Talk:好好

@Umbreon126 Actually, there is a problem with the erhua pinyin. It's "hǎohāor", not "hǎohǎor". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:19, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Does that mean restoring the previous zh-pron input? —umbreon126 04:49, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Sense 3

@Justinrleung, Suzukaze-c I don't speak Cantonese, but... the sense 3 doesn't look like an adverb to me. What do you think? Dokurrat (talk) 18:11, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

@Dokurrat: You're right. Senses 1 and 3 (now 1 and 2 under adjective) are both adjectives. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 18:16, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: Thanks! I still have a problem. Is this Cantonese "very good; excellent" sense etymologically made of 好 (in a big degree; very) + 好 (good)? If my guess is right, we may need to put this sense under a new etymology section. Dokurrat (talk) 18:42, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

@Dokurrat: Yes, right again. It might be SoP, though, so I don't know if we should actually keep the sense. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 18:44, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: I don't know either for now. And I'd say this usage is not a Cantonese exclusive. 今天天氣好好 works in Mandarin too. Dokurrat (talk) 18:55, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

@Dokurrat: I thought so. @Wyang, Suzukaze-c, should we keep this sense? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 19:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

{{&lit}}? —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 00:00, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

I think it can be kept as the sense can be quite useful to readers. Not a big fan of {{&lit}} to be honest; it offers no support to Chinese terms and is unnecessarily verbose. Wyang (talk) 01:36, 26 August 2018 (UTC)