Memorizing vocabulary at the advanced level

[songlei]

great to see so many replies! i think in when we distinguish between active and passive vocabulary, it is interesting to point out the cultural gap in the way the chinese and we use language. i don't want to say anything really profound and philosophical here; it's just that it strikes me that when chinese describe things, at least in writing, they seem to have slightly different priorities than western people do. maybe it's because of the things chinese grammar allows you to do that english grammar doesn't, and vice versa, or because of a bigger focus of chinese on relations and context. i think it's also largely due to their 'burden of history', the fact that the old is perceived to be profound, and therefore using fixed classical expressions increases your credibility. anyway, the point i want to get to is that when you are reading chinese texts originally written in chinese, your main priority ought to be to understand them passively, whereas your active vocabulary studies should be more focused on what you want to be able to say in chinese. for communication to be optimal, you need to be able to express your thoughts well, as well as be able to understand the other party's communications to you clearly. when you watch a tv show or read a chinese novel, you might at some points, if you're anything like me, feel slightly annoyed or disgusted at the romantic and high sounding expressions being used. this is something you have to get through, sure, but you don't really have to turn such expressions into active vocabulary, unless you want to attempt to transform who you are. for active use, it's really a matter of taste. for passive use, it's a matter of rolling with the punches.

this is just one way of seeing things. surely its necessary and enriching to be able to incorporate something from chinese culture of expression into your use of language, this is part of the attraction of learning such an alien language. but it's also an asset to be able to communicate in chinese with a more western mindset, where the priorities lay in more precise reasoning. this is actually a distinction feng youlan makes betwen chinese and western philosophy; that western thought was traditionally more focused on rationalist reasoning, while chinese thought focused on getting the point across with allusions and analogies. i guess that's why i find modern scientific articles written in chinese a breeze to read compared to other materials, since these scholars have adopted a western style of reasoning...

[songlei]

for those interested, here's the bit by feng youlan on the difference on language use between western and chinese philosophers (i underlined the bits about logical reasoning vs the use of allegories):

中国哲学家表达自己思想的方式

初学中国哲学的西方学生经常遇到两个困难。一个当然是语言障碍；另一个是中国哲学家表达他们的思想的特殊方式。我先讲后一个困难。

人们开始读中国哲学著作时，第一个印象也许是，这些言论和文章都很简短，没有联系。打开《论语》，你会看到每章只有廖廖数语，而且上下章几乎没有任何联系。打开《老子》，你会看到全书只约有五千宇，不长于杂志上的一篇文章；可是从中却能见到老子哲学的全体。习惯于精密推理和详细论证的学生，要了解这些中国哲学到底在说什么，简直感到茫然。他会倾向于认为，这些思想本身就是没有内部联系吧。如果当真如此，那还有什么中国哲学。因为没有联系的思想是不值得名为哲学的。

可以这么说：中国哲学家的言论、文章没有表面上的联系，是由于这些言论、文章都不是正式的哲学著作。照中国的传统，研究哲学不是一种职业。每个人都要学哲学，正像西方人都要进教堂。学哲学的目的，是使人作为人能够成为人，而不是成为某种人。其他的学习(不是学哲学)是使人能够成为某种人，即有一定职业的人。所以过去没有职业哲学家；非职业哲学家也就不必有正式的哲学著作。在中国，没有正式的哲学著作的哲学家，比有正式的哲学著作的哲学家多得多。若想研究这些人的哲学，只有看他们的语录或写给学生、朋友的信。这些信写于他一生的各个时期，语录也不只是一人所记。所以它们不相联系，甚至互相矛盾，这是可以预料的。

以上所说可以解释为什么有些哲学家的言论、文章没有联系：还不能解释它们为什么简短。有些哲学著作，像孟子的和荀子的，还是有系统的推理和论证。但是与西方哲学著作相比，它们还是不够明晰。这是由于中国哲学家惯于用名言隽语、比喻例证的形式表达自己的思想。《老子》全书都是名言隽语，《庄子》各篇大都充满比喻例证。这是很明显的。但是，甚至在上面提到的孟子、荀子著作，与西方哲学著作相比，还是有过多的名言隽语、比喻例证。名言隽语一定很简短；比喻例证一定无联系。

因而名言隽语、比喻例证就不够明晰。它们明晰不足而暗示有余，前者从后者得到补偿。当然，明晰与暗示是不可得兼的。一种表达，越是明晰，就越少暗示；正如一种表达，越是散文化，就越少诗意。正因为中国哲学家的言论、文章不很明晰，所以它们所暗示的几乎是无穷的。

富于暗示，而不是明晰得一览无遗，是一切中国艺术的理想，诗歌、绘画以及其他无不如此。拿诗来说，诗人想要传达的往往不是诗中直接说了的，而是诗中没有说的。照中国的传统，好诗“言有尽而意无穷。”所以聪明的读者能读出诗的言外之意，能读出书的“行间”之意。中国艺术这样的理想，也反映在中国哲学家表达自己思想的方式里。

