Wiktionary talk:Requested entries (Chinese)

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

scintillate:发出火花[edit]

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"? 24.29.228.33 16:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Is the problem that the English word "scintillate" has no single-word Chinese translation? 24.29.228.33 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. 131.123.231.143 23:32, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Missing hanzi[edit]

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? 24.29.228.33 03:48, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

more (simple) words that need entries[edit]

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"[edit]

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. 71.66.97.228 00:39, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

This is already being discussed at Talk:走狗. ---> Tooironic 17:31, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Split by language[edit]

This should be split by different languages (as we treat them on en.wikt), right? --Bequw τ 00:50, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

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?[edit]

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.

You can also find me at Chinese wikipedia, if not here. SzMithrandir (talk) 01:05, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

kuen[edit]

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? 71.66.97.228 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 :

  • (quán, Old Chinese *gron (Zhengzhang Shangfang), "(of knees) to bend, to curl")
  • (juăn, OC *kronʔ, "to roll up"), also written as
  • (juàn, OC *krons, "a scroll > books, volumes") - a late derivation, probably no earlier than 200 AD

In Shuowen (~ 100 AD), the definition for 卷 (image) was: "厀曲也。从卪𠔉[𨤑]聲。" (Bending of knees. Phono(𠔉)-semantic(卪).)

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. , , , , , , , ). 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: *kroːg), hook, curve, corner, crook, crotch, curl, crimp, cringe, crinkle, cripple, crisp, crochet, crouch).

  • putongkuai - regular chopsticks 60.240.101.246 02:54, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
This is a SoP. 普通 / 普通 (pǔtōng kuài). --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:54, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Aha so most of these would also be valid SoP ways to describe regular chopsticks right? 平常筷 (píngcháng kuài), 平凡筷 (píngfán kuài), 共同筷 (gòngtóng kuài), 共通筷 (gòngtōng kuài), 相互筷 (xiānghù kuài) — hippietrail (talk) 07:52, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Probably not. You can try Jamesjiao (talkcontribs). Not all adjectives can be used in any sense, like "平常" refers to usual actions, "平凡" means "commonplace, not special", "共同" means "joint, common" in the sense of "shared". --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 09:26, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure what the current policies on SoP are, they seem to have swung back and forth a fair bit over the years, but wouldn't the fact that only one of several synonyms can be part of the phrase make it not SoP, much like scrambled eggs, etc? — hippietrail (talk) 06:40, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
普通 as opposed to... uh...消毒 or? If that's the case, I would not include 普通, reason being its naming is simply due to the popularisation of 消毒. 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 or 消毒. JamesjiaoTC 21:26, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

moved from Wiktionary:Requested entries (Chinese) - end Wyang (talk) 11:43, 5 March 2014 (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)

[edit]

I think there was a discussion about 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)

々 is used fairly frequently in informally written Chinese texts, though not formally. When I was in school, the teacher used to deduct marks off anyone who was too lazy to write characters in full and just wrote iteration marks. Wyang (talk) 05:06, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Shall we add it? --WikiWinters (talk) 01:41, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

奥运匹克[edit]

奥运匹克 should mean "Olympics" or "Olympic Games" (and appears as such on websites) but it was removed from the list twice. 173.89.236.187 03:51, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

The page referred to the correct spelling, then it was removed first as a "non-word" by Wyang, then by me. Please look at the correct spellings (only including simplified forms):

Your "奥运匹克" is a strange misspelling, where to the 1st part 奥运 (àoyùn) (abbreviation of 林匹克动会) the 2nd part of "奥林" (pǐkè) is attached, the result is "àoyùn pǐkè". It seems to have 23 hits in Google books, so you can restore the request if you so insist but I'm not too keen to create Chinese uncommon misspellings. @Wyang:, @Jamesjiao:, please comment if this word should be included. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:43, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

It is an ignorant misspelling of 奥林匹克 by someone likely uneducated. It is nonsensical and should not be created. Wyang (talk) 05:06, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
There's on annoying fact that this misspelling seems attestable (I'm not saying it is) - it has 23 Google books hits, so it may sit there on the page with a comment if nobody wants to create it. I have posted on Wiktionary:Tea_room/2014/March#.E5.A5.A5.E8.BF.90.E5.8C.B9.E5.85.8B --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:20, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

对不对 and 到了[edit]

@Wyang: Thanks for maintaining the page but I was going to create these two entries later. They are are border cases but are included in some dictionaries and may qualify as phrasebook entries, especially 对不对 (also: isn't it?). 到了 can also have a different meaning if pronounced "dàoliǎo" --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:54, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

