Editing Chinese characters (section)

== Classification ==
{{Main|Chinese character classification}}
Chinese characters have been used in several different [[writing system]]s throughout history. A writing system is most commonly defined to include the written symbols themselves, called ''[[grapheme]]s''—which may include characters, numerals, or punctuation—as well as the rules by which they are used to record language.{{sfnm|Qiu|2000|1p=1|Handel|2019|2pp=4–5}} Chinese characters are [[logograph]]s, which are graphemes that represent units of meaning in a language. Specifically, characters represent a language's [[morpheme]]s, its most basic units of meaning. Morphemes in Chinese—and therefore the characters used to write them—are nearly always a single syllable in length. In some special cases, characters may denote non-morphemic syllables as well; due to this, [[written Chinese]] is often characterized as [[morphosyllabic]].{{sfnm|Qiu|2000|1pp=22–26|Norman|1988|2p=74}}{{efn|According to Handel: "While monosyllabism generally trumps morphemicity—that is to say, a bisyllabic morpheme is nearly always written with two characters rather than one—there is an unmistakable tendency for script users to impose a morphemic identity on the linguistic units represented by these characters."{{sfn|Handel|2019|p=33}}}} Logographs may be contrasted with [[letter (alphabet)|letter]]s in an [[alphabet]], which generally represent [[phoneme]]s, the distinct units of sound used by speakers of a language.{{sfnm|Qiu|2000|1pp=13–15|Coulmas|1991|2pp=104–109}} Despite their origins in picture-writing, Chinese characters are no longer ideographs capable of representing ideas directly; their comprehension relies on the reader's knowledge of the particular language being written.{{sfnm|Li|2020|1pp=56–57|Boltz|1994|2pp=3–4}}

The areas where Chinese characters were historically used—sometimes collectively termed the ''[[Sinosphere]]''—have a long tradition of [[lexicography]] attempting to explain and refine their use; for most of history, analysis revolved around a model first popularized in the 2nd-century ''{{tlit|zh|[[Shuowen Jiezi]]}}'' dictionary.{{sfnm|Handel|2019|1pp=10, 51|2a1=Yong|2a2=Peng|2y=2008|2pp=95–98}} More recent models have analysed the methods used to create characters, how characters are structured, and how they function in a given writing system.{{sfn|Qiu|2000|pp=19, 162–168}}

=== Structural analysis ===
Most characters can be analysed structurally as compounds made of smaller [[Chinese character components|components]] ({{zhi|c=部件|p=bùjiàn}}), which are often independent characters in their own right, adjusted to occupy a given position in the compound.{{sfn|Boltz|2011|pp=57, 60}} Components within a character may serve a specific function—phonetic components provide a hint for the character's pronunciation, and semantic components indicate some element of the character's meaning. Components that serve neither function may be classified as pure signs with no particular meaning, other than their presence distinguishing one character from another.{{sfn|Qiu|2000|pp=14–18}}

A straightforward structural classification scheme may consist of three pure classes of semantographs, phonographs, and signs—having only semantic, phonetic, and form components respectively—as well as classes corresponding to each combination of component types.{{sfnm|Yin|2007|1pp=97–100|Su|2014|2pp=102-111}} Of the {{val|3500}} characters that are frequently used in Standard Chinese, pure semantographs are estimated to be the rarest, accounting for about 5% of the lexicon, followed by pure signs with 18%, and semantic–form and phonetic–form compounds together accounting for 19%. The remaining 58% are phono-semantic compounds.{{sfn|Yang|2008|pp=147-148}}

The 20th-century Chinese palaeographer [[Qiu Xigui]] presents three principles of character function adapted from earlier proposals by {{ill|Tang Lan|zh|唐蘭}} and [[Chen Mengjia]],{{sfn|Demattè|2022|p=14}} with ''semantographs'' describing all characters with forms wholly related to their meaning, regardless of the method by which the meaning was originally depicted; ''phonographs'' that include a phonetic component; and ''loangraphs'' encompassing existing characters that have been borrowed to write other words. Qiu also acknowledges the existence of character classes that fall outside of these principles, such as pure signs.{{sfn|Qiu|2000|pp=163–171}}

