Recent from talks
Neolithic symbols in China
Knowledge base stats:
Talk channels stats:
Members stats:
Neolithic symbols in China
Beginning in the latter half of the 20th century, artifacts bearing markings dating to the Neolithic period have been unearthed at several archeological sites in China, mostly in the Yellow River valley. These symbols, collectively called Táo Wén (陶文 'pottery scripts'), have been compared to the oracle bone script — the earliest known forms of Chinese characters, first attested in the late 13th century BCE — and have been cited by some as evidence that Chinese writing has existed in some form for over six millennia. However, the Neolithic symbols have only been found in small numbers, and do not appear to go beyond pictorial techniques, as is required to obtain a true writing system representing spoken language.
Small collections of symbols have been found at several archeological sites dating to the Neolithic period in what is now China. The symbols are either pictorial in nature, or are simple geometric figures, and have either been incised into or drawn onto artifacts—mostly pottery, but sometimes also turtle shells, animal bones or other items made of bone or jade. Sites include those identified with the Yangshao, Liangzhu, Majiayao and Longshan cultures.
There is no scholarly consensus whether any of these markings constitute a primitive writing system or proto-writing, or are merely a set of symbols used for other purposes, such as identification. Some believe that Neolithic symbols are part of an incipient semiotic system that eventually led to the development of the mature Chinese writing system.
Others have characterized the markings as directly ancestral to modern Chinese writing, citing resemblances between individual symbols and individual characters of the later oracle bone script as evidence. Sinologist William G. Boltz points out that such comparisons are "notoriously risky and inconclusive" when based on such primitive scratch marks rather than on similarity in function. Boltz adds:
"There does not seem to be any meaningful order of repetition or concatenation that would lead us to suspect anything more than that these are random and largely unorganized, unsystematic markings."
In general, the Neolithic symbols which have been unearthed to date are found in isolated use (as would be expected with ownership marks or clan symbols) rather than in sequences consistent with representation of the spoken language, and there is no evidence of processes fundamental to the beginnings of a true, useful writing system such as phonetic loan usage. Qiu Xigui explains:
Only when symbols ... are consciously used to record words used to form sentences is there a true sign that the development of script has begun.
Evidence is still scant, even when considering evidence dating to the early Shang period:
Hub AI
Neolithic symbols in China AI simulator
(@Neolithic symbols in China_simulator)
Neolithic symbols in China
Beginning in the latter half of the 20th century, artifacts bearing markings dating to the Neolithic period have been unearthed at several archeological sites in China, mostly in the Yellow River valley. These symbols, collectively called Táo Wén (陶文 'pottery scripts'), have been compared to the oracle bone script — the earliest known forms of Chinese characters, first attested in the late 13th century BCE — and have been cited by some as evidence that Chinese writing has existed in some form for over six millennia. However, the Neolithic symbols have only been found in small numbers, and do not appear to go beyond pictorial techniques, as is required to obtain a true writing system representing spoken language.
Small collections of symbols have been found at several archeological sites dating to the Neolithic period in what is now China. The symbols are either pictorial in nature, or are simple geometric figures, and have either been incised into or drawn onto artifacts—mostly pottery, but sometimes also turtle shells, animal bones or other items made of bone or jade. Sites include those identified with the Yangshao, Liangzhu, Majiayao and Longshan cultures.
There is no scholarly consensus whether any of these markings constitute a primitive writing system or proto-writing, or are merely a set of symbols used for other purposes, such as identification. Some believe that Neolithic symbols are part of an incipient semiotic system that eventually led to the development of the mature Chinese writing system.
Others have characterized the markings as directly ancestral to modern Chinese writing, citing resemblances between individual symbols and individual characters of the later oracle bone script as evidence. Sinologist William G. Boltz points out that such comparisons are "notoriously risky and inconclusive" when based on such primitive scratch marks rather than on similarity in function. Boltz adds:
"There does not seem to be any meaningful order of repetition or concatenation that would lead us to suspect anything more than that these are random and largely unorganized, unsystematic markings."
In general, the Neolithic symbols which have been unearthed to date are found in isolated use (as would be expected with ownership marks or clan symbols) rather than in sequences consistent with representation of the spoken language, and there is no evidence of processes fundamental to the beginnings of a true, useful writing system such as phonetic loan usage. Qiu Xigui explains:
Only when symbols ... are consciously used to record words used to form sentences is there a true sign that the development of script has begun.
Evidence is still scant, even when considering evidence dating to the early Shang period: