[davidjohnstone]

> This is only because the plan for simplified characters died midway through. There was a second round of simplifications that would have gone even further with talks of full phoneticization if that succeeded.

I was under the impression that most of the debates about moving from Chinese characters to alphabetic writing happened in the pre-PRC period. For example, Lu Xun supported Latinxua Sin Wenz[1] in the 30s. These proposals failed for a variety of reasons. Simplified characters were introduced in the 50s. Pinyin was also introduced in the 50s, but unlike previous latinisations meant to replace the Chinese characters, it was only ever intended as a teaching tool. I think there was still a thought to replace Chinese characters with alphabetic writing at a later stage, but, in practice, it pretty much died in the 40s.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latinxua_Sin_Wenz

[dwohnitmok]

In 1957 Mao specifically called out that

> 漢字必須改革，漢字改革要走世界文字共同的拼音方向

> Chinese characters must be reformed, and that reform of Chinese characters must follow the global trend of phonetic spelling (pinyin)

This was swiftly followed up by 1958 by a pronouncement from the head of the government committee on character reform (http://www.gov.cn/test/2008-03/07/content_912608.htm)

> 我们认为：汉字总是要变的，拿汉字过去的变化就可以证明，将来总是要走世界共同的拼音方向。

> We believe: Chinese characters inevitably must change. We can use the changes in Chinese characters of the past to prove that in the future, this must follow the global trend of phonetic spelling [this is almost a carbon copy of Mao's words]

This sentiment continued through the second round of simplification. The People's Daily (the usual mouthpiece of the PRC) wrote an article in 1977 (https://www.laoziliao.net/rmrb/1977-12-20-1) in concert with the beginning of the second round of simplification explicitly describing character simplification as setting the stage for phonetic spelling.

> 毛主席指出，汉字的拼音化需要做许多准备工作；在实现拼音化以前，必须简化汉字

> Chairman Mao has stated: the pinyin-ification of Chinese characters requires a great deal of preparation. Before we can achieve pinyin-ficiation, we must first simply characters.

But by that time literacy rates were sufficiently high that there was considerable backlash against the second round of simplification and it was withdrawn, first informally and later formally. Had it succeeded, no doubt a fully phonetic script would've been at least on the table for discussion.

[davidjohnstone]

Thanks, that's interesting. Yurou Zhong, in her book Chinese Grammatology, traces the end of the latinisation movement to a precise date in 1958 when Zhou Enlai gave a speech "当前文字改革的任务" ("The Current Tasks of the Script Reform"), where he announced the current tasks are to simplify characters, promote putonghua and issue and implement a pinyin plan, conspicuously not including further alphabetisation.

[dwohnitmok]

In general it is true that the central government agreed that in the interim pinyin was not to replace characters. However, they explicitly made clear that this was a plan only for the initial task at hand, and not any final conclusion about the future of a phonetic script. The sentences preceding my quote from the committee head make this clear:

> 至于汉字的前途问题：它是永远不变还是要变呢？它是在汉字固有的形体范围内变化，还是被拼音文字所代替呢？它是为拉丁字母式的拼音文字所代替，还是为别的形式的拼音文字所代替呢？这些问题我们现在还可以不忙去作结论。我们认为：汉字总是要变的，拿汉字过去的变化就可以证明，将来总是要走世界共同的拼音方向。而且可以说，世界各个民族的语言和文字，将来总有一天会逐渐接近和统一。但是这些都不属于当前文字改革的任务的范围，因此我们今天还不必加以讨论。

> As for the question of the future of Chinese characters: will they never change or will they change? Will the change be restricted to the scope of their current form, or will they be replaced by a phonetic script? Will they be replaced by a phonetic script based on Latin characters, or will they be replaced by another form of phonetic script? For now, we will not rush to any conclusions on this topic. We believe: Chinese characters inevitably must change. We can use the changes in Chinese characters of the past to prove that in the future, this must follow the global trend of phonetic spelling. Moreover it can be said, the languages and scripts of all the people in the world will one day come together and unify as one. But these are not within the scope of our current reform tasks and as such today we have no need to discuss them further.

The committee head's pronouncement was in fact essentially paraphrasing and nearly copying large parts of Zhou Enlai's speech. So I would not characterize his speech as closing the door on a phonetic script, only setting it aside for now and leaving the door open for a future date. From Zhou Enlai's speech:

> 至于汉字的前途，它是不是千秋万岁永远不变呢？还是要变呢？它是向着汉字自己的形体变化呢？还是被拼音文字代替呢？它是为拉丁字母式的拼音文字所代替，还是为另一种形式的拼音文字所代替呢？这个问题我们现在还不忙作出结论。但是文字总是要变化的，拿汉字过去的变化就可以证明。将来总要变化的。而且可以说，世界各个民族的文字形式将来总有一天会逐渐统一，甚至语言最后也会逐渐统一。人类的语言文字发展的最后趋势是逐渐接近，到最后也许就没有多大区别了。

> As for the future of Chinese characters, will they not change across the eons time? Or will they change? Will they trend towards changes based on the shapes of characters themselves? Or will they be replaced by phonetic script? Will they be replaced by a Latin character-based phonetic script, or will they be replaced by some other form of phonetic script? As of now, we are not yet in a rush to make conclusions. But writing must change. The past changes of Chinese character can prove this. In the future, there must be change. Moreover it can be said, the scripts of all the peoples of the world will one day unify as one, indeed language itself will gradually unify. Humanity's language and script development's ultimate trend is to gradually become closer. In the end there may not be much of any difference [among different languages].

And as we can see that rhetoric about a fully fledged phonetic script would indeed come back once the initial reform plans were finished.

Only with the failure of the second wave of simplification does it seem that future plans for a phonetic script finally disappeared from the conversation.