Chinese Typography

[ahi]

Originally Posted by herbalist

That’s a law, not grammatical rules. In Hong Kong, we used to write our essays on grid papers, if starting the next line is a “,” or a “:”, I will put in the punctuation mark and not omit a space or two just to make sure that comma or colon does not occupy the start of a line. If however, I’ve forgotten to use the squiggly to underline book names or start a new paragraph, I would not be punctuating correctly. If I publish a book in China without following their rules, I probably ran afoul of their law but I still haven't committed any grammatical errors.

Typography/typographical not grammar/grammatical.

And while the referenced material may be a law, it would be arguably a case of a central authority (the PRC government) on a given language (simplified Chinese) prescribing rules of correct usage. This happens in most languages around the world... even if not usually in the form of explicit laws.

- Ahi

[LDBoblo]

Taiwanese larger-scale publishers usually add spacing between characters when justifying text. It's actually a pretty good method when not reading something visually structure-dependent, since the vertical format allows quite a few characters (42cpl in one trade-sized pb I checked). This only happens in lines with offending units like punctuation that would appear at the head of the following line, so the overall grid is maintained. I rarely see *literature* published in horizontal, and that includes translations of foreign books. For Chinese, and especially complex (traditional) characters, I think the most pleasing results almost always come from vertical layout.

[lionfish]

Originally Posted by herbalist

Well, is your copy of Louis Cha’s novel layout in a grid? Or is the spacing between the characters adjusted ever so imperceptably?


So the Chinese government actually promulgated a set of rules regarding published books in mainland China? That’s a law, not grammatical rules. In Hong Kong, we used to write our essays on grid papers, if starting the next line is a “,” or a “:”, I will put in the punctuation mark and not omit a space or two just to make sure that comma or colon does not occupy the start of a line. If however, I’ve forgotten to use the squiggly to underline book names or start a new paragraph, I would not be punctuating correctly. If I publish a book in China without following their rules, I probably ran afoul of their law but I still haven't committed any grammatical errors.

The text of those books is fully-justified with variable spaces, though imperceptible, between characters. They are typeset by hand so I think it won't take too much more time to do that. But in a computerized world, if your word processor or ebook reader (like Sony's LRF renderer) doesn't support it, there won't be too much one can do.

I think the gridded papers you mentioned are mainly used by Chinese students or writers so that their teachers or editors can count the number of characters written easily. But usually they won't be the final product.

I am afraid these are more like grammatical rules than law and I can't imagine the PRC Government will punish you for violating them. But since there are specific rules set by the Government, most people will obey.

I think most governments won't bother to set rules in that microscopic level. I guess, say in western countries, not starting a line with a comma etc is like a tradition or a consensus.

[Polyglot27]

Originally Posted by ahi

The existence of poorly typeset books is no proof that typography (or typographic correctness) are non-existent concepts.

Also, LDBoblo did not say English typographic rules applied to Chinese--but rather that Chinese, along with all other written languages, had typographic rules of its own that higher quality publications would strive to obey in order to maximize readability.

- Ahi

Thanks Ahi, for bringing up this topic.
I have worked in publishing and can say that though unwritten, it is understood that printed lines should not begin with a punctuation mark.

Even though Eric does not seem to mind, I find it jarring to see poorly typeset Chinese text with commas and full stops beginning a line.

Curiously, Japanese publications do not seem to have this problem at all. When a punctuation mark threatens to begin a line, they either use strict justified text and squeeze the punctuation mark within the margin of the previous line (thus breaking the grid), or they put it outside the margin (thus keeping the grid) and avoid it becoming the first character on the next line.

Thank you, Lionfish, for digging out the Chinese government rules on typesetting. I also agree with your other comments which I find very useful.

[LDBoblo]

Oh and Ahi, I'm curious if you've tested out different Chinese typefaces for the 505. I don't have any Ming/Song fonts that look halfway decent on the reader, and the only gothic variant I've tried that seems to look OK is JhengHei in the Microsoft pack. If you know of any that seem to render well on e-ink, let me know.

[herbalist]

Originally Posted by ahi

Typography/typographical not grammar/grammatical.

And while the referenced material may be a law, it would be arguably a case of a central authority (the PRC government) on a given language (simplified Chinese) prescribing rules of correct usage. This happens in most languages around the world... even if not usually in the form of explicit laws.

- Ahi

Yes, typographical error if I were publishing.

Lionfish, it is amazing that all those volumes novels were typeset manually.

I certainly hope that the PRC doesn't micromanage to that degree...but honestly they have been very poor custodians of Chinese culture and language. Had it not been for the computer revolution, the PRC government would be pushing for the adoption of pinyin using English alphabets to replace the Chinese written language. Not even the simplified script would remain. But I am getting off topic...

[Brainiac 5]

Originally Posted by ahi

Are there any English language books that you would recommend regarding modern (and perhaps also classical) Asian typesetting... and... whatever the equivalent would be called when no mechanical press is used.

I see I'm late to this discussion, but I do know of one English-language book that discusses this: CJKV Information Processing by Ken Lunde. There is a "Typography" chapter that includes a discussion of avoiding starting/ending a line with certain characters, using pretty much the methods people have mentioned here. It's only a small part of the book, but it does go over the basic sets of rules you can use.

[Jellby]

That book can be partially read on Google Books.

[ericshliao]

Originally Posted by Polyglot27

Even though Eric does not seem to mind, I find it jarring to see poorly typeset Chinese text with commas and full stops beginning a line.

It's not that only I don't seem to mind. It's that the people using the same language - traditional Chinese don't mind it.

