¹ Some authors–especially linguists—tend to prefer such terms as ‘graph’, ‘sinograph’, or ‘sinogram’ to ‘character’. However, while they may be more accurate in certain senses, ‘character’ seems more suitable for the purpose of this article, considering that the term ‘character amnesia’ has already been established as the English label for this phenomenon. Some scholars even use ‘sinograph’ and ‘character’ interchangeably. See, for example, Bachner, A. (2014). Beyond Sinology: Chinese Writing and the Scripts of Culture. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 55, 88Google Scholar; Tsu, J. (2011). Sound and Script in Chinese Diaspora. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, p. 223Google Scholar.

² See, for example, Xu, C. [许承宁] (2010). ‘“Tibiwangzi” wenhua de jinbu haishi daotui’ [‘提笔忘字’文化的进步还是倒退], Shenzhou 9, pp. 29–31Google Scholar; Mair, V. (22 July 2010). ‘Character Amnesia’, Language Log: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2473, [accessed 27 August 2018].

³ Cameron, D. (2012). Verbal Hygiene. London: RoutledgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar, p. vii. Another definition of ‘verbal hygiene’ is ‘the urge to meddle in matters of language’ or ‘more precisely, “verbal hygiene” describes the set of normative metalinguistic practices that arise from this urge to meddle’, ibid., pp. xix, 265.

⁴ For some examples of large-scale empirical surveys see, for example, Gottlieb, N. (2012). Language Policy in Japan: The Challenge of Change. New York: Cambridge University Press, p. 106Google Scholar; Nihon Nikkei Shimbun (20 September 2012). ‘Kanji “kakenakunatta” 6wari IT fukyū de kyūzō’ [漢字「書けなくなった」 6 割 I T 普及で急増]: http://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXNASDG2004I_Q2A920C1CR8000, [accessed 27 August 2018]; Xu, Y. [徐艳平] (2011). ‘Muzhi shidai daxuesheng shuxie nengli de peiyang’ [拇指时代大学生书写能力的培养], Neimenggu shifandaxue xuebao (jiaoyu kexue ban) 24 (9), pp. 67–69, p. 67Google Scholar; You, C. [游传耀] (2007). ‘Xinxi shidai dui hanzi de tiaozhan’ [信息时代对汉字的挑战], Journal of Fujian Institute of Socialism 62 (1), pp. 45–50Google Scholar; Yomiuri Shimbun (30 September 2012). ‘Kokugo senron chōsa: kanji kakuryoku no teika ga ki ni naru’ [国語世論調査: 漢字書く力の低下が気になる]; Zheng, K. [郑可春] (2012). ‘Hanzi weiji’ [汉字危机], Zhongguo gangbi shufa 11, pp. 4–7, p. 4Google Scholar. For examples of empirical data on a smaller scale, see, for instance, Aoki, Y. (13 December 2015). ‘Can Japanese Actually Write Japanese Kanji?’: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJNxPRBvRQg, [accessed 27 August 2018, online video]; Du, Y. [杜洋洋] and Zhang, W. [张雯婧] (2013). ‘“Tibiwangzi” cheng tongbing hanzi shuxie weiji gai ruhe pojie’ [‘提笔忘字’ 成通病 汉字书写危机该如何破解], Shenghuo jiaoyu 11, pp. 5–8, p. 5Google Scholar; Hatton, C. (27 August 2014). ‘When Chinese Children Forget how to Write’, BBC News: http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-28599392, [accessed 27 August 2018]; Lu, Y. [路勇] (1 December 2006). ‘Ganga’ [尴尬], Zhongguo jingji shibao: http://jjsb.cet.com.cn/show_77174.html, [accessed 27 August 2018]. Nishimoto, K. and J. Wei (2015). ‘G-IM: An Input Method of Chinese Characters for Character Amnesia Prevention’, ACHI 2015: The Eighth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions, 22–27 February 2015, Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 118–124, p. 118.

⁵ Mair, ‘Character Amnesia’.

