It's not just the example. Your entire point is ehrm, incorrect. Chinese uses radicals and entire characters to serve as the prefix/suffix. It's perfectly capable of performing character mashups or other mutations to create slang, and there are spontaneous word generations all the time... I mean how else could new ideas be expressed?
>Should probably also bring up the fact that acronyms are near impossible in Chinese, at least in it's strict sense. I like Japanese for the fact that both the language and the culture is willing to evolve.
Lol wut. There is some interesting bias and stereotyping going on here, but I find this so novel and shocking that I'm unable to respond.
> It's perfectly capable of performing character mashups or other mutations to create slang
Except that you can't just "create" new characters on a computer, as opposed to alphabetic languages, where creating a new word on a computer is trivial.
I think he means the written language doesn't work well for acronyms and other shortening. Each character is already so much work. You could never get words like SNAFU.
Chinese shortens words by replacing two-character words with one-character ones, e.g. 北京天津高速铁路 (Beijing-Tianjin High-speed Railway) is abbreviated to 京津高铁 (lit. "Jing-Jin High-Rail).
Yes, but that is still 4 characters = lots of strokes. Also, not everything can be reliably shortened this way. You can't get the kind of shortening you can with things like "TNT", "DNA". And what about when there are no two character words to be shortenened? Like WTF.
>Should probably also bring up the fact that acronyms are near impossible in Chinese, at least in it's strict sense. I like Japanese for the fact that both the language and the culture is willing to evolve.
Lol wut. There is some interesting bias and stereotyping going on here, but I find this so novel and shocking that I'm unable to respond.