This study investigates the language transfer errors in simplified–traditional Chinese conversion among Hong Kong university students. Applying empirical research methods, the study assesses the students’ abilities to convert between traditional and simplified characters through single-character and contextual dynamic examinations. The results highlight significant writing errors, predominantly at the component level for simplified–traditional conversion and stroke level for traditional–simplified conversion. Misused characters and non-conversion errors were also prevalent. The findings suggest that students rely on visual similarity and existing orthographic knowledge, leading to systematic errors influenced by language transfer. The study underscores the need for targeted instructional strategies to improve students’ proficiency in both scripts, emphasizing explicit teaching of conversion rules and integrating characters within meaningful contexts to enhance overall writing proficiency. These insights offer theoretical and practical implications for understanding and improving bilingual script proficiency in Chinese.
BakerC (2011) Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters
.
2.
BiYHanZZhangY (2008) Reading does not depend on writing, even in Chinese. Neuropsychologia47(4): 1193–1199.
3.
CaoFSussmanBLRiosV, et al. (2017) Different mechanisms in learning different second languages: Evidence from English speakers learning Chinese and Spanish. NeuroImage148: 284–295.
CorderSP (1967) The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching5: 161–170.
8.
DengSHuW (2022) An examination of Chinese character writing errors: Developmental differences among Chinese as a foreign language learners. Journal of Chinese Writing Systems6(1): 39–51.
9.
DettermanDK (1993) The case for the prosecution: Transfer as an epiphenomenon. In: DettermanDKSternbergRJ (eds) Transfer on Trial: Intelligence, Cognition, and Instruction. New Jersey: Ablex Publishing
, pp. 1–24.
10.
GevaESiegelLS (2000) Orthographic and cognitive factors in the concurrent development of basic reading skills in two languages. Reading and Writing12(1): 1–30.
11.
GohYS (1998) Xinjiapo xuesheng fantizi bianren cecha [Traditional Chinese Character Recognition Test for Singaporean Students]. Yuyanxue wenzi yingyong25(1): 41–46.
12.
GuanCFraundorfSHPerfettiCA (2011) Writing strengthens orthography and alphabetic-coding strengthens phonology in learning to read Chinese. Journal of Educational Psychology103(3): 509–522.
13.
HeydariPBagheriM (2012) Error analysis: Sources of L2 learners’ errors. Theory and Practice in Language Studies2(8): 1583–1589.
14.
JamesKHEngelhardtL (2012) The effects of handwriting experience on functional brain development in pre-literate children. Trends in Neuroscience and Education1(1): 32–42.
15.
KodaK (2008) Impacts of prior literacy experience on second-language learning to read. In: KodaKZehlerA (eds) Learning to Read Across Languages. New York: Routledge
, pp. 68–96.
16.
KuoLLiYSadoskiM, et al. (2014) Acquisition of Chinese characters: The effects of character properties and individual differences among learners. Contemporary Educational Psychology39(4): 287–300.
17.
LanY (2019) Interlingual interfaces in Chinese language learning and its use: Exploring language transfer errors in Chinese writing. Journal of Language Teaching and Research10(3): 437–445.
18.
LauDK (2021) The dual-route account of writing-to-dictation in Chinese: A short report. Language and Speech64(4): 790–803.
19.
LeungH (2009) Research on simplified Chinese transcription ability of Hong Kong tertiary college students. Bachelor Thesis, The Education University of Hong Kong
.
20.
LiC-C (2009) Quantify the accuracy of recognizing from traditional Chinese to simplified Chinese. Journal of College of Chinese Language and Culture of Jinan University (TCSOL Studies)33(1): 66–76.
21.
LiHShuHMcBride-ChangC, et al. (2010) Chinese children’s character recognition: Visuo-orthographic, phonological processing and morphological skills. Journal of Research in Reading35(3): 287–307.
22.
LinCJC (2019) Chinese psycholinguistics: A typological overview. In: Huang C-R, Jing-Schmidt Z and Meisterernst B (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Chinese Applied Linguistics. New York: Routledge
, pp. 773–785.
23.
LiuCLLaiMHTienKW, et al. (2011) Visually and phonologically similar characters in incorrect Chinese words: Analyses, identification, and applications. ACM Transactions on Asian Language Information Processing10(2): 1–39.
24.
LiuTChukTYYehSL, et al. (2016) Transfer of perceptual expertise: The case of simplified and traditional Chinese character recognition. Cognitive Science40(8): 1941–1968.
25.
Londoño VásquezDA (2008) Error analysis in a written composition. Profile Issues in Teachers Professional Development10: 135–146.
26.
OdlineT (1989) Language Transfer: Cross-linguistic Influence in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
.
27.
PerfettiCAZhangS (1991) Phonological processes in reading Chinese characters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition17(4): 633–643.
28.
QianN (2002) Introduction to Modern Chinese. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University Press
.
29.
RimmingtonDYipPC (2006) Chinese: An Essential Grammar. Abingdon: Routledge
.
30.
ShaoA (2017) Statistics and reflections on simplified characters in “Table of General Standard Chinese Characters”. Sinogram Culture16: 13–17.
31.
ShenHHKeC (2007) Radical awareness and word acquisition among nonnative learners of Chinese. Modern Language Journal91(1): 97–111.
32.
ShiL (2003) Writing in two cultures: Chinese professors return from the West. Canadian Modern Language Review59(3): 369–392.
33.
ShuHAndersonRC (1997) Role of radical awareness in the character and word acquisition of Chinese children. Reading Research Quarterly32(1): 78–89.
34.
TanLHSpinksJAEdenGF, et al. (2005) Reading depends on writing, in Chinese. Psychological and Cognitive Sciences102(24): 8781–8785.
35.
TsangYKHuangJWangS, et al. (2024) Comparing word recognition in simplified and traditional Chinese: A megastudy approach. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology77(3): 593–610.
36.
WongYK (2017) The role of radical awareness in Chinese-as-a-second-language learners’ Chinese character reading development. Language Awareness26(3): 211–225.
37.
XieJHuangYChenK, et al. (2021) ERP evidence for asymmetric orthographic transfer between traditional and simplified Chinese. Experimental Brain Research239: 365–379.
38.
YangMCoocNShengL (2017) An investigation of cross-linguistic transfer between Chinese and English: A meta-analysis. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education2: 1–21.
39.
YangRWangWSY (2018) Categorical perception of Chinese characters by simplified and traditional Chinese readers. Reading and Writing31: 1133–1154.
40.
YehT-M (2005) Psychological advantages in Chinese character recognition and writing. In: LiC-CChenY-FLiangH-H (eds) Reflecting on the Future of Chinese Language Pedagogy. Taipei: Lucky Bookstore
, pp. 69–82.
41.
YinBLuoS (1991) Taiwan xuesheng rendu dalu guifan jianhuazi de jiancha baogao [Report on the test of Taiwanese students’ reading of mainland China’s standardized simplified characters]. Yuwen Jianshe (8): 34–35.
42.
ZhangNRenJWangM, et al. (2024) Automatic phonological access among bilinguals with cross-script languages. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology77(7): 1399–1417.
43.
ZhengZChenX (1993) Hanzi de jianhua dui zhongwen shuxie de yingxiang [The Impact of Simplified Chinese Characters on Chinese Writing]. National Science Council Research Bulletin: Humanities and Social Sciences3(1): 82–95.
