| Change log entry 80428 | |
|---|---|
| Processed by: | richwarm (2023-10-27 20:56:58 UTC) |
| Comment: |
<< review queue entry 74785 - submitted by 'aaronwong' >> Years ago I submitted a note (entry 66423) reminding you that these two entries are pointing to the same character. As it's a slangy one, there's no standard form. One entry uses a square as the lemma, the other uses the sound symbols. But goldyn_chyld's reply rejected my propostion. Today as I look back at them again, I still hold the same idea. Can you please explain how they are not the same? --------------------------------------- Editor: You say you "reminded us that these two entries are pointing to the same character." But actually, what you wrote at the time was this: "these two entries are the same. delete one." Your first sentence was clearly wrong, since [biang4] ≠ [xx5 xx5 xx5 xx5], for example, and I suspect your second sentence may have been perceived as curt. * * * Now of course the two entries are indeed pointing to the same word. (Same *word*, not "same character" since neither entry identifies a character that represents the word). However, it's perfectly normal for a dictionary to have more than one entry for the same word. It happens when there is more than one way of writing a word. I just looked up Encarta World English Dictionary (physical book) and I can confirm that they have an entry for "center" and another one for "centre". Two entries for the same word. And Wiktionary has at least two entries for biàng: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ㄅㄧㄤˋ https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bi%C3%A0ng * * * In the future, when cc-cedict is released in v2 format, the two entries *may* be collapsed into a single entry (or maybe not). In v2, it will be possible to have pinyin with a number of syllables different from the number of characters in the headword, e.g. a four-character headword like ㄅㄧㄤˋ, and a single-syllable pinyin like [biang4], but that isn't permitted in v1. But anyway, this is all a waste of breath to a large extent since, as far as I can tell, apps like Pleco and Zhongwen for Chrome simply ignore "weird" entries like our two biang entries. For example, if I type biang4 into Pleco, no entries are displayed, and if I point my mouse at ㄅㄧㄤˋ in my browser, Zhongwen doesn't pop up with a definition. |
| Diff: |
# = □ □ [biang4] /(Tw) (coll.) cool/awesome/(etymologically, a contracted form of 不一樣|不一样[bu4 yi1 yang4])/often written as ㄅㄧㄤˋ/ # = ㄅㄧㄤˋ ㄅㄧㄤˋ [xx5 xx5 xx5 xx5] /(Tw) (coll.) cool/awesome/pr. [biang4]/(etymologically, a contracted form of 不一樣|不一样[bu4 yi1 yang4])/ |