User talk:Nlu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search



Quong Tuck Company safe 01.jpg

Hello Nlu, according to the summary of the picture to the right, you did the translation for the inscriptions, so I guess you may be the right person to ask:

  1. Do they form a duilian? It seems to not follow the prescribed tone pattern.
  2. The sequence is rendered with the left row first; should that not be the other way, given that traditionally right is read first?

Thanks, — Sebastian 18:54, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

@SebastianHelm: They aren't "duilian" in the sense of the strict pattern, but loosely, they can be considered a "duilian"; I think whoever wrote them was more interested in the "good luck" aspects of the words rather than literary, so didn't go as far as making sure that the wording is analogous. As far as which one should be read first - I don't think it matters; they are matching columns that clearly don't have one flowing into the other. --Nlu (talk) 19:00, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I'm surprised you write the sequence doesn't matter; to me it seems that "國寶" is a further extension of "財源廣". That said, as I'm writing this, I realize that the word classes also don't match, so it's clearly as you say that the writer was not that interested in the literary aspect. — Sebastian 19:11, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
@SebastianHelm: Well, I meant that in the captions, I don't think our readers necessarily needs to read one column before the other. (By the way, while the image is not at great resolution for my eyes, I am reading the left column as "國寶盈庫" and the right column as "財源廣進.") --Nlu (talk) 19:15, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, maybe there's a misunderstanding. We both recognize the same characters; maybe I confused you by only mentioning some of them? Of course, anybody can read anything on Wikipedia in the order they jolly well please, but I don't see why we shouldn't guide our readers towards the order it was intended to be read in. Especially as it's easy to do by just adding "(right)" and "(left)" in the text. But as we both agree, it's not a literary text, so it's not worth quibbling over. — Sebastian 19:33, 18 September 2015 (UTC)