⁶ Lee, J. 8. (1 February 2001). ‘In China, Computer Use Erodes Traditional Handwriting, Stirring a Cultural Debate’, New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/01/technology/01LOST.html?pagewanted=all, [accessed 27 August 2018]. Similar terms, such as ‘kanji amnesia’ were used in previous publications, for example, Schreiber, M. (18 March 2009). ‘Calligraphy Still Holds the Key to Mastering Kanji’, Japan Times: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2009/03/18/language/calligraphy-still-holds-the-key-to-mastering-kanji/#.V2gv_PkrJhE, [accessed 27 August 2018]. However, Mair himself notes that he ‘was probably already using the expression “character amnesia” from around that time [2001], if not before’: see Mair, V. (22 April 2016). ‘Character Amnesia Redux’, Language Log: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=25291, [accessed 29 August 2018].

⁷ Wikipedia. 2016. ‘Character Amnesia’: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_amnesia, [accessed 29 August 2018].

⁸ For example, Yan, W. [严文井] (1957). ‘Yige waihang de yijian’ [一个外行的意见], Wenzi gaige 8, pp. 10–11, p. 10Google Scholar.

⁹ In order to get a sense of the magnitude of the Chinese (major) part of this discourse, search engines such as Google might offer some insights. For example, as of 2 January 2017, Googling the term ‘提笔忘字’ (‘tibiwangzi’ in quotation marks) produces ‘about’ 171,000 results, while the term ‘汉字危机’ (‘Chinese characters crisis’) produces ‘about’ 18,200. The popular Chinese search engine Baidu (百度) produces no fewer than 734,000 results for the query ‘提笔忘字’ and 98,400 results for ‘汉字危机’.

¹⁰ For example, Nishimoto and Wei, ‘G-IM’; Bai, S. (10 October 2013). ‘Hanzi Crisis’, Beijing Review: http://www.bjreview.com.cn/print/txt/2013-10/08/content_570986_3.htm, [accessed 27 August 2018].

¹¹ See Schreiber, ‘Calligraphy Still Holds the Key’; Wang, Y. [王永民] and Yang, T. [杨桃源] (9 August 2006). ‘Jingjue tibiwangzi he hanzi de shamohua’ [警觉提笔忘字和汉字的沙漠化], Xinlang caijing: http://finance.sina.com.cn/g/20060809/11502806043.shtml, [accessed 27 August 2018].

¹² See Du and Zhang, ‘Tibiwangzi’; Liu, M. [刘敏] (2013). ‘Hanzi weishenme you weiji’ [汉字为什么有危机], Jiaoshi bolan 12, p. 51Google Scholar; Fan, C. [范传贵] (16 September 2014). ‘400 zi jianli xian 24 ge cuobiezi: zhengqiu hanzi weiji xu jie li falü’ [400字简历现24个错别字:拯救汉字危机需借力法律], Fazhi ribao: http://www.chinanews.com/edu/2014/09-16/6594218.shtml, [accessed 27 August 2018].

¹³ Hanzi Yingxiong [汉字英雄] (11 July 2013). Henan weishi (first episode) [TV programme].

¹⁴ For example, Fan, ‘400 zi jianli’; Du and Zhang, ‘Tibiwangzi’; Yan, C. [闫春波] (2015). ‘Dui “tibiwangzi” de hanzi wenhua weiji xianzhuang de sikao’ [对 ‘提笔忘字’的汉字文化危机现状的思], Kecheng jiaoyu yanjiu 8, pp. 38–39Google Scholar; Zheng, ‘Hanzi weiji’.

¹⁵ For example, Liang, J. [梁杰] (16 September 2013). ‘Shuxie tuihua? Muyu weiji!’ [书写退化? 母语危机!], Zhonggui jiayu bao; Zhang, J. [张敬伟] (27 July 2010). ‘Zhengshi “tibiwangzi” de hanzi wenhua weiji’ [正视 ‘提笔忘字’ 的汉字文化危机], Shidai shangbao: http://www.chinanews.com/cul/2010/07-27/2428148.shtml, [accessed 27 August 2018].

¹⁶ For example, Yan, ‘Dui “tibiwangzi” de hanzi wenhua’, p. 39.

¹⁷ For example, Du and Zhang, ‘Tibiwangzi’, pp. 5, 7.

¹⁸ Zhang, X. [张旭青] (9 August 2013). ‘Hanzi weiji mianmianguan’ [汉字危机面面观], Langfang ribao.

¹⁹ Wang and Yang, ‘Jingjue tibiwangzi’.