X不X (X=adjective) as the basic structure of a simple Chinese question is something a learner needs to know himself/herself. 对不对 (is it true?), 好不好 (is it good?), 脏不脏 (is it dirty?), 高不高 (is it tall?), 斜不斜 (is it tilted?). I don't know about phrasebook, but it is obviously SoP. There is no is it true, is it right, isn't it, isn't that right, or anything synonymous in English that I can think of. 到了 created. Wyang (talk) 05:06, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. What you say is true and I know about X不X (X=adjective or verb). We have the English phrasebook entry isn't it so, which fits 对不对.
到了 needs the second, non-idiomatic reading (etym 2) as well. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:17, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

面對音樂[edit]

Should be added as Chinese equivalent of face the music. 204.11.184.222 13:58, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

We do not say 面对音乐.--Hahahaha哈 (talk) 19:49, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Prove it's in use. JamesjiaoTC 20:19, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Did you look online for this term? 173.89.236.187 03:38, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

美利坚合眾[edit]

Should be added as it is a translation of United States of America. 204.11.184.222 13:58, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

The correct translation is 美利堅合眾國--Hahahaha哈 (talk) 19:51, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Prove it's in use and on a side note, please discuss with the regular Mandarin editors before starting on your crusade of wrecking Mandarin entries. Discuss if there is something you don't agree with. If you come with an attitude, you won't last long here. JamesjiaoTC 20:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
I think 204.11.184.222 meant 美利坚合众国 (missed the last character (or as Hahahaha哈 mentioned the traditional form). In defense of the anon user, I should say he/she hasn't been aggressive but a bit too persistent. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:27, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Who "wrecked" what, when? 173.89.236.187 03:36, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

晩餐[edit]

The term 晩餐 should be added; found in Chinese-language newspaper here: http://ecjweb.net/KCXX/ECJ249/KCXX_140315_01.htm 173.89.236.187 03:39, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

:Copying my reply: on User_talk:173.89.236.187

Please don't re-add 晩餐 to the requests. It uses a Japanese-specific character. There's "also" just on top of the entry. The Chinese spelling is 晚餐. Please also check the comments, check the entries carefully, so we don't have to notify you personally. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:12, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Why did I just find it under the spelling I added in a Chinese-language newspaper? 173.89.236.187 03:31, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Here is the link: http://ecjweb.net/KCXX/ECJ249/KCXX_140315_01.htm 173.89.236.187 03:34, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
The link doesn't matter. We have criteria for inclusion. Typos and conversion problems are common, due to inefficiency of input or human errors. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:41, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, what does that mean? I just provided a source--a Chinese-language newspaper. Further, the two characters you said were Japanese-only have "Mandarin" sections in their own Wiktionary entries. 173.89.236.187 03:42, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
I have removed the section but it may still be necessary for reference. Japanese characters is a CJKV character, a variant of Chinese , it means that Chinese people know about it but don't use it or are supposed to use. Your source is not reliable [1] (in permanently recorded media) give only Japanese results. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:48, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
The character is in Zdic and CDict. 173.89.236.187 03:53, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
And Wiktionary is not about only Standard Mandarin Chinese as spoken and written and typed in the year 2014, but also reflects historical usages and (as permitted by computer standards) variant characters. 173.89.236.187 03:55, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
I will let others deal with you but don't re-add the request until this is resolved, this may be considered disruptive and you may get a block. I'm not keen to create entries I consider non-standard. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:03, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
I have made a "common misspelling of" entry but @Wyang:, a native speaker has removed it, which shows his attitude to this spelling. Sorry, you can try your luck somewhere outside Wiktionary. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

四十年 and 四十年代[edit]

四十年 and 四十年代 should be added. These are idioms meaning the 1940s, something that definitely would not be apparent to non-Chinese speakers. Someone just removed them, saying that "四十年" means "40 years." It can, but it can also mean the 1940s. 204.11.186.190 15:39, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

These are SoP and won't be added. See 四十 and 年代. The missing numeral can be added. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 21:29, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
四十年 doesn't mean the 1940s; neither does 四十年代. "The 1940s" is "二十世紀四十年代". Wyang (talk) 23:12, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Yes, 四十年 is "40 years" and 四十年代 is "the '40s". --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:22, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Has Japanese entry, needs Chinese[edit]

@Tooironic: I'm sure you can do some of those. :) --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:34, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Well I saw that there were almost no requested entries for Chinese, so I thought I'd see if anyone else was up for creating them. I'll be migrating all the other ones from my User Page. May as well see if anyone else wants to take a stab. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:30, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh, I see you've already done many of them. Thanks a million. I'll take a look now. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:32, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
No worries, I was just stirring you :). I have no problem with you adding requests here, I've been doing that as well, even if I can make entries myself - Russian, Korean, etc - to remind myself too. You will find much more potential Chinese words in (formerly User:Wyang/c) User:Wyang/c/1, User:Wyang/c/2, User:Wyang/c/3. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:43, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Re: "I thought I'd see if anyone else was up for creating them". I have been quite busy creating Chinese entries, if you haven't noticed. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:52, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I've noticed. I'm quite proud of the progress we have made over the past few years. Our Chinese coverage keeps going from strength to strength. While our zi entries lag behind, our ci entries are pretty damn good if I may say so myself. ---> Tooironic (talk) 11:09, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Some suggestions[edit]