=== Semantographs ===
==== Pictographs ====
{{mim
| direction = vertical | width = 300 | caption_align = center | border = none
| header    = Graphical evolution of pictographs
| image1    = Evo-rì.svg
| caption1  = {{zhc|c=日|l=Sun}}
| image2    = Evo-shān.svg
| caption2  = {{zhc|c=山|l=mountain}}
| image3    = Evo-xiàng.svg
| caption3  = {{zhc|c=象|l=elephant}}
}}
Most of the oldest characters are [[pictograph]]s ({{zhi|c=象形|p=xiàngxíng}}), representational pictures of physical objects.{{sfn|Yong|Peng|2008|p=19}} Examples include {{zhc|c=日|l=Sun}}, {{zhc|c=月|l=Moon}}, and {{zhc|c=木|l=tree}}. Over time, the forms of pictographs have been simplified in order to make them easier to write.{{sfnm|Qiu|2000|1pp=44–45|Zhou|2003|2p=61}} As a result, modern readers generally cannot deduce what many pictographs were originally meant to resemble; without knowing the context of their origin in picture-writing, they may be interpreted instead as pure signs. However, if a pictograph's use in compounds still reflects its original meaning, as with {{zhi|c=日}} in {{zhc|c=晴|l=clear sky}}, it can still be analysed as a semantic component.{{sfn|Qiu|2000|pp=18–19}}{{sfnm|Qiu|2000|1p=154|Norman|1988|2p=68}}

Pictographs have often been extended from their original meanings to take on additional layers of metaphor and [[synecdoche]], which sometimes displace the character's original sense. When this process results in excessive ambiguity between distinct senses written with the same character, it is usually resolved by new compounds being derived to represent particular senses.{{sfn|Yip|2000|pp=39-42}}

==== <span class="anchor" id="Ideographs"></span>Indicatives ====
Indicatives ({{zhi|p=zhǐshì|t=指事}}), also called ''simple ideographs'' or ''self-explanatory characters'',{{sfn|Yong|Peng|2008|p=19}} are visual representations of abstract concepts that lack any tangible form. Examples include {{zhc|c=上|l=up}} and {{zhc|c=下|l=down}}—these characters were originally written as dots placed above and below a line, and later evolved into their present forms with less potential for graphical ambiguity in context.{{sfn|Qiu|2000|p=46}} More complex indicatives include {{zhc|c=凸|l=convex}}, {{zhc|c=凹|l=concave}}, and {{zhc|c=平|l=flat and level}}.{{sfnm|Norman|1988|1p=68|Qiu|2000|2pp=185–187}}

==== Compound ideographs ====
[[File:Compound Chinese character demonstration with 好.webm|thumb|upright=0.9|The compound character {{zhi|c=好}} illustrated as its component characters {{zhi|c=女}} and {{zhi|c=子}} positioned side by side]]
Compound ideographs ({{zhi|t=會意|s=会意|p=huìyì}})—also called ''logical aggregates'', ''associative idea characters'', or ''syssemantographs''—combine other characters to convey a new, synthetic meaning. A canonical example is {{zhc|c=明|l=bright}}, interpreted as the juxtaposition of the two brightest objects in the sky: {{zhc|c=日|l=Sun}} and {{zhc|c=月|l=Moon}}, together expressing their shared quality of brightness. Other examples include {{zhc|c=休|l=rest}}, composed of pictographs {{zhc|c=人|l=man}} and {{zhc|c=木|l=tree}}, and {{zhc|c=好|l=good}}, composed of {{zhc|c=女|l=woman}} and {{zhc|c=子|l=child}}.{{sfn|Qiu|2000|pp=15, 190–202}}