²⁰ See, for example, Ling, Y. [凌云鹏] (1 December 2009). ‘Wangluo shidai tibiwangzi lingren you’ [网络时代提笔忘字令人忧], Yantai wangshi: http://www.shm.com.cn/jcld/images/2009-12/01/1259628793835CBC19Bc01C.pdf, [accessed 29 August 2018]; Liu, ‘Hanzi weishenme you weiji’; Qiu, W. [裘伟廷] (2002). ‘Diannao xiezuo de fumian yingxiang—diannao shixiezheng’ [电脑写作的负面影响——电脑失写症], Yuedu yu xiezuo 2, pp. 2–3, p. 2Google Scholar; Wang, J. [汪嘉波] (2011). ‘E shidai xin wenmang’ [E时代新文盲], Baolin 8, pp. 136–139, p. 137Google Scholar; Xu, J. [许婕] and Zhou, Y. [周易] (27 August 2013). ‘98.8% shoufangzhe ceng tibiwangzi’ [98.8%受访者曾提笔忘字], Zhongguo qingnianbao: http://zqb.cyol.com/html/2013-08/27/nw.D110000zgqnb_20130827_2-07.htm, [accessed 27 August 2018]; Zhou, S. [周诗梦] (2008). ‘“Tibiwangzi” ruhe zhengjiu ni’ [‘提笔忘字’ 如何拯救你], Dajiang zhoukan (jiaodian jishi) 7, pp. 59–60, p. 60Google Scholar.

²¹ See, for instance, Gottlieb, N. (2005). Language and Society in Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 128–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²² For example, Yomiuri Shimbun, ‘Kokugo senron chōsa’.

²³ For example, Tonooka, H. [外岡紘代] (29 June 2016). ‘Yomeru kedo, kakenai. . .kanken ga setsumon kōmokubetsu seitōritsu wo chōsa’ [読めるけど、書けない. . .漢検が設問項目別正答率を調査], Risemamu: http://resemom.jp/article/2016/06/29/32359.html, [accessed 27 August 2018].

²⁴ See, for example, Monchan no Burogu [もんちゃんのブログ] (21 October 2015): http://ameblo.jp/monchan1114/entry-12086692656.html, [accessed 27 August 2018].

²⁵ Dance☆Man [ダンス☆マン] (18 October 2000). ‘Kanji yomeru kedo kakenai’ [漢字読めるけど書けない], In Da Groove [compact disc]. For further humorous representations of character amnesia in the Japanese media, see, for example, Yoshimoto Kōgyō Chaneru [吉本興業チャンネル] (30 March 2014). ‘Yomeru noni kaketo iwaretare igai to kakenai kanji kentei “Nigataken”’ [読めるのに書けと言われたら意外と書けない漢字検定「にいがたけ]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Bb0woPFmkQ, [accessed 27 August 2018, online video].

²⁶ Masuzoe, Y. [舛添要一] (26 January 2016). ‘ICT ga wagaie nimo tarashita kōzai’ [ICTがわが家にもたらした功罪], Yomiuri Online: http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/life/special/ikuji/20160119-OYT8T50097.html, [accessed 29 August 2018].

²⁷ Odawara, H. [小田原 漂情] (29 February 2016). ‘Kantan na kanji ga kakenai. Korette sumaho ga genin?’ [簡単な漢字が書けない。これってスマホが原因?], Jijico: http://jijico.mbp-japan.com/2016/02/29/articles19221.html, [accessed 27 August 2018].

²⁸ A few notable exceptions are Nishimoto and Wei, ‘G-IM’; Fu, R. S. (2012). ‘Incurable Character Amnesia: The Unavoidable Trend toward Romanization of Traditional Chinese Handwriting’, Sino-Platonic Papers 224, pp. 26–39Google Scholar; Hilburger, C. (2016). ‘Character Amnesia: An Overview’, Sino-Platonic Papers 264, pp. 51–70Google Scholar; Pyle, C. (2016). ‘Effect of Technology on Chinese Character Amnesia and Evolution’, Sino-Platonic Papers 264, pp. 27–49Google Scholar. Note, however, that the latter three articles were published in a journal edited by Mair and were written by his students as part of the requirements for a course he teaches.

²⁹ Demick, B. (12 July 2010). ‘China Worries about Losing its Character(s): More and More Chinese are Realizing they can't Remember Exactly how to Write a Given Character’, Los Angeles Times: http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/12/world/la-fg-china-characters-20100712, [accessed 27 August 2018].

³⁰ Matyszcyk, C. (26 August 2010). ‘“Character Amnesia” Hitting Gear-Obsessed Kids’, Cnet: http://www.cnet.com/news/character-amnesia-hitting-gear-obsessed-kids/, [accessed 27 August 2018].

