Article published In: Written Language & Literacy
Vol. 16:1 (2013) ► pp.107–111
A note on Unger’s “What linguistic units do Chinese characters represent?”
Published online: 8 March 2013
https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.16.1.05spr
https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.16.1.05spr
Unger (2011) observes that Chinese characters do not observe a Zipfian distribution, and he uses this fact as evidence that Chinese characters do not represent words. He then goes on to suggest that they do not represent morphemes either. In this note I argue that Unger’s observation is neither new, nor is it necessary; and that, at least with respect to his claim about morphemes, it does not support the conclusion he wishes to make.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Osterkamp, Sven & Gordian Schreiber
2021. <Th>e ubi<qu>ity of polygra<ph>y and its significan<ce> for <th>e typology of <wr>iti<ng> systems. Written Language & Literacy 24:2 ► pp. 171 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.