Many traditional examples of compound ideographs are now believed to have actually originated as phono-semantic compounds, made obscure by subsequent changes in pronunciation.{{sfn|Sampson|Chen|2013|p=261}} For example, the ''{{tlit|zh|Shuowen Jiezi}}'' describes {{zhc|c=信|l=trust}} as an ideographic compound of {{zhc|c=人|l=man}} and {{zhc|c=言|l=speech}}, but modern analyses instead identify it as a phono-semantic compound—though with disagreement as to which component is phonetic.{{sfn|Qiu|2000|p=155}} [[Peter A. Boodberg]] and [[William G. Boltz]] go so far as to deny that any compound ideographs were devised in antiquity, maintaining that secondary readings that are now lost are responsible for the apparent absence of phonetic indicators,{{sfn|Boltz|1994|pp=104–110}} but their arguments have been rejected by other scholars.{{sfn|Sampson|Chen|2013|pp=265–268}}

=== Phonographs ===
==== Phono-semantic compounds ====
Phono-semantic compounds ({{zhi|p=xíngshēng|s=形声|t=形聲}}) are composed of at least one semantic component and one phonetic component.{{sfn|Norman|1988|p=68}} They may be formed by one of several methods, often by adding a phonetic component to disambiguate a loangraph, or by adding a semantic component to represent a specific extension of a character's meaning.{{sfn|Qiu|2000|p=154}} Examples of phono-semantic compounds include {{zhc|c=河|p=hé|l=river}}, {{zhc|c=湖|p=hú|l=lake}}, {{zhc|c=流|p=liú|l=stream}}, {{zhc|c=沖|p=chōng|l=surge}}, and {{zhc|c=滑|p=huá|l=slippery}}. Each of these characters have three short strokes on their left-hand side: {{kxr|氵|v=y|name=no}}, a simplified combining form of {{lang|zh|⽔}} ('water'). This component serves a semantic function in each example, indicating the character has some meaning related to water. The remainder of each character is its phonetic component: {{zhc|c=湖|p=hú}} is pronounced identically to {{zhc|c=胡|p=hú}} in Standard Chinese, {{zhc|c=河|p=hé}} is pronounced similarly to {{zhc|c=可|p=kě}}, and {{zhc|c=沖|p=chōng}} is pronounced similarly to {{zhc|c=中|p=zhōng}}.{{sfn|Cruttenden|2021|pp=167–168}}

The phonetic components of most compounds may only provide an approximate pronunciation, even before subsequent sound shifts in the spoken language. Some characters may only have the same initial or final sound of a syllable in common with phonetic components.{{sfn|Williams|2010}} A [[phonetic series (Chinese characters)|phonetic series]] comprises all the characters created using the same phonetic component, which may have diverged significantly in their pronunciations over time. For example, {{zhc|c=茶|l=tea|p=chá|j=caa4}} and {{zhc|c=途|l=route|p=tú|j=tou4}} are characters in the phonetic series using {{zhc|c=余|p=yú|j=jyu4}}, a literary first-person pronoun. Their [[Old Chinese]] pronunciations were similar, but the phonetic component no longer serves as a useful hint for their pronunciation in modern [[varieties of Chinese]] due to subsequent sound shifts—demonstrated here in both their [[Mandarin Chinese|Mandarin]] and [[Cantonese]] readings.{{sfn|Vogelsang|2021|pp=51–52}}

=== Loangraphs ===
The phenomenon of existing characters being adapted to write other words with similar pronunciations was necessary in the initial development of Chinese writing, and has remained common throughout its subsequent history. Some loangraphs ({{zhi|c=假借|p=jiǎjiè|l=borrowing}}) are introduced to represent words previously lacking a written form—this is often the case with abstract grammatical particles such as {{Linktext|之|lang=zh}} and {{Linktext|其|lang=zh}}.{{sfn|Qiu|2000|pp=261–265}} The process of characters being borrowed as loangraphs should not be conflated with the distinct process of semantic extension, where a word acquires additional senses, which often remain written with the same character. As both processes often result in a single character form being used to write several distinct meanings, loangraphs are often misidentified as being the result of semantic extension, and vice versa.{{sfn|Qiu|2000|pp=273–274, 302}}