³¹ Cameron, Verbal Hygiene, p. 3.

³² Ibid., p. 5.

³³ Ibid., p. 8.

³⁴ Ibid., pp. 3–9, 20.

³⁵ Ibid., p. 9. In a similar fashion Noam Chomsky asserted that ‘sensible prescriptivism ought to be part of any education’. See Chomsky, N. (1991). ‘Language, Politics, and Composition: A Conversation with Noam Chomsky’, in Olson, A. and Gale, I. (eds), (Inter)views: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Rhetoric and Literacy. Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press, pp. 61–95, p. 90Google Scholar.

³⁶ Neustupný, J. V. (1989). ‘Language Purism as a Type of Language Correction’, in Jernudd, B. H. and Shapiro, M. J. (eds), The Politics of Language Purism. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 211–223, p. 217Google Scholar. Sometimes, however, ‘purism’ is simply used as a synonym for ‘prescriptivism’.

³⁷ Cameron, Verbal Hygiene, p. xxi.

³⁸ See, for instance, Demick, ‘China Worries about Losing its Character(s)’; Yang, M. [杨敏] (10 October 2013). ‘Tibiwangzi zhi you’ [提笔忘字之优], Jiangxi ribao; Yan, ‘Dui “tibiwangzi” de hanzi wenhua’, p. 39; Qiu, ‘Diannao xiezuo’, p. 3; Xu, ‘“Tibiwangzi”’, pp. 29, 31.

³⁹ Wang and Yang, ‘Jingjue tibiwangzi’.

⁴⁰ Demick, ‘China Worries about Losing its Character(s)’; emphasis added.

⁴¹ Fu, ‘Incurable Character Amnesia’, p. 39.

⁴² Wang and Yang, ‘Jingjue tibiwangzi’.

⁴³ Xu, ‘“Tibiwangzi”’, p. 31.

⁴⁴ For example, Lan, S. [兰世秋] (4 November 2013). ‘“Tibiwangzi”, women jiujing wangdiao le shenme’ [‘提笔忘字’, 我们究竟忘掉了什么], Chongqing ribao: http://cq.cqnews.net/shxw/2013-11/04/content_28498106_5.htm, [accessed 12 September 2018]; Zhou, ‘“Tibiwangzi”’, pp. 59–60; Zheng, ‘Hanzi weiji’, passim.

⁴⁵ Barry, B. (2001). Culture and Equality. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 258–264Google Scholar. Moreover, even if we ‘accept that traditional rules are arbitrary and still defend them on the “if it ain't broke, don't fix it” principle that, other things being equal there is some intrinsic value in continuity, [. . .] this cannot be the whole story of verbal hygiene [. . .]’: Cameron, Verbal Hygiene, p. 13.

⁴⁶ See, for example, Han, J. (2012). Chinese Characters, G. Wang and L. Zhou (trans). Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar; Hu, S. [胡双宝] (2008). Hanzi shihua [汉字史话]. Beijing: Shoudu Shifandaxue ChubansheGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁷ Not only laymen might have difficulties in this regard. The oracle bone script (甲骨文), for example, is accepted by virtually all relevant scholars as an early, if not the earliest, surviving predecessor of modern Chinese characters. However, the meanings and pronunciations of many characters found on these oracle bones remain under dispute to this very day. According to Sinologist Endymion Wilkinson, for example, out of the total corpus of about 4,000 to 5,000 characters, approximately 1,200 to 1,500 characters ‘have been deciphered in a manner that meets with general acceptance [. . .]’. Wilkinson adds that an additional 1,500 characters were ‘identified’ in the sense that it is possible to transcribe them to clerical or regular script (i.e. all of their radicals were identified). However, their original meanings and pronunciations remain unknown, most likely since these characters functioned only as the names of places and people. The remaining (approx.) 1,000 characters ‘have not yet been deciphered in ways that are generally accepted’. In other words, at least parts of this script have changed so drastically over the passage of time that even experts are unable to decipher them. It is important to bear in mind, however, that the characters which can be read with high levels of certainty are also those that make up the majority of the surviving texts. See Wilkinson, E. (2010). Chinese History: A Manual. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Asia Center, p. 397Google Scholar. See also Bagley, R. (2004). ‘Anyang Writing and the Origin of the Chinese Writing System’, in Houston, S. D. (ed.), The First Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 190–249Google Scholar, p. 198.

