Here's a concise comparison of "letter" (淇′欢) and "telegram" (鐢垫姤) based on their historical and modern contexts:

馃Ь Letter (淇′欢)

  • Format: Traditionally handwritten or typed physical documents sent via postal service. Modern equivalents include emails (鐢靛瓙淇′欢) and formal digital correspondence.

  • Usage:

  • Personal: Private communication (e.g., family updates, personal sentiments).

  • Formal: Official documents (contracts, legal notices), business proposals 馃拰.

  • Characteristics:

  • Allows detailed, lengthy content with structured formatting (e.g., salutations, signatures).

  • Delivery time varies (days to weeks for physical mail; near-instant for email).

  • Modern variants prioritize templates and digital security (e.g., encrypted emails).

    • 馃摗 Telegram (鐢垫姤)

  • Format: Short, text-based messages transmitted electronically via telegraph systems, historically using Morse code 馃摖.

  • Usage:

  • Urgent Communication: Emergency notifications, diplomatic statements (e.g., condolences from world leaders).

  • Official Procedures: Visa applications requiring immediate proof of authorization (e.g., "visa notification telegram")馃搼.

  • Decline:

  • Largely obsolete since the late 20th century, replaced by fax, email, and instant messaging 鈴?

  • By the 2010s, weekly telegram deliveries in rural China dwindled to "2鈥? per week" 馃搲.

    • 馃攽 Key Differences

    | Aspect | Letter | Telegram |

    |-|-|-|

    | Speed | Slow (physical) / Fast (digital) | Historically rapid (minutes/hours) |

    | Content Length| Unlimited | Concise (paid per word) |

    | Modern Role | Email dominates formal communication| Legacy use in diplomatic archives |

    馃拵 Summary

  • Letters evolved into emails but retain formal/personal significance.

    • Telegrams symbolized urgency in pre-digital eras but are now functionally extinct, surviving only in historical or ceremonial contexts 馃摐.

    本文章来自（https://www.r-telegtam.com），转载请说明出处！