Why do Chinese characters have simple forms (简体字) and full forms (繁體字)?
There have always been various forms of characters, some more complex than others. For example, 岩 yán 'rock' has also been written 嵒, 嵓, 碞, 巖, 巗, and even 礹; now these are all generally considered "variant" forms. But if 礹 were commonly used, then presumably 礹 would be considered the "full" form and 岩 would be considered the "simple" form. (Which form is the oldest? Maybe 嵒.)
Some simple forms are older than the corresponding complex or "full" forms.
从 is older than 從 (cóng 'follow')
网 is older than 網 (wǎng 'net')
云 is older than 雲 (yún 'cloud')
与 is older than 與 (yǔ 'and')
气 is older than 氣 (qì 'vital energy')
复 is older than 復 (fù 'return')
制 is older than 製 (zhì 'make')
号 is older than 號 (hào 'name')
In each of the above examples, the full form was created by adding parts to the simple form. So it's misleading to call these full forms "traditional", and the simple forms "simplified". In these cases it would be more accurate to call the simple forms "traditional", and the full forms "complexified"! The reasons for complexification are themselves complex; parts may have been added to characters both for clarification and for ornamentation.
There are also many cases where a simple form and a full form have co-existed for ages.
无 and 無 (wú 'without') may be equally old
异 and 異 (yì 'different') may be equally old
弃 and 棄 (qì 'abandon') may be equally old
凭 and 憑 (píng 'lean on') may be equally old
万 and 萬 (wàn 'ten thousand') may be equally old
个 and 個 and 箇 (gè 'piece') may be equally old
丰 and 豐 (fēng 'abundance') may be equally old
Nevertheless, the most common relationship between simple and full forms, is that the simple form came about by simplifying the full form. Look at the history of mǎ 'horse':
(There are the same pictures in https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/馬)
The oracle bone character on the left is a picture of a horse. The full form 馬 is already simplified, the simple form 马 even more so. This happened, obviously, because people wanted to write quickly. Artistic considerations also influenced simplification. The greatest calligrapher of all time is said to be 王羲之 Wáng Xīzhī (321-379 A.D.), who excelled in many styles, including the fast abbreviated cursive script known as 草书 cǎoshū "grass writing". Grass writing produced many simplified forms, such as:
见 from 見 (jiàn 'see')
东 from 東 (dōng 'east')
学 from 學 (xué 'learn')
门 from 門 (mén 'door')
为 from 為 and 爲 (wèi 'for')
传 from 傳 (chuán 'convey')
说 from 說 (shuō 'speak')
书 from 書 (shū 'book')
经 from 經 (jīng 'go through')
来 from 來 (lái 'come')
乐 from 樂 (yuè 'music')
Grass writing was used for artistic and practical purposes, and even diligently studied by emperors; but it was never standardized.
The Chinese imperial civil service examinations must have strongly influenced the standardization of characters. For thirteen centuries, until 1905, the examinations were the means by which success or (more often) failure was decided for men hoping to join the ruling class. Passing the examinations depended on memorization of the Confucian classics, and on conformity to orthodox ideology. The influence on writing must have been essentially conservative, but possibly with some bias in favor of complex characters. A historian describes the grading of the palace examinations:
"Inasmuch as the papers were literary exercises, the grading could not be completely just. In search of objective standards, readers shifted their attention from examining the content of the answers to concentrating upon style, and finally upon calligraphy. Furthermore, calligraphy itself was not valued aesthetically: the 'square writing' style, bereft of all individuality, in which the characters were made to resemble those used in printer's type, inevitably received good marks because it was pleasing to look at. If famous calligraphers, such as Wang Hsi-chih [王羲之 Wáng Xīzhī] (321-79), had tried to take the palace examination during the Ch'ing dynasty [清朝 Qīngcháo 1644-1911], they would have failed it completely" (Miyazaki, page 81).
The connection between literacy and political power has profoundly shaped Chinese culture, and must have been a key factor in the development of the written language. Still, literacy was not limited to the elite. "Indeed, available information indicates that a relatively high degree of functional literacy, which provided the foundation for complex political, social, and economic institutions, existed well before the Ch'ing" (Rawski, page 5).
The Chinese invented the printing press more than a thousand years ago. Books were widely available and inexpensive. "The printed editions of vernacular fiction extant from the Sung [宋 Sòng] and Yüan [元 Yuán] periods, with their copious use of illustrations and simplified characters, must have attracted a fairly wide readership" (Rawski, page 112). Since all fiction was officially regarded as indecent anyway, there was a relaxed attitude towards using "vulgar" characters (俗字) in these publications.
In print (not only cursive handwriting), simple forms such as 声 (for 聲), 坚 (for 堅), 壮 (for 壯) were already current at least 800 years ago. They were included in dictionaries such as 改併四聲篇海, compiled in 1212 A.D.
In the twentieth century, with the abolition of the imperial civil service examinations in 1905, and the democratic revolution in 1911, it became possible for intellectuals to call for standardization of simple form characters. In the 1950's a new standard was created by the Language Reform Committee in Mainland China. Most of the simple forms included had long traditions of popular use; probably some new simplifications were also made. For example, 业 (for 業) and 厅 (for 廳) may be modern innovations (I haven't found any evidence about their origins). The standard was adopted by the government of Singapore, but it was outlawed on Taiwan, and mostly ignored in Hong Kong and elsewhere. In Japan, simple forms (like 学 and 当) had already been standardized independantly (some Japanese forms are more or less simple than the Mainland Chinese forms).
Many people have very strong preferences for either simple or full form characters. Not surprisingly, people tend to prefer whichever is most familiar to them, though some non-conformists are exceptions to that rule. Simple forms are undeniably faster to write, and maybe easier to learn. Full forms are generally regarded as more attractive (except when printed illegibly small). It's a basic fact of Chinese calligraphy, that the simpler a character is, the more difficult it is to write that character beautifully. Complex characters look nice as long as they're neat, but simple characters often look clumsy.
-Tom Bishop, Wenlin Institute, Inc.
---------------------------------
References:
Miyazaki: CHINA'S EXAMINATION HELL, by Ichisada Miyazaki, translated by Conrad Schirokauer, published by John Weatherhill, Inc., New York, 1976. (Originally published in Japanese in 1963 by Chūō Kōron-sha under the title Kakyo: Chūgoku no Shiken Jigoku.)
Rawski: EDUCATION AND POPULAR LITERACY IN CH'ING CHINA, by Evelyn Sakakida Rawski, The University of Michigan Press, 1979.
