Wiktionary talk:Requested entries (Chinese)
发出火花 - scintillate, scintillating, scintillation? (See 发出 and 火花) -- when putting "scintillating" into Babelfish, these four characters are given - if this is not a word, why does Babelfish give these four characters as the translation of the single English word "scintillate" -- and what is, in your estimation, the Mandarin translation of the English word "scintillate"? 188.8.131.52 16:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Is the problem that the English word "scintillate" has no single-word Chinese translation? 184.108.40.206 16:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
- I will try to give you a concise answer to a complicated issue. Websites like Babelfish attempt to provide translations of words. There is a subtle difference between a translation of a word and a plain old word. Sometimes, a word in one language is several words in another (and vice versa). 发出火花 is a legitimate translation of the verb to scintillate. Therefore, I don't think anyone would object if you added it to the translations section of scintillate. However, that does not mean that a typical Chinese speaker would view 发出火花 as a single term. Literally translated, 发出火花 means to give off sparks. It is comprised of two words: 发出 (to issue) + 火花 (sparks), which is the literal meaning of scintillate. Putting the two Chinese words together does not create a unique meaning. This is why it would be considered a sum of parts entry, even though it is possible to translate the phrase with one English word. In contrast, the Chinese word of the month for April is a good example of a phrase that is more than the sum of its parts: 刻舟求剑. -- A-cai 23:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, it's very clear now. In the "translations" section of "scintillate," if we included 发出火花 as the Mandarin translation, there wouldn't be any Wikilink, though, because it wouldn't have an entry (unless the two component words comprising two characters each were wikilinked). This is the only problem, one I haven't encountered yet at Wiktionary, so I'm not sure how to solve it. 220.127.116.11 23:32, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
It appears that this website has perhaps thousands of hanzi that are all redlinks here at Wiktionary. As we already have thousands of bluelinks for hanzi that have no definitions, how is it possible that there are still thousands of hanzi that we don't even have stubs for? 18.104.22.168 03:48, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
The question template should only be used on talk pages
more (simple) words that need entries
Hi guys. I'm working on creating new entries for some very simple Mandarin words that surprisingly have missing entries. If you want to help me on my quest feel free to check out my user page. Cheers. Tooironic 03:22, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- I completely ditto this. Tooironic's guidelines make it easy to create Chinese entries. Personally, I suggest that we might want to concentrate on the Appendix:HSK list of Mandarin words--tons of missing basic words--达伟 16:19, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
"Running dogs of imperialism"
帝国主义的走狗 is a very commonly used phrase in Chinese communist propaganda of the 20th century. c. 8,000 Google hits. Please evaluate and discuss with care and thoughtfulness before removing. 22.214.171.124 00:39, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Split by language
- Not really. Most Chinese languages write in hanzi anyway. There would only be a very small minority of cases where we would have to differentiate between Mandarin and another topolect. Not worth the effort to create separate pages for everything. K.I.S.S. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:47, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
More as a Chinese learning site for Westeners?
Hi, I'm recently getting deeply involved into Wikipedia and all. And I have just annotated a few dozens of words in this page.
I'm just wondering, is this the way it should be done? Am I contributing properly? Please point out any deviation of my wiktioning I may have, thank you.
moved from Wiktionary:Requested entries (Chinese) - start
- küen "scroll", kuin "to roll up; a scroll; a book", citing "This sign was read as kiuan before the Han dynasty (221 BC-220 AD), which was changed to kui between 220 and 589. In the first Chinese dictionary (around 100) it meant “to bend the knee” and represented a sitting figure."
- Where was this text found? 126.96.36.199 08:21, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
"which was changed to kui between 220 and 589" - This is incorrect. The character you were looking for is 卷:
- (quán, Old Chinese *gron (Zhengzhang Shangfang), "(of knees) to bend, to curl")
- (juăn, OC *kronʔ, "to roll up"), also written as 捲
- (juàn, OC *krons, "a scroll > books, volumes") - a late derivation, probably no earlier than 200 AD
They are obviously part of the Old Chinese word family *Gron ("to bend, to curl > round, circle"), possibly a derivation from the root *Gon ("to surround > round"), which was extremely productive (cf. 拳, 蜷, 圈, 弮, 環, 圓, 彎, 圜). This has been proposed to be the source of Proto-Slavic *kъniga ("book"). I think it's unlikely.
Incidentally, Proto-Indo-European also has *kroC- ("to be bent") (horn ("that which is bent", PIE *k̑r̥nom, OC: 角 *kroːg), hook, curve, corner, crook, crotch, curl, crimp, cringe, crinkle, cripple, crisp, crochet, crouch).
- putongkuai - regular chopsticks 188.8.131.52 02:54, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
- This is a SoP. 普通筷 / 普通筷 (pǔtōng kuài). --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:54, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
- 普通筷 as opposed to... uh...消毒筷 or? If that's the case, I would not include 普通筷, reason being its naming is simply due to the popularisation of 消毒筷. Otherwise it would just be called 筷子. As for the choice of adjectives, the other suggestions would not make much sense. As Atitarev mentioned, 平常 is usually used with actions, so you can potentially say: 平常用的筷子 -> which means 'chopsticks that one usually uses', which could be either 普通筷 or 消毒筷. Jamesjiao → T ◊ C 21:26, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm a Chinese, I'm just curious in what occasion has anyone seen this phrase? I mean, I never see 普通筷 before; is it a term used in Restaurant "Industry", or by some Bureau/Ministry of Food Safety? Unless that be the case, this entry may be of Original Research. In re of SoP (what is this abbrev?), 平凡、共同、共通 are really not examples at all, since there's no such occasion of usage at all, in any country, by any Chinese. SzMithrandir (talk) 03:33, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
- I have not heard these terms before either, and all the terms above describing regular chopsticks appear weird-sounding to me. Wyang (talk) 05:05, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
I think there was a discussion about 々 in Chinese. It's not in a Chinese running text but can be used to show "Japaneseness" or mentioning/describing the Japanese character. Besides, duplications in Japanese/Chinese usually have different semantics and grammar. I think it should be removed. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 22:38, 11 March 2014 (UTC)