| Change log entry 38607 | |
|---|---|
| Processed by: | richwarm (2011-12-08 23:55:15 UTC) |
| Comment: |
<< review queue entry 37518 - submitted by 'robin' >> if you have 前妻 why not 前男友 and 前女友? Editor: Reasons for having a construct in CEDICT include: - The processing editor didn't regard it as a construct (there is no editor-in-chief at CEDICT -- all editors have the right to process) - It serves as an *example* of a particular kind of construct, even though we have no intention of including every possible instance of it. - It was processed prior to 2007 when the current editorial system was set up, and would be deleted under current standards. - It is deemed to be a "useful" construct in some sense. The entry for 前妻 is, in fact, a pre-2007 entry, added before the current guidelines were developed. Our definition of 前妻 is "ex-wife", which I tend to think suggests that there was a divorce, whereas in the case of a 前妻, it may have been the death of the wife that ended the marriage. 稱已去世或離異的妻子 If that is so, then it might be useful to keep 前妻 and expand its definition. But maybe I'm mistaken. But I don't see any mitigating factors in the case of 前男友 and 前女友. They are simply 前+男友 and 前+女友, as far as I am aware, since we have "former" in our defintion of 前. Would you expect to find in an English dictionary all of the following terms? former wife former husband former boyfriend former girlfriend former partner former employee former ... well, this could be a very long list! ;-) Dictionaries generally take the modular approach. Otherwise, there is too much work for too little return. If you wish, you may like to submit for the deletion or expansion of the entry for 前妻. |
| Diff: |
# 前男友 前男友 [qian2 nan2 you3] /ex-boyfriend/ |