| Change log entry 30783 | |
|---|---|
| Processed by: | ycandau (2010-09-21 18:38:44 GMT) |
| Comment: |
<< review queue entry 30716 - submitted by 'parkenyu' >> You may disagree with my suggestion, but I think it wouldn't hurt to bring it to the table. Often in "modern" Chinese texts written with traditional characters (namely those from Taiwan and even Hong Kong), the character 兌 is written as 兑 (more often when used as a component than as a stand-alone character). This came to my attention when I purchased the college-level Chinese textbook series titled "Integrated Chinese: Simplified and Traditional Characters." On the cover, "中文听说读写 中文聽説讀寫" is written. While 説 is indeed the form used in Japanese, in this context it is most clearly used as a traditional Chinese character. I think it would be misleading to say that 兌 is the sole traditional form, because it implies that the use of 兑 would be unacceptable in traditional writing, when that is evidently not the case. My recommendation is to record 兑 as both the traditional and simplified form, while giving 兌 a discrete entry as a variant (this recommendation applies to all characters utilizing the 兌 / 兑 component). This is justified by the analogous labeling of certain characters like 眞 and 爲 as variants even though they appear in texts using older fonts as the standard form. Many other similar cases exist, but many of them have been unified by font conventions. The case of 兑 / 兌 seems to be one of the few discrepancies left in the database. Editor: basically I agree with most of what you say. if you write smthing that looks like 兑, I will say that it is the same as 兌. The difference is a difference in fonts. However we have to deal here with computer codes. 兌 and 兑 have been coded as different chars, the second being the simplified variant of the first. It is not felt to be a traditional variant because in Trad there is only one character兌 or兑. And this goes for a bunch of other chars:內,别... In short: I use traditional characters. But what I see printed as 別說 I write on paper as smth that *looks* like 别説. PRC insisted that it should appear in print more like it is in handwriting, so codepoints were assigned so that 別 and 别 appear different, *in the same font* You will notice that simplification tables do not say that 别 is the simplification of 別. To them it was the same character. However everybody agrees that 别 is the codepoint for the simp and 別 the codepoint for the trad. Wow! See what I mean? ;-) |
| Diff: |
# - 兌 兑 [dui4] /to cash/to exchange/to add (liquid)/to blend/one of the Eight Trigrams 八卦[ba1 gua4], symbolizing swamp/☱/ # + 兑 兑 [dui4] /to cash/to exchange/to add (liquid)/to blend/one of the Eight Trigrams 八卦[ba1 gua4], symbolizing swamp/☱/ # Editor: what you propose, I guess, is: # 兑 兑 [dui4] /variant of 兌|兑[dui4]/ |