| ²é¿´: 1429 | »Ø¸´: 9 | |||
| ±¾Ìû²úÉú 1 ¸ö ESEPI £¬µã»÷ÕâÀï½øÐв鿴 | |||
| µ±Ç°Ö»ÏÔʾÂú×ãÖ¸¶¨Ìõ¼þµÄ»ØÌû£¬µã»÷ÕâÀï²é¿´±¾»°ÌâµÄËùÓлØÌû | |||
zhaokan123½ð³æ (ÕýʽдÊÖ)
|
[½»Á÷]
Which is better, traditional Chinese characters or simplified Chinese characters
|
||
|
There is always an arguement about the use of traditional Chinese characters and simplified Chinese characters among we Chinese people. Some people argue that traditional Chinese characters, also known as the original coplex form of Chinese characters, should be applied the basic characters we use in our daily life, because these characters represent our history and traditional culture, which remind us who we are. A typical example goes to the calligraphy--a treasure we all cherish--which becomes meaningless in the form of simplified Chiese characters. However, there is also voices insist that simplified Chinese characters are better, as they are easier to learn, and most importantly, are time saving, which sparkles since we live in a rapidly developing world. They hold the opinion that those issues related to cuture and history should be protected by those people who doing the cutural and historical jobs, rather than we common people. So, what is your opinion on it? [ Last edited by zhaokan123 on 2012-2-4 at 15:43 ] |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
070300Ò»Ö¾Ô¸211£¬312·ÖÇóµ÷¼ÁԺУ
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
332Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´
279Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
310Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
²ÄÁÏר˶ 085600Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
0703»¯Ñ§/290Çóµ÷¼Á/±¾¿Æ¾Àú·á¸»/¹¤¿ÆÒ²¿É
ÒѾÓÐ12È˻ظ´
ÉúÎï¼¼ÊõÓ빤³Ì
ÒѾÓÐ8È˻ظ´
085602 »¯Ñ§¹¤³Ìר˶ 340·ÖÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
292Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ8È˻ظ´
297Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ13È˻ظ´















»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