中国艺术的理想，不是没有它的哲学背景的。《庄子》的《外物》篇说：“筌者所以在鱼，得鱼而忘筌。蹄者所以在兔，得兔而忘蹄。言者所以在意，得意而忘言。吾安得夫忘言之人而与之言哉！”与忘言之人言，是不言之言。《庄子》中谈到两位圣人相见而不言，因为“目击而道存矣”(《田子方》)。照道家说，道不可道，只可暗示。言透露道，是靠言的暗示，不是靠言的固定的外延和内涵。言一旦达到了目的，就该忘掉。既然再不需要了，何必用言来自寻烦恼呢？诗的文字和音韵是如此，画的线条和颜色也是如此。

公元三、四世纪，中国最有影响的哲学是“新道家”，史称玄学。那时候有部书名叫《世说新语》，记载汉晋以来名士们的佳话和韵事。说的话大都很简短，有的只有几个字。这部书《文学》篇说，有位大官向一个哲学家(这位大官本人也是哲学家)问老、庄与孔子的异同。哲学家回答说：“将无同？”意思是：莫不是同吗？大官非常喜欢这个回答，马上任命这个哲学家为他的秘书，当时称为“掾”，由于这个回答只有三个字，世称“三语掾”。他不能说老、庄与孔子毫不相同，也不能说他们一切相同。所以他以问为答，的确是很妙的回答。《论语》、《老子》中简短的言论，都不单纯是一些结论，而推出这些结论的前提都给丢掉了。它们都是富于暗示的名言隽语。暗示才耐人寻味。你可以把你从《老子》中发现的思想全部收集起来，写成一部五万字甚至五十万宇的新书。不管写得多么好，它也不过是一部新书。它可以与《老子》原书对照着读，也可以对人们理解原书大有帮助，但是它永远不能取代原书。

我已经提到过郭象，他是《庄子》的大注释家之一。他的注，本身就是道家文献的经典。他把《庄子》的比喻、隐喻变成推理和论证，把《庄子》诗的语言翻成他自己的散文语言。他的文章比庄子的文章明晰多了。但是，庄子原文的暗示，郭象注的明晰，二者之中，哪个好些？人们仍然会这样问。后来有一位禅宗和尚说：“曾见郭象注庄子，识者云：却是庄子注郭象”(《大慧普觉禅师语录》卷二十二)。

[mikchen]

Hi,

I know the topic of the discussion is different, but this is the only way I have to get an answer from "very advanced level students". How many words are necessary to understand the main points (not everything in detail) in a newspaper or in TV news? 3000 words? 5000 words? I do not refer to the level where everything is clear in a text, but a level where I can get information I need from Chinese sources and do research in Chinese without using always the dictionary. In one word: The point where I can say that Chinese is one of my workable languages. I hope, and I think, 5000 words, but I'd like to know if my guess is right.

Thank you all!

[imron]

I'd say the answer is probably closer to 10,000 words, and 3,000-4,000 characters.

[gato]

The old HSK's vocab list had 9000 words. That is the minimum required for the advanced level test. The actual test has many words not in the vocab list, so I would consider the 9000 words on the HSK list to be a bare minimum needed for newspaper reading. You probably need quite a bit more than 10,000 to be able comprehend the news with ease.

2000 characters should be enough to be able to get the gist of newspaper article. With 3000 characters, you should be able to know almost every character in the article, though there may still be many words that you don't know.

[EDIT: Actually, the old HSK list has 9000 words, not 8000.]

[valikor]

It also depends on what you mean by "get information from Chinese sources" and "do [your] own research" without constantly using a dictionary.

I know 2500-3000 characters, probably 5000+ words, and I could probably get the key information out of a newspaper without using a dictionary, but it's sometimes difficult and I might miss some things.

If I was doing research in some scholarly sources, it might be very laborious, or maybe impossible for me.

[songlei]

to mikchen:

i think it's difficult to pinpoint in terms of vocabulary a stage in which you can more or less understand chinese. first of all, vocabulary is a tricky concept when it comes to chinese. and second, your ability to understand chinese depends on much more than vocabulary and knowledge of grammar alone. the reason i say vocabulary is a tricky concept is because, as we all know, the single character is an important unit of meaning in chinese language. although there are many vocabulary items in chinese best learned as fixed combinations (e.g. 国际化, 医院), i believe that at an intermediate stage it pays off in the long run to focus more on individual characters. learning individual characters, and knowing how they combine into different words , gives you a much more flexible and thorough understanding how chinese language can be used (pleco is good for looking up in which words and expressions a certain character is used). if you don't do this, you will end up confused about running into the 30th chinese word for "to change", or "circumstances". a better knowledge and feel for the individual characters that these words are composed of will allow you to understand their subtle differences in meaning better, as well as give you a stronger memory of the word itself. as for my second argument about what else is required for understanding chinese: i think context is everything. i'm not talking about adding-example-sentences-to-flashcards-context, i'm talking about experiencing-the-chinese-universe-context. i think the best way to do this is read about chinese thought and culture in secondary literature, as well as try to read classic stories in chinese, watch tv shows, get language partners etc. of course, the main driver of progress is cramming raw data, but this process needs to be mirrored by contextual input in order to really get what and why they are saying what they are saying. i am personally really lacking in this department, so it's what i'll be mainly working on in 2011. i hope this was useful to you. let us know how it's going!