Talk:Four-Corner Method

Only Traditional Chinese

I believe this input method only applies to Traditional Chinese. Simplified Chinese characters are written differently hence the resulting code will be all wrong. For that reason, Simpified Chinese text is not native to this article and should be removed. Kowloonese 21:51, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I have seen a few old Xinhua Zidian versions use this system instead of the radical system. The dictionary was in simplified Chinese. So i have to say, they did apply the method to simplified chinese.

I think this method is very rarely used now both in Input Method and general categorization. --Voidvector 19:59, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

I don't doubt such dictionary exists. But I'd like to find out when you use the Four corner method in your dictionary, do you look up by the traditional writing then it shows you the entry written in Simplified characters? Or can you use the method to look up the Simplified writing?

If latter, I bet your dictionary was a direct translation from the original traditional character version but the publisher didn't remove the inappropriate index. Kowloonese 21:13, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That, I have no clue. I don't own such dictionary. I will check when I encounter one next time. --空向 19:01, Nov 20, 2004 (UTC)

Software

Where can i find software for the four corner method (i.e. for windows)? thank you, --Abdull 16:29, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Poem

What does the given poem say? --Abdull 19:07, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

From what I can tell, the English description of the codes is the translation of the poem, just as is given in the next section. Vanisaac (talk) 09:21, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I parleyed my extremely mediocre skills at reading Chinese characters into an in-line "translation" of each poem, and rearranged those sections, because it really was a mess. Vanisaac (talk) 10:02, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Headings

At the moment, this article could do with some more headings. It currently seems rather disorganized, especially to someone like me, who just wants (for now, at least) to know how the system works. Setokaiba^✌_≝ 23:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

The first sentence depends on the reader knowing what encoding is, so that word should be better defined, even as it is linked to its own article. Hires an editor 22:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Expert help

The Four Corner Method was extremely popular in government education circles until pronunciation-based systems, using the Mandarin phonetic symbols (the Guoyu Luomazi was thought to be too radical and difficult) in the GR phonetic chart's (labial-to-velar) "bo-po-mo-fo" order, became fashionable in the mid 1930s. It was used to promote spoken language unification.

I don't know what the above paragraph means. I simplified the sentence down to what is currently there, but I don't know that that's correct. Hires an editor 20:52, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not an expert, but the meaning seems plain to me:

The Four Corner Method was extremly popular in government education circles until pronunciation-based systems became fashionable in the mid 1930s to promote spoken language unification. These systems used the Mandarin phonetic symbols in the bo-po-mo-fo order that was also found in the GR's phonetic chart. The Gwoyeu Romatzyh itself was considered to radical and too difficult for use.

In particular, I believe your assertion that The Four Corner Method was [used] to promote spoken language unification [...] is wrong, seeing as said method does not concern itself with pronunciation at all.

10:09, 22 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.105.114.223 (talk)

Also, I'd like to know what is different about the revisions. How are they different from each other? Why did they get revised?

Computer input with Four corner method

This is a technical question: Is this system used in any computer applications and if so, does it make use of the numeric keypad like the CKC Chinese Input System? --A12n 12:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Corner order?

What's the order for the corners?

1 2
3 4

Or is it something else entirely? 71.198.127.97 06:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

You got it right. — kwami (talk) 16:51, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

bad External Link

The first External Link seems to have gone bad

G. Robert Shiplett 16:51, 21 March 2012 (UTC)