I want to remind people who are used to read page layout following widely accepted punctuation rules of western language, that although it's quite common sense that comma should not occur in the start of a line, there seems no such common sense for people using traditional Chinese when they are reading traditional Chinese text. For the western world, that common sense is constructed in these hundreds of years, I suppose, but for traditional Chinese, it's still not a common sense or unbreakable rule, since we use standard punctuations in text only in these 80 years. For western people, maybe they will think it ill-formated, looks bad or un-acceptable fault or anything else, but that's not the case for people using traditional Chinese. That means, maybe you judge on a ill-formated traditional Chinese publication based on your own standards, not the standards used by the people who really use the language and read the publication in their daily life.

[LDBoblo]

Originally Posted by ericshliao

It's not that only I don't seem to mind. It's that the people using the same language - traditional Chinese don't mind it.

I want to remind people who are used to read page layout following widely accepted punctuation rules of western language, that although it's quite common sense that comma should not occur in the start of a line, there seems no such common sense for people using traditional Chinese when they are reading traditional Chinese text. For the western world, that common sense is constructed in these hundreds of years, I suppose, but for traditional Chinese, it's still not a common sense or unbreakable rule, since we use standard punctuations in text only in these 80 years. For western people, maybe they will think it ill-formated, looks bad or un-acceptable fault or anything else, but that's not the case for people using traditional Chinese. That means, maybe you judge on a ill-formated traditional Chinese publication based on your own standards, not the standards used by the people who really use the language and read the publication in their daily life.

I use Traditional Chinese and so does the rest of the island around me. Virtually all modern professional publication uses typographic rules for Chinese. There are exceptions to this in just about every country and language, but again the constructs and methods exist.

Just because the average Joe does not know anything about it or care does not make typography any less valid. Japan has been infinitely more progressive than the Chinese world in terms of typography, but it is a feature of good Chinese printing (and that includes Traditional Chinese) today to be typeset by conventions that have been in place for some time.

I'm not sure I understand why you even contribute to this thread though, since you just seem to resist typographic conventions on the extremely flawed logic of "Traditional Chinese users don't use it".

[ericshliao]

Originally Posted by LDBoblo

I'm not sure I understand why you even contribute to this thread though, since you just seem to resist typographic conventions on the extremely flawed logic of "Traditional Chinese users don't use it".

I contribute to this thread because I know that I don't see any such typographic conventions for traditional Chinese in my life. And I assume that 95 percent or more people don't know the so-called "convention". I htink that "convention" should be known and accepted by most people, when such "convention" only exists in so few people's mind, is that still a convention?

Besides, I also don't see why you still contribute to this thread. For me, you seems not a professional, either. At least, you never wrote any formal academic writing, that's why you don't know there is no such rule or convention in traditional Chinese "high level" academic writing.

If the prerequisite to participate in the thread is being able to start personal attack or judging on people who has different point of view, then I will admit that I should not participate in such thread.

[LDBoblo]

Originally Posted by ericshliao

I contribute to this thread because I know that I don't see any such typographic conventions for traditional Chinese in my life. And I assume that 95 percent or more people don't know the so-called "convention". I htink that "convention" should be known and accepted by most people, when such "convention" only exists in so few people's mind, is that still a convention?

Besides, I also don't see why you still contribute to this thread. For me, you seems not a professional, either. At least, you never wrote any formal academic writing, that's why you don't know there is no such rule or convention in traditional Chinese "high level" academic writing.

You've never seen it in your life? And you still think that scholarly writing style has something to do with formal typography? Your insinuations about my writing background are false, but you're right that I'm not a professional typesetter. Try not to make false red herrings though in order to promote your point, especially when you try to approach it from an "academic" point of view.

[ericshliao]

Originally Posted by LDBoblo

Try not to make false red herrings though in order to promote your point, especially when you try to approach it from an "academic" point of view.

I never wanted to promote my point, because I don't have any point of view on this issue. I just want to express the reality. My academic example is used to express the reality. Maybe the reality that I expressed will piss somebody off, but that's still the reality that I think true.
If I have any point of view on this issue, then it should be that whether you call it rules, standards, or conventions, it is meanless when only so few poeple know it or accept it.

[LDBoblo]

Originally Posted by ericshliao

I never wanted to promote my point, because I don't have any point of view on this issue. I just want to express the reality. My academic example is used to express the reality. Maybe the reality that I expressed will piss somebody off, but that's still the reality that I think true.
If I have any point of view on this issue, then it should be that whether you call it rules, standards, or conventions, it is meanless when only so few poeple know it or accept it.

The only people who know much about it in English speaking countries are book designers, publishers, and hobbyist typographers. They are still called rules, norms, and conventions.

[ericshliao]

Originally Posted by LDBoblo

The only people who know much about it in English speaking countries are book designers, publishers, and hobbyist typographers. They are still called rules, norms, and conventions.

For western langaues, I also call it rules, norms, or conventions. We have nothing different on this. Why it's rules, norms, or conventions for western languages? Because most peopel using that language accept it. People can learn the rules, norms, conventions in school, from reference books or writing guide, or the associations of publishing. Even a foreigner (for western language) like me know the punctuation rules. I don't know exactly when I perceived it, I just knew it during learning English.

Why I doubt it rules, norms, or conventions for traditional Chinese? Because for traditional Chinese I don't see the same condition as western laguage. Teachers, writing guide for Chinese writing do not consider it rules. If association of publishers for traditional Chinese has such norms, that's nice, but that's not what I know of.

I am not opposed to making it rules, norms, or conventions in the future, but before it's considered rules, norms, or conventions, we must have many people accept it. For the time being, we don't have the qualified conditions. That's why I doubt it rules, norms, or conventions.

You used "resist" to describe me. When you used that word, you revealed that you "insist" on something. In fact, on this issue, there is nothing to insist or resist, because reality is reality, only that reality may differ for time and place.