@Tooironic: Hi Carl, I reckon terms that do exist in dictionaries, such as Wenlin (I know you have it), Pleco - (free download for mobile devices) and Nciku shouldn't be added here, since we, as advanced learners, are able to get definitions ourselves. Another, less reliable source, is CEDIC, which is integrated into free pop-up dictionaries and, of course, MDBG. CEDIC's definitions are sometimes off, so it's better to verify against Wenlin or Pleco. Pls reply. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:56, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

What exactly do you mean? Are you saying we should only add requests for entries which are not in the usual dictionaries? ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:35, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
It's just my request to you, asking you to help when you can. I'd like to fill all the requests but in most cases I would possibly use the same resources you could as well. Let's take the next one I was going to do as example: 攀比 (pānbǐ). Pleco has it: "to cite cases of others in support of one's claim". CEDIC also has it: "to make invidious comparisons, to compete with, to emulate". Nciku: "to compare unrealistically; to compete (with each other socially)", MDBG: "to make invidious comparisons / to compete with / to emulate". I don't have Wenlin handy. If you get the same resources, it may be easier for you to check the words you don't know and maybe add more entries by yourself? Of course, you can continue doing what you're doing but it would make my life a bit easier. :) --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:02, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
@Tooironic: Carl, please comment. Don't feel pressurised, though. I just want to discuss this with you. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:30, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm still not sure exactly what you're getting at. I add new entries almost every day. The more complex ones I add here as I often can't be bothered to work on them due to time constraints. The problem is not about getting definitions, it's about adding an entry which has all senses, all alternative forms and all variant pronunciations. They are my own personal requirements. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:42, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
OK, no worries. What I was getting at - a basic entry just needs a pronunciation and a translation to English, which are available from dictionaries, even if words are unfamiliar to you - Pleco often provides usage examples too (Wenlin and Nciku as well). Anyway, happy with your explanation. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:46, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

RFM discussion: November 2012–September 2014[edit]

AS-rondo-icon.svg

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for moves, mergers and splits (permalink).

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, though feel free to discuss its conclusions.


Wiktionary:Requested entries (Chinese) to Wiktionary:Requested entries (Mandarin)

We no longer treat Chinese as a language on Wiktionary, so this should probably be moved. I don't know if everything on the page is Mandarin, though, so it should be checked. —CodeCat 18:57, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, move then check. I can see three entries which explicitly say 'Cantonese', the rest are either explicitly Mandarin, or implicitly Mandarin. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:21, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
But many of them have overlap. It might be more productive just to keep them all on one page. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Is overlap such a bad thing? The idea of having request pages is to show what needs to be done for that language. Most people who edit Chinese dialects will know only Mandarin, so if they add Mandarin and remove the link, what happens to someone who comes along and wants to add Cantonese entries? If we mix the languages up then that picture is no longer as clear. Imagine if we had one page for both English and Scots! —CodeCat 02:05, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
There are cases where the requester doesn't know the dialect, having found it referenced in a book or movie somewhere, or in a menu at a restaurant, so there should be a category for such requests. Also, there may be requests for a specific Han character, so there should be a category for those. Don't forget that most people outside of Asia and Asian communities abroad aren't well-versed in the distinctions between the different dialects. Being rigorous about such distinctions in entries and translation tables is absolutely appropriate, but request categories should be looser to accommodate those who don't know the right question to ask. I would favor merging as proposed, but also adding one category for Chinese (unknown dialect), and one for Han character (if we don't already have those already). Chuck Entz (talk) 02:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
It's also possible that someone finds a word in any other language but don't know which language it is in. If I came across something written in Devanagari, I wouldn't know whether to add the request to Sanskrit, Hindi or something else. So Chinese is not special at all in that regard. —CodeCat 02:57, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
What makes Chinese different is that they have a language name that they have every reason to believe is correct based on common usage. I wouldn't mind having vague categories like "Languages of India" or "Middle Eastern Languages", especially for requests in transliteration. I might cringe a bit if I ran across a request to translate a word like "wee-wish" from "Indian", though. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:56, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Well, we don't have Wiktionary:Requested entries (West Germanic) or Wiktionary:Requested entries (Iberian). Mglovesfun (talk) 10:45, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose; we now treat Chinese as a language. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:09, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Expired with no action taken. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:09, 27 September 2014 (UTC)