Template talk:script

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

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

---

Categories ending in "in traditional script" to "in Traditional Han script"

And the same for the simplified characters. The templates {{script|Hant}} and {{script|Hans}} expand to "Traditional Han" and "Simplified Han", so for example, {{poscatboiler|cmn|noun|sc=Hant}} currently becomes "Mandarin nouns in Traditional Han script". To be consistent and make it easier to design category boilerplate templates to handle multiple scripts, it would be better if we name the categories accordingly. —CodeCat 13:12, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Both names are equally meaningful for someone who knows that "traditional" is. That said, I like the proposal of choosing the name that makes the organization consistent. Notably, Category:Mandarin nouns in Traditional Han script should somehow be a child of Category:Traditional Han script, eventually. --Daniel 15:37, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I have no preferences about the name itself, it's just that one gives more technical problems than the other. —CodeCat 15:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I have no objection to the change, provided that it makes things easier and doesn't require extensive editing of entries by hand. -- A-cai 21:35, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

P.S. I would also add one more, which would be sc=Hani. This one would place the entry in both traditional and simplified categories.. -- A-cai 21:41, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I have no problem with this as long as it makes the technical side simpler to manage. Jamesjiao → ^{T ◊ C} 22:12, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

• I've never heard "Traditional Han script" or "Simplified Han script" before in my life. Neither phrases can be found on Google Books. They should be "Traditional Chinese script" and "Simplified Chinese script" respectively. ---> Tooironic 22:22, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

That would mean editing {{script}} to display a different name, and moving Category:Traditional Han script and various other pages to match as well. —CodeCat 22:26, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

ISO 15924 refers to the scripts as "Han (Simplified variant)" and "Han (Traditional variant)". Are these scripts used only by Chinese languages? --Yair rand 23:00, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

• Question: Why are these categories split by script in the first place? We don't split other languages with multiple scripts. --Yair rand 23:07, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
  • I don't see why we shouldn't. Someone who is interested in traditional Chinese shouldn't have to pick their way through a category that is a mix of all three. I think the same could be done for Serbo-Croatian and many other languages too, but that's a separate issue. And as for the name... we call A a Latin letter even though it's used for more than just Latin. Chinese characters are named for their origin in the same way. —CodeCat 23:12, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

    Is it called Chinese script when used in non-Chinese languages (assuming it is used outside Chinese languages)? --Yair rand 23:19, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

    I agree with CodeCat. There's no reason why you couldn't do the same thing for other languages. It just so happens that the Chinese case is the most obvious. That's because it is not a trivial task to learn a new Chinese script, which involves memorizing thousands of new characters. This is why many speakers of Chinese never bother to learn both simplified and traditional scripts. -- A-cai 23:15, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Tooironic, there is precedent for using the word Han in describing Chinese characters in the context of computing standards. The html script codes hant and hans being two cases in point. Just saying :) -- A-cai 23:18, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

According to Category:Han script languages, a bunch of languages written in Han script are not Chinese languages. --Daniel 07:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but we are talking about script, not language here, obviously. It's Chinese in simplified or traditional script; calling it "Han script" is not only weird but political correctness gone mad (excuse the cliché). ---> Tooironic 01:51, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Err, A-cai, regardless of what some computer techies think are the correct terms, we should still use terms which are actually used by linguists and laypeople alike. No one actually says "Han script", that's just bizarre. ---> Tooironic 23:32, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Point taken. I'm just trying to be fair to all sides. However, it seems like everyone is leaning toward "Chinese script." -- A-cai 23:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I've created a poll.

Categories ending in "in traditional script" to "in Traditional Han script" — Traditional/Simplified Han script

1. Support Don't tell me you're honest with this. "Chinese script" is never used in a Japanese or Korean (or Vietnamese, for that matter) context. -- Prince Kassad 17:02, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

   Anyone wishes to prove Kassad wrong? If no one does that, perhaps the best option would be really to use "Han" as generic enough, regardless of the results of this poll. --Daniel 17:06, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

   I had never heard of Han characters until I started working on Wiktionary. I learn lots of things here. :) —CodeCat 17:16, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

   I learned English here. Basically. --Daniel 17:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

   This is madness. There are zero hits on Google Books for "Traditional Han script" and "Simplified Han script" - nobody says this! They're Chinese characters, plain and simple. ---> Tooironic 10:21, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

   Madness? This. Is. Wiktionaryyyyyyyyyyyyy *blocks* —CodeCat 10:48, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

   OK. Here are some Google Books results:

   "Han script" - 355 hits

   "Han writing system" - 9 hits

   "Han character" - 444 hits

   "Han characters" - 1.250 hits

   --Daniel 15:51, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

   And... there are way more hits for "Chinese script" and the traditional and simplified phrases. ---> Tooironic 15:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

   The aforementioned question remains. Are people comfortable with reading and writing all these statements below?

   • "Mandarin uses the Chinese script."
   • "Japanese uses the Chinese script."
   • "Korean uses the Chinese script."
   • "Vietnamese uses the Chinese script."

   --Daniel 16:06, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

   That's not what's being discussed. We're talking about "Mandarin nouns in simplified Chinese script", "Korean adjectives in Chinese script", "Japanese adverbs in Chinese script"... are we not? ---> Tooironic 22:46, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

   What's the difference? Well, nevermind, I'll adapt the question just for you.

   ...Are people comfortable with reading and writing all these phrases below?

   • "Mandarin nouns in Chinese script"
   • "Japanese nouns in Chinese script"
   • "Korean nouns in Chinese script"
   • "Vietnamese nouns in Chinese script"

   --Daniel 22:58, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

   One possible compromise, although it would require more programming gymnastics, would be to make it dependent on the language specified. For example, if the lang=ja and script=hant, you could have it say "Japanese nouns in kyujitai kanji script. If it says lang=ja and sc=hans, it could say "Japanese nouns in shinjitai kanji script." In other words, make the labels contingent upon the language. Korean would say "Korean nouns in Hanja script" and Vietnamese would say "Vietnamese nouns in Hán tự script" etc. -- A-cai 23:47, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

   I think you mean "Korean nouns in Hanja script". :P But yes, this would be best, since the appropriate wording for "hanzi" varies from language to language when rendered in English. ---> Tooironic 11:14, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

   Oops, I stand corrected :) Actually, the more I think about it, this definitely has certain advantages. For example, Japanese "simplified script" is different from Chinese "simplified script" in many instances. For example, the word for "map" in simplified Chinese is 地图, but it's 地図 in shinjitai script. It wouldn't make sense to put 地図 in a category called "Japanese nouns in simplified Chinese script." -- A-cai 12:55, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

   This would be possible, it would mean adding a language parameter to {{script}}. I think this would be the best solution. —CodeCat 13:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

2. Support Engirst 20:34, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
3. Support because of this point above: It wouldn't make sense to put 地図 in a category called "Japanese nouns in simplified Chinese script." DAVilla 15:09, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
4. Support Better than "Chinese", per arguments above. I take back my abstention. --Daniel 15:32, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Categories ending in "in traditional script" to "in Traditional Han script" — Traditional/Simplified Chinese script

1. Support —CodeCat 14:19, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
2. Support ---> Tooironic 23:32, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Categories ending in "in traditional script" to "in Traditional Han script" — Abstain

# Support --Daniel 03:35, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

1. Support (I'll go along with whatever everyone decides, as long as it doesn't involve me changing a lot of stuff by hand) -- A-cai 23:44, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
2. What he said. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:00, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
3. What they said. —Ruakh_TALK 04:15, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Categories ending in "in traditional script" to "in Traditional Han script" — Oppose/other