User talk:Suzukaze-c

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
(Redirected from User talk:Umbreon126)
Jump to: navigation, search

JA い-adjective く forms[edit]

Would something like this be acceptable to you? く forms are really more adverbs than adjectives, much like EN -ly forms. What do you think? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:24, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Sure. (I was thinking about it too.) —suzukaze (tc) 22:31, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

「 」[edit]

I see you removed "Encloses a character sequence that is supposed to represent a single character" from 「 」. Do you think that sense does not actually exist, or maybe that it is not citable? I realize it's usually hard to find quotes on Google Books for punctuation marks. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 06:21, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Not sure it's citable. Probably just an offhand way of noting that character A and character B are supposed to be grouped together. —suzukaze (tc) 06:25, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
I remember seeing them used like this, but it's mostly online, so it's not that easy to cite. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:50, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Category:Han characters needing common meanings[edit]

Can this category be cleared?--2001:DA8:201:3512:55FD:63A0:5A07:6206 07:21, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Not sure. I think our hanzi entries are weird, and when I think about the topic it gets complicated. —suzukaze (tc) 07:28, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
Common meanings are going to be phased out. I think this template no longer have purposes as definition should be added to appropriate language sections.--Zcreator (talk) 12:01, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Bumping it again. It is no longer preferred to add any definitions to translingual section and current contents in translingual section is being migrated. So I don't think this serves any use (rfdef template in Chinese section is enough). Also, it is three months since the proposal for deletion of this category.--Zcreator (talk) 17:39, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
It is certainly no longer preferred, but I worry about the quality and formatting of the pre-existing definitions, like . —suzukaze (tc) 18:02, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
If it is no longer preferred, we don't need to add or request it anymore; cleaning pre-existing definitions is another thing. What I request is remove {{defn|Han|sort=...}} from pages in the category, which displays the text "This term needs a translation to English." in the translingual section.--Zcreator (talk) 12:15, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Ahh, sorry, I forgot what the original proposal was. Yes, I think we can probably get rid of most of them. But what do we do about characters that don't have any other language sections besides Translingual? —suzukaze (tc) 18:05, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
If the character have some meaning, they should almost always be added to appropriate language sections (which may be created if needed). Having defn in translingual instead encourage people to add definitions to translingual section.--Zcreator (talk) 18:18, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
That's true. But then we need to think of another way to keep track of those characters. —suzukaze (tc) 18:20, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
They are now tracked in Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:tracking/zh-han/translingual-only_character.--Zcreator (talk) 18:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Nice. —suzukaze (tc) 18:52, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Is it ready to be cleared?--Zcreator (talk) 20:41, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
I suppose so. —suzukaze (tc) 20:48, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

せう[edit]

There'd been some discussion a while back about having entries for historical spellings. I think せう was created as part of an earlier effort towards that same end; looking at the history, I revamped it in May 2016, likely after our more-recent discussions.

If we are to have entries for historical spellings, then the entry should be cleaned up somewhat to more clearly redirect users to the modern spelling しょう.

If we are not to have entries for historical spellings, we should probably have a broader discussion on that to gain consensus, and then delink hhira and hkata spellings in headlines. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 20:10, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

I marked it for deletion as part of the WT:RFDO discussion for {{ja-kanji reading}}, and because it had no actual definitions. (I think people should go to Wikipedia for such detailed information on the evolution from seu > shou). I think that if it is to be kept, it should be as an entry that concisely points to shou, with some header other than Usage notes. —suzukaze (tc) 01:27, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
Helpful resource → KSound link. Please refer to the link, the list of historical readings derived from Middle Chinese. From there, it is possible to list the kanji with that historical spelling/pronunciation. What do you think? How about an appendix extending the KSound? --POKéTalker (talk) 02:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

𡿺[edit]

Hey! Please let me know what you think of the page I made about 𡿺! Thanks for your tireless work.--Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:38, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

It seems like Justin has already looked at it, so I don't really have any comment other than I like your work too. —suzukaze (tc) 03:45, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

丁丁‎[edit]

Why the reversion? It is the Chinese Wikipedia, and not just any Wikipedia, and that dot before the word on the other template looks weird to me. PseudoSkull (talk) 21:22, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

The dot is a bullet.
{{zh-wp}} is different from the normal {{wikipedia}} template, but I think it is necessary. See 中國 for an example. —suzukaze (tc) 23:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Ok, that makes sense. PseudoSkull (talk) 07:07, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

𭒹[edit]

I was wondering where you got the Chinese pronunciation of 𭒹 from? Johnkn63 (talk) 04:52, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

@Johnkn63: It comes from the Zhonghua Zihai. —suzukaze (tc) 06:05, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you very much for a quick and clear answer. I asked because only pronunciation given.Johnkn63 (talk) 09:33, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Grammar for 鬱#Japanese adjective[edit]

My references all list this as a と・たる adjective, not a な adjective. C.f. the Daijirin entry at Weblio and the Daijisen entry at Kotobank. Examples of 鬱な気分 found via Google mostly seem to be cases of 憂鬱な気分. Can you confirm usage of 鬱な where it's not part of a larger compound? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 05:39, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I wonder if it's a colloquial thing. These Google News results seem to have 鬱な気分. —suzukaze (tc) 05:47, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you! I suspect this is a literary term that is now making (or has recently made?) the transition back into common vernacular use, with a grammatical change as part of that process.
I feel like we should note that this is also a と・たる adjective... but I don't think we have the templates for that, as classical stuff and rare grammar patterns keep getting back-burnered.  :) ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 07:06, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Reddit[edit]