⁴⁸ The all-too-familiar quagmire of not separating language and script might still entrap unwary participants in this discourse, especially if they are foreign to it. Demick, for example, asserts that ‘Chinese is the oldest continuously used writing system in the world.’ Chinese (a problematic term on its own) is definitely not ‘the oldest continuously used writing system in the world’ simply because it is a language (or a set of languages) that could be represented by several scripts (such as Chinese characters, pinyin, bopomofo, etc.). See Demick, ‘China Worries about Losing its Character(s)’.

⁴⁹ Also, note that phenomena of Chinese character forgetfulness are certainly not new. As Hu Shuangbao elaborates, some of the new forms that Chinese characters adopted over time were the result of erroneous copying. It seems that the early policymakers and regulators of clerical script (隸書), for instance, did not necessarily adopt the variants that were the most ‘correct’ but rather those that were the most common among the users of the script, a phenomenon which Hu refers to as ‘erroneous change’ [讹变]: see Hu, Hanzi shihua, p. 49. Therefore, some of what we might dub ancient ‘persistent spelling mistakes’ were eventually accepted as the norm, even though they were previously treated as ‘vulgar’ or ‘mistaken’ variants.

⁵⁰ See, for example, Gottlieb, Language Policy in Japan, pp. 107–110.

⁵¹ This phenomenon also exists in Chinese but is less conventional and—unlike the case of Japanese—is considered by most to be vulgar and embarrassing. In this respect, see an interesting article by Zhang Xiaoming, who suggests the adoption of a mixed script system of Chinese characters and pinyin in the context of character amnesia. For example, instead of writing 她戴著一頂紫色的帽子 (‘She is wearing a purple hat’), it would be acceptable to write something like 她 dài著 一dǐng 紫色 的 mào子. Zhang, X. [张晓明] (1999). ‘Pinyin Hanyu’ [拼音汉语], CND (Huaxia wenzhai): http://www.cnd.org/HXWK/author/ZHANG-Xiaoming/cm9901d-8.gb.html, [accessed 30 August 2018]. See also in this regard Mair, V. (18 October 2014). ‘Dumpling Ingredients and Character Amnesia’, Language Log: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=15217, [accessed 27 August 2018].

⁵² For an online copy of the official Jōyō kanji document, see http://kokugo.bunka.go.jp/kokugo_nihongo/joho/kijun/naikaku/pdf/joyokanjihyo_20101130.pdf, [accessed 30 August 2018].

⁵³ The addition of more kanji to the Jōyō list is not unprecedented. In fact, the original 1981 Jōyō kanji list replaced the 1946 Tōyō kanji list, increasing the number of ‘common’ kanji from 1,850 to 1,945. Having said that, and as Nanette Gottlieb clearly shows in her 1994 article, script reforms are also very susceptible to various considerations of power, ideology, and politics, and are not merely the product of purely educational and linguistic concerns. See Gottlieb, N. (1994). ‘Language and Politics: The Reversal of Postwar Script Reform Policy in Japan’, Journal of Asian Studies 53 (4), pp. 1175–1198CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁴ These 8,105 characters are divided into three levels of 3,500 (considered common), 3,000 (considered less common), and 1,605 (considered rare). However, it is safe to say that the vast majority of Chinese speakers would not be able to even recognize, let alone handwrite, most of the 3,000 ‘secondary’ characters, even though they are still considered ‘common’. For an online copy of the official document containing this character classification, see http://www.gov.cn/zwgk/2013-08/19/content_2469793.htm, [accessed 30 August 2018].

⁵⁵ Regarding the many inherent difficulties of creating, selling as well as using Chinese characters-based typewriters, see Mullaney, T. S. (2016). ‘Controlling the Kanjisphere: The Rise of the Sino-Japanese Typewriter and the Birth of CJK’, Journal of Asian Studies 75 (3), pp. 725–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁶ Language reformism, as well as the development of various phonetic scripts, were also common in late Qing China. However, as W. K. Cheng argues in this regard, ‘the late Qing language reformers were not willing to call for jettisoning the ideograph in favor of the phonetic script—that position had to wait for the cultural iconoclasts in the May Fourth period’: see Cheng, W. K. (2001). ‘Enlightenment and Unity: Language Reformism in Late Qing China’, Modern Asian Studies 35 (2), pp. 469–493, p. 483CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁷ Quoted in Zhu, J. [朱竞] (2005). Hanyu de weiji [汉语的危机]. Beijing: Wenhua yishu chubanshe, p. 210Google Scholar.