Loangraphs are also used to write words borrowed from other languages, such as the Buddhist terminology introduced to China in antiquity, as well as contemporary non-Chinese words and names. For example, each character in the name {{zhc|c=加拿大|p=Jiānádà|l=Canada}} is often used as a loangraph for its respective syllable. However, the barrier between a character's pronunciation and meaning is never total; when transcribing into Chinese, loangraphs are often chosen deliberately as to create certain connotations. This is regularly done with corporate brand names—for example, [[Coca-Cola]]'s Chinese name is {{zhc|s=可口可乐|t=可口可樂|p=Kěkǒu Kělè|l=delicious enjoyable}}.{{sfn|Taylor|Taylor|2014|pp=30–32}}{{sfn|Ramsey|1987|p=60}}{{sfn|Gnanadesikan|2011|p=61}}

=== Signs ===
Some characters and components are pure [[sign (semiotics)|signs]], with meanings merely stemming from their having a fixed and distinct form. Basic examples of pure signs are found with [[Chinese numerals|the numerals]] beyond four, e.g. {{zhc|c=五|l=five}} and {{zhc|c=八|l=eight}}, whose forms do not give visual hints to the quantities they represent.{{sfnm|Qiu|2000|1p=168|Norman|1988|2p=60}}

=== Traditional ''<span lang="zh-Latn">Shuowen Jiezi</span>'' classification ===
The ''{{tlit|zh|[[Shuowen Jiezi]]}}'' is a character dictionary authored {{cx|100&nbsp;CE}} by the scholar [[Xu Shen]]. In its postface, Xu analyses what he sees as all the methods by which characters are created. Later authors iterated upon Xu's analysis, developing a categorization scheme known as the {{zhl|s=六书|t=六書|p=liùshū|l=six writings}}, which identifies every character with one of six categories that had previously been mentioned in the ''{{tlit|zh|Shuowen Jiezi}}''. For nearly two millennia, this scheme was the primary framework for character analysis used throughout the Sinosphere.{{sfnm|Norman|1988|1pp=67–69|Handel|2019|2p=48}} Xu based most of his analysis on examples of Qin seal script that were written down several centuries before his time—these were usually the oldest specimens available to him, though he stated he was aware of the existence of even older forms.{{sfn|Norman|1988|pp=170–171}} The first five categories are pictographs, indicatives, compound ideographs, phono-semantic compounds, and loangraphs. The sixth category is given by Xu as {{zhc|c=轉注|p=zhuǎnzhù|l=reversed and refocused}}; however, its definition is unclear, and it is generally disregarded by modern scholars.{{sfn|Handel|2019|pp=48–49}}

Modern scholars agree that the theory presented in the ''{{tlit|zh|Shuowen Jiezi}}'' is problematic, failing to fully capture the nature of Chinese writing, both in the present, as well as at the time Xu was writing.{{sfnm|Qiu|2000|1pp=153–154, 161|Norman|1988|2p=170}} Traditional Chinese lexicography as embodied in the ''{{tlit|zh|Shuowen Jiezi}}'' has suggested implausible etymologies for some characters.{{sfnm|Qiu|2013|1pp=102–108|Norman|1988|2p=69}} Moreover, several categories are considered to be ill-defined—for example, it is unclear whether characters like {{zhc|c=大|l=large}} should be classified as pictographs or indicatives.{{sfn|Qiu|2000|p=154}} However, awareness of the 'six writings' model has remained a common component of character literacy, and often serves as a tool for students memorizing characters.{{sfn|Handel|2019|p=43}}