contact Italki to discuss.
Thanks.
Yun Xian, thank you for your reply.
>> I didn't say that after learning 17 most frequent characters we will really be able to understand 20% of written texts.
It's true, you didn't say that explicitly, but that's what most people would understand as implication from the article. If 17 most frequent characters account for 20% of all the characters in a given text, but still after knowing these 17 characters I'll be able to understand 0% of the text, then why speak about those 20% at all? The said 20% is just a technical trick, but it doesn't have any practical meaning. That's why I say that people reading the article might be fooled. I'm not saying it was your intention to fool them, but that's what might actually happen.
>> ...the point of the article is that it is important for learners to proficiently master high frequency characters...
I have no objections to that.
>> ...the statistic come from scientific research and published by authorities...
Again, I do not doubt that. I'm just saying that this statistics is useless for any practical purpose. To say that 140 most frequent characters account for 50% of all the characters in a text is useless because in fact it will give you understanding of only 1-2% of the text, and it's misleading because it might get the readers to erroneously think that after learning 140 most frequent characters they will actually understand 50% of the text, which is not true.
Thank you for your long comment.
First, I didn't want to fool anyone.
Secondly, I didn't say that after learning 17 most frequent characters we will really be able to understand 20% of written texts. Don't know how did you get that conlusion?
Thirdly, the point of the article is that It is important for learners to proficiently master high frequency characters in order to build up their reading and writing fluency, and it is better to learn these characters first.
Fourthly, The statistic come from scientific research and published by authorities in order to reveal the truth of the usage of the language. It is not just a " illusion".