⁵⁸ Lu, X. [魯迅] (25 August 1934). ‘Hanzi he Ladinghua’ [漢字和拉丁化], Zhonghua ribao dongxiang.

⁵⁹ Quoted in Seybolt, P. J. and Chiang, G. K. (1978). ‘Introduction’, in Seybolt, P. J. and Chiang, G. K. (eds), Language Reform in China: Documents and Commentary. New York: M. E. Sharpe, pp. 1–27, p. 1Google Scholar.

⁶⁰ The ‘first round’ of the official simplification was promulgated in two documents in 1956 and 1964. A much less successful ‘second round’ of further simplifications was promulgated in 1977, but was later retracted by the authorities in 1986 due to poor public reception. Simplification reforms were also adopted in post-war Japan, but not in Taiwan, Hong Kong, or Macau.

⁶¹ Quoted in Chen, T. (30 May 2016). ‘Writing China: David Moser, “A Billion Voices”’, Wall Street Journal: http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2016/05/30/writing-china-david-moser-a-billion-voices/, [accessed 29 August 2018].

⁶² Quoted in Zheng, ‘Hanzi weiji’, pp. 6–7.

⁶³ Ibid., pp. 4–5. For similar examples of aversion to slang within the Chinese part of the discourse of character amnesia, see, for example, Chang, Y. [常艳] (16 September 2013). ‘Hanzi weiji lai le ma’ [汉字危机来了吗], Anqing ribao; Du and Zhang, ‘Tibiwangzi’; Lan, ‘“Tibiwangzi”’. For a Japanese example, see Maita, K. [蒔田一彦] (21 August 2013). ‘Kanji no kuni kakenai wakamono: Chūgoku pasokon fukyū de kyūzō’ [漢字の国 書けない若者 中国パソコン普及で急増], Yomiuri Shimbun.

⁶⁴ Quoted in Wang, N. [王南] (2014). ‘Zhongguo guaqi hanzi xuanfen’ [中国刮起汉字旋风], Jinri Zhongguo (Zhongwenban) 9, pp. 88–89, p. 89.

⁶⁵ Wang and Yang, ‘Jingjue tibiwangzi’.

⁶⁶ Xu, ‘Muzhi shidai’, p. 67.

⁶⁷ Odawara, ‘Kantan na kanji ga kakenai’.

⁶⁸ Qiu, ‘Diannao xiezuo’, p. 3.

⁶⁹ Yomiuri Shimbun, ‘Kokugo senron chōsa’.

⁷⁰ Du and Zhang, ‘Tibiwangzi’, p. 6.

⁷¹ Trubek, A. (2016). The History and Uncertain Future of Handwriting. New York: Bloomsbury, p. 140Google Scholar.

⁷² Baron, D. (2009). A Better Pencil: Readers, Writers, and the Digital Revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 222Google Scholar.

⁷³ Trubek, The History and Uncertain Future of Handwriting, p. 144.

⁷⁴ For additional examples, see, for instance, Bauerlein, M. (2008). The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future (or, Don't Trust Anyone Under 30). New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher/Penguin, especially pp. 8–9Google Scholar; Heffernan, V. (17 July 2011). ‘The Price of Typos’, The New York Times: https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/17/the-price-of-typos/, [accessed 12 September 2018].

⁷⁵ Hensher, P. (2012). The Missing Ink: The Lost Art of Handwriting. New York: Faber and Faber, p. ²⁴⁴Google Scholar.

⁷⁶ Xu, ‘“Tibiwangzi”’, p. 31.

⁷⁷ See, for example, Zheng, ‘Hanzi weiji’, pp. 6–7. If, as some within this discourse claim, Chinese characters are indeed ‘one of the most beautiful scripts’ (Qiu, ‘Diannao xiezuo’, p. 3) and are ‘extremely abundant with a sense of beauty’ (Du and Zhang, ‘Tibiwangzi’, p. 8.), their alleged possible loss due to character amnesia is all the more tragic. Yet, as already explained above, there is little reason to believe that the characters themselves are in danger of disappearing any time soon; after all, they are used more than ever for both reading and writing in the digital space.