Hello. You said in an edit summary at moon rune, "reddit is not a source of quotes". I am curious about why. I actually don't know much about Reddit, but I had imagined that it is something like 'alt' spaces were in usenet – a basically open forum where people share messages. Is Reddit not durably archived? or does it have in-group language norms that make it problematic for examples? Just curious. Cnilep (talk) 00:37, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't think Reddit is durably archived. (Honestly, I think the "durably archived" criteria is out of touch with the current state of the internet...) —suzukaze (tc) 00:51, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Reddit comments can be (and are frequently) deleted by their creators, by moderators, or by site administration. Sometimes entire communities are banned or locked off from public view. In those cases, it becomes impossible to verify that someone said something on Reddit unless recorded on another website. Now, we can (and possibly should) broaden the "durably archived" criterion, but including Reddit directly is not the way to go about it. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:27, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

'full=' in ja-verb-suru[edit]

Hello. The documentation at Template:ja-verb-suru/documentation says, “full= full form with the suru included ¶ This parameter is required.” It appears, though, that the template works well without that parameter. Should the documentation be changed? Cnilep (talk) 01:43, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

"full" doesn't exist in Module:ja-headword, the code that powers Template:ja-verb-suru. I think it is outdated documentation. —suzukaze (tc) 02:55, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

中華人民共和國[edit]

Hi.

Do you have another source for Min Bei? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:23, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

@Atitarev: I personally don't, but it seems to me like nêng belongs to 人#Etymology_2, not 人#Etymology_1. I don't think we are in any hurry to add Min Bei pronunciation to words that we don't have information for, even if it a word like 中國. I'm not really a fan of blindly concatenating readings. —Suzukaze-c 03:27, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
I got the transliteration from Min Bei incubator, apparently an enthusiast of Min Bei. The Min Bei (Jian'ou) pronunciation of (nêng) is /neiŋ³³/, I don't see any discrepancy here. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:32, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Nêng is a reading of 人, which is corroborated by 漢字古今音資料庫 and this excerpt of Matthew in the New Testament, but it strikes me as too similar to 人#Etymology_2.
Of course, it is possible that I am wrong too, and that nêng really is part of 人#Etymology_1. —Suzukaze-c 03:37, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
I can only see one Min Bei reading - "nêng" and /neiŋ³³/ is the only reading listed there under the "Dialectal data" in the expanded mode. I've added "nêng" to etymology 1. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:42, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Nêng is actually etymology 1. Compare other characters with the same rime (Min Bei / Min Nan): 親 (chéng / chhin), 認 (nēng / jīn). Min Bei is inland Min, not coastal Min, so it's lexically quite different from Min Nan, Min Dong, or Puxian Min. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:37, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Alright, thanks for clearing that up. The initial threw me off a lot. I guess I was indeed wrong :o —Suzukaze-c 07:43, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Min Bei initials are kinda weird, but this is just a mild case. There are weirder ones, like 狗 (ě), 食 (iè) or 老 (sē). My bigger concern for 中華人民共和國 and 中國 is the fact that dô̤ng is a vernacular reading, which I can only find in 中央 at this point. I've left a message at @唐吉訶德的侍從's page on Wikipedia, so hopefully we can get an answer on this. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 19:40, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
😮
(I wonder if we can invite more editors from China by infiltrating their QQ/Wechat/whatever groups...?) —Suzukaze-c 21:10, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Katakana in ja-usex[edit]

Hello. Regarding this edit, notice that without the duplicate kana the '''bolded''' word doesn't appear in bold face. At least, it doesn't in my browser. Also, タイヤ should be in katakana. It seems like the bold face works if there is カナ|かな in the template, but not if there is only one kana entry. I'm not sure if this is a technical snafu. Cnilep (talk) 03:43, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

I didn't notice that たいや was in hiragana orz
The font thing should be fixed! —Suzukaze-c 03:53, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Now the bold face looks fine. I wonder if it's a browser issue? Any road, thanks for your edits. Cnilep (talk) 04:02, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

烟店[edit]

Hello! I have created a page that has a problem I can't fix on it: 烟店. The page reads: "For pronunciation and definitions of 烟店 – see 煙店 (“[[w:Yandian, Hubei; etc.”)."

It shouldn't say "(“[[w:Yandian, Hubei; etc.”)", it should say "(“Yandian, Hubei; etc.”)" or something like that.

How can I fix this problem? Thanks for any assistance! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:18, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

It has to do with some of the code in Module:zh but I'm not sure how to fix it. —Suzukaze-c 22:16, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
(In Perl notation) \{\{place\|zh\|[^\}]*t=((?:[^\n\}\|\[]|\[\[.+?\]\])+)[^\}]*\}\} apparently works. The point is to match the part after t= in a way that accepts (one-or-more) not only single characters but also clusters beginning with [[ and ending with ]] so that inner pipes will be regarded as part of the cluster and skipped. --Dine2016 (talk) 06:15, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Sadly, Lua implements a crippled subset of regex they call "patterns". :( Thanks for looking at it though. @Zcreator alt, any ideas? —Suzukaze-c 19:12, 23 April 2018 (UTC)