Talk:Second round of simplified Chinese characters
|WikiProject Writing systems||(Rated B-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject China||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
|A fact from Second round of simplified Chinese characters appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 24 January 2006. The text of the entry was as follows: "Did you know
This image was in the history section. I removed it because, while I don't doubt the intent of whoever inserted it, it contributes little to the article without an explanation of what's in the image.
The reader can deduce that these are (probably) proposed simplifications from the second round, but there's no explanation of what the characters represent, which method of simplification applies, whether any of them survived in informal use, etc. A table header in English would be a nice start. :) Recognizance (talk) 18:01, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
- Hm, I'd put them back in with a header or footer explaining that the left column represents the traditional characters, the right hand column the proposed 2nd round simplification. They are intuitively simpler than the traditional ones, even without knowing what the method of simplification was. Akerbeltz (talk) 10:52, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
That is very useful, particularly the Unicode link. In a couple of cases the sources show XYZ character and I didn't have a way of inputting them myself. The other list is potentially useful but probably doesn't meet RS standards. The appendices in Planning Chinese Characters do include the simplification lists if we need to cite them as a source. Recognizance (talk) 18:58, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
That section needs looking at. It's true that some characters appear to be missing from Unicode as yet but by no means all, I found 𦬁 26B01, 浂 6D42, 氿 6C3F and 𠮵 D842DFB5. I haven't got the time to put the one's off the Society's list through Unihan but it might be worthwhile doing. In addition, it might be worthwhile checking if they have been submitted to Unicode and if not, to draw their attention to it or write a proposal. Akerbeltz (talk) 19:22, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure on this one. I've found plenty of discussion of the formidable task of including 'all' Chinese characters in Unicode, but it doesn't specifically address the inclusion or lack thereof of second round characters.
- On a related note, the current location of this article at 'Second-round simplified Chinese character' makes it even easier to spot potential references that are just scraping Wikipedia. Recognizance (talk) 20:00, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well... either way, it needs a plural s :b And the goal of Unicode is to *ultimately* include all the characters, they're well aware of the fact that haven't got all yet, especially some of the really old ones. I don't see why the list shouldn't be acceptable as a source by the way, it's printed by a gov organisation - the fact that we got the scanned pages of the web shouldn't be a hindrance. Akerbeltz (talk) 20:09, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- I give some mappings of 2nd round simplified characters to Unicode in my page, and there are a few more 2nd round simplified characxters in CJK-C which will be part of Unicode 5.2 (Autumn 2009). There has not yet been a proposal to encode all the remaining 2nd round simplified characters, but as someone actively involved in Unicode I can assure you that they will eventually be encoded. BabelStone (talk) 10:27, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- Incidentally, we should either expand the Tech Info section, perhaps with a table of common fonts showing their coverage of both rounds of simplification or at least take off the comment about the font supporting the *first* round - which doesn't really belong here I think. Akerbeltz (talk) 11:50, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
For inclusion (or at least food for thought)
So I picked up this book today, and it discusses at length the underlying Gestalt of the Chinese writing system: The politics of Chinese language and culture. (Part about the Second Scheme is on 63-64.)
- In their in-depth look at the psychology of the Chinese writing system, Hodge and Louie examine the Gestalt which is taught in the process of learning many characters' forms and argue that Chinese characters are "more saturated with ideological functions and ideological content than any other major writing system". They use the Second Scheme as a case study of a failed attempt at altering the direction of a language's growth, pointing to the contrast between the First Scheme, which recorded existing variations, and the Second Scheme, which invented new ones. They use xian, the character for suspicion. Blah blah blah, the character originally used the woman radical. So basically this was a product of the Cultural Revolution, and the attempt at changing the underlying Gestalt of the language was another factor that led to the Second Scheme's failure and by this point the average reader's probably fallen asleep.
Probably have to chop most of that paragraph down in the morning, but I figured it was worth putting here. And the specialists among us might find the book interesting. Recognizance (talk) 05:09, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think that's too much detail at all personally, it's fascinating really. I like Routledge. Unfortunately books they publish are usually so specialised that 'picking up' a copy is rather expensive. Postulor (talk) 20:58, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- Alright, I added it but without the detailed explanation of the suspicion character. I also re-added Hannas (Asia's Orthographic Dilemma) to the reference list and added one citation to him, but I haven't been able to check him out at length yet. Still waiting on DeFrancis to arrive. Recognizance (talk) 01:11, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
- Responding to Recognizance RFC on #wikipedia.freenode.net. Not commenting on the article which I haven't read yet but the underlying issue, i.e. the nature of the Chinese writing system and its position in writing systems of the future, inside or outside China. First, the phenomenon (binding of concepts and recombination of same in characters and multi-character words) has also been referred to in some (eg AI) circles as "chunking" (due SFAIK (in re the reading of Hanzi) to Douglas Hofstadter). Second, the more general notion is not without experimental treatments outside of the context of Chinese, e,g. in implementations of Herman Hesses Glassperlenspiel. Lycurgus (talk) 00:03, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Proposal to encode second round simplified characters
I have written a Proposal to Encode Obsolete Simplified Chinese Characters which may be relevant to this article, but to avoid WP:COI I am mentioning it here for other editors to evaluate. BabelStone (talk) 00:41, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
- Hodge and Louie, pp. 46-47.