⁷⁸ See, for example, Gottlieb, Language Policy in Japan, pp. 106, 115.

⁷⁹ Han, Chinese Characters, pp. 7, 81. Arguably, this point can be connected to what Edward McDonald dubs ‘character fetishization’: ‘an exaggerated status given to Chinese characters in the interpretation of Chinese language, thought, and culture’. This tendency, according to McDonald, is also inseparable from Orientalism and, I argue, is tantamount to ‘self-Orientalism’ when it comes from Chinese, Japanese, or even Korean sources. See McDonald, E. (2009). ‘Getting over the Walls of Discourse: “Character Fetishization” in Chinese Studies’, Journal of Asian Studies 68 (4), pp. 1189–1213, p. 1194CrossRefGoogle Scholar. This kind of character fetishization is obviously not confined to the realm of the character amnesia discourse, as it is also to be found in publications that deal with other aspects of Chinese characters. McDonald, for instance, explores how this fetishization is present in the discourse relating to Chinese characters and their alleged ‘ideography’, providing ample examples (ibid., passim).

⁸⁰ Swidler, A. (1986). ‘Culture in Action—Symbols and Strategies’, American Sociological Review 51, pp. 273–286, p. 281CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁸¹ Cameron, Verbal Hygiene, p. 14.

⁸² See Trubek, The History and Uncertain Future of Handwriting, p. 141.

⁸³ For example, China Daily (11 January 2011). ‘Top 10: Fading Away’: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2010topten/2011-01/11/content_11825785.htm, [accessed 30 August 2018].

⁸⁴ For example, Fan, X. [范学芝] (2014). ‘“Tibiwangzi” zenmaban’ [‘提笔忘字’ 怎么办], Huaihai wenhui 1, p. 64Google Scholar; Masuzoe, ‘ICT ga wagaie nimo tarashita kōzai’; Qiu, ‘Diannao xiezuo’, p, 3.

⁸⁵ Chin, J. (25 May 2016). ‘Not Enough Character? Communist Party Frets Over Constitution Copying’, Wall Street Journal: http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2016/05/25/not-enough-character-communist-party-frets-over-constitution-copying-%E2%80%8B/#livefyre-comment, [accessed 29 August 2018].

⁸⁶ Tam, R., T. Lee. and A. Bouthier (25 June 2013). ‘In Asia, Ancient Writing Collides with Digital Age’, AFP: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob4zBtYXdwc, [accessed 29 August 2018; online video].

⁸⁷ For example, Wang and Yang, ‘Jingjue tibiwangzi’; Xu, ‘Muzhi shidai’, pp. 68–69.

⁸⁸ For example, Grigg, H. (26 December 2010). ‘Why Wubi Chinese Input is Better than Pinyin’, East Asia Student: https://eastasiastudent.net/china/mandarin/wubi-input-advantages/, [accessed 29 August 2018].

⁸⁹ One might argue, however, that the majority of Chinese who use (pinyin) phonetic IME are not doing so because of their objective convenience and ease of use, but due to the fact that they learned pinyin in school. On the other hand, while Chinese pupils are indeed obliged to learn pinyin in schools, it should also be borne in mind that they spend far greater amounts of time on learning how to handwrite Chinese characters. Finally, it should also be noted that while many IME do in fact offer the users the option of handwriting Chinese characters just as they have been doing in schools for many years, they still choose to type using the phonetic methods instead.

⁹⁰ See, for example, Mair, ‘Character Amnesia’; Xu, ‘Muzhi shidai’; also Fu, ‘Incurable Character Amnesia’, for a detailed analysis of why Wubi fails to ‘cure’ character amnesia. Another interesting lead for ‘curing’ character amnesia is a new phonetic-shape-based IME called G-IM (‘Gestalt Imprinting Method’) developed as a Sino-Japanese collaboration by Nishimoto Kazushi and Wei Jianning. As the two admit, using G-IM still consumes much more time than the common phonetic IME. However, to them, this cumbersomeness is ‘an unavoidable trade-off’. Nishimoto and Wei, ‘G-IM’, pp. 123–124.

⁹¹ See Mei, Y. [梅莹] (30 May 2011). ‘Hubei daxue yi laoshi yao xuesheng “lunwen shouxie” wei tichang chuantong’ [湖北大学一老师要学生‘论文手写’为提倡传统], Chu tian jinbao.

⁹² Gottlieb, Language Policy in Japan, p. 122.