The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against

[rikforto]

Oh, and about this:

I just answered myself the question about what Sun Tzu would have said when asked to read his own book aloud, so forget that one.  The other two wre in You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.:

if a Dictator today read aloud the Rooster recipe 
丹雄鸡味甘微温主女人崩中漏下赤白沃补虚温中～
to a Cantonese speaker who does not know Mandarin or Classical Chinese, by reading each hanzi as a Cantonese syllable,

daan1 hung4 gai1 mei6 gam1 mei4 wan1 zyu2 neoi5 jan4 bang1 zung1, lau6 haa6
cik1 baak6 juk1 bou2 heoi1 wan1 zung1 ...

what would the guy miss because of the wrong syntax?   And if the Dictator instead read 

daan1 hung4 gai1 mei6 gam1 mei4 wan1 zyu2 jiu3 hai6 ji1 neoi5 jan4 ge3 bang1 zung1 lau6 haa6
cik1 baak6 juk1 zung6 ho2 ji5 bou2 heoi1 wan1 zung1 ...

which is supposed to be valid Cantonese syntax -- would the guy understand it any better?

This is several sentences after you quoted me saying I cannot account for this because I don't know how an LLM produced it and you don't either. I answered it, you did not like the answer so you repeated the question, and then you characterized me as non-responsive. It wasn't, you have your answer. It's rather like the question about the Sun Tzu's pronunciation standard I'm still ignoring; I said we don't agree about how to read Chinese, it's premature to discuss the output of that reading. You have your answers.