User talk:Wyang/Archive6

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


Do you hear people of non-Chinese origin speaking Chinese languages?[edit]

For me, I only can hear them on the TV or YouTube. How about you? Can it also be the case that those speakers were born in those countries (e.g. China, Hong Kong and Taiwan), therefore raised with those languages? I'm curious, as the world is becoming more globalised as time goes on, I assume that you have friends of this type – AWESOME meeos * (「欺负」我) 04:17, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

The proportion of non-natives speaking it fluently is definitely lower than European languages, but there are many that do. There are some in the Wiktionary editing community, for example. Wyang (talk) 06:56, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Use of 鴨嘴 in Chinese[edit]

I'm curious if the character combo 鴨嘴 on its own would meet CFI for Chinese. I do note use of this online, as at google:"鴨嘴是" or google:"這鴨嘴的", but I'm not sure of the SOP-ness of the two-character combo 鴨嘴. Do you have any insight?

Yes, it does have a meaning other than "bill of a duck" in Chinese. However, the meaning is quite different from Japanese ... Wyang (talk) 22:15, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Aha, thank you. Fumiko has been adding {{DEFAULTSORT:...}} to various entries to force sorting under the kana order for Japanese. If there are kana in the headword, that seems safe to me, since kana are isolated to only Japanese. But for kanji-only headwords, that can be inappropriate if the headword also exists as a term in Chinese. This appears to be one such case.
Thank you for your expertise! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:43, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
By "vaginal dilator", might that be the same thing as a speculum? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Haha indeed, speculum is a more precise name. (Was Googling "vaginal dilator" and wondering how to make it non-ambiguous...) Wyang (talk) 23:19, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Query about origins of a bopomofo letter[edit]

I don't suppose you could add anything at w:Talk:Bopomofo#Etymology_of_ㄊ? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:41, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

@Eirikr, I've added my thoughts there. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:21, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, I agree with Justin on this. Wyang (talk) 23:23, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Irregular Korean pronunciation[edit]

Hi Wyang, I was talking about random things to my Korean friend, and we eventually hit a Korean word called 해돋이 (haedodi, sunrise). The thing was, I thought that this word was pronunced like haedodi [hɛ̝do̞di], but he told me it was actually [hɛ̝do̞d͡ʑi]. I thought Hangul was a completely phonetic orthography for Korean! What do you think of this? – AWESOME meeos * (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 02:07, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Hangul is not completely phonemic; it is largely morphophonemic. There are some regular rules of assimilation, and some irregularities which can be specified when trying to infer the IPA from orthography. They are mostly outlined in {{ko-pron}}. In this case, the pronunciation template and transliteration function for Korean anticipate palatalisation of the d, hence 해돋이 (haedodi) does not require additional parameters for pronunciation. Wyang (talk) 05:52, 23 January 2017 (UTC)


你好!如果未做完就停止可以講「結束」嗎? 19:53, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Quick check of [edit]

Hi Wyang, this character () seems to refer to a place name in China's ancient Lu state (during the Spring and Autumn Period) -- "~池" 同"曲池",中国春秋时鲁国地名。Just seeing if I translated this one correctly. Thanks! Bumm13 (talk) 06:35, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

@Bumm13, you're right! — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 21:33, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Some IP module edits[edit]

I noticed a number of module errors in CAT:E for Chinese entries, which led me to the edits by (talkcontribswhoisdeleted contribsnukeedit filter logblockblock logactive blocksglobal blocks) to data modules. I have no clue whether these edits are the problem or whether it's something else, but I figured you would be able to sort it out. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 20:44, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz, it should be fixed now. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 21:17, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 21:20, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

㈀ & ㉠[edit]

Do you know if PARENTHESIZED HANGULs and CIRCLED HANGULs have any special meaning, listed in here? I guess they don't and I am going to redirect them to normal hanguls (or words). --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:25, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

I think these are for listing items: ㈀ ...; ㈁ ...; ㈂ ... I'm not familiar with the redirect policy, so I'm not sure if they are suitable for redirects. Wyang (talk) 03:34, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Listing head like (1) (2) (3) is not special meaning. I mean, if it is used on map to represent some kind of places or abbreviation of something, for example. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:53, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Oh I see. I don't think there are any uses of these as abbreviations, as far as I know. Wyang (talk) 04:00, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


This code considers syllabic 'ng' wrong... —suzukaze (tc) 06:55, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

What's the point of this code when lines 126–134 check already? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:11, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Re Justin: The error checks on lines 126-134 rely on the syllable itself being of the shape "[a-z]+[1-9][%-%*]?[1-9]?". It fails to pick up ones such as "hoeng" which is missing a tone. Wyang (talk) 07:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
I see, thanks. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:55, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

{{Han compound}}: diff[edit]

Could you please document these changes? Thanks! —suzukaze (tc) 08:39, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

No problem - added now. Wyang (talk) 08:52, 30 January 2017 (UTC)


不耐 + or + 耐煩? I feel it's probably the latter. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:59, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

I agree. I remembered checking Moedict for this word when I created it; they had 21, but now I realise some of their compound divisions seem to have been done automatically and are not accurate. I will change it to the latter. Wyang (talk) 06:45, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Confusing Korean pronunciation[edit]

Hi Wyang, I was taught this phrase by my Korean friends, so that I can say it to Koreans who were boastful to me (usually making stereotypes of saying that Asians are better than Aussies): 잘난척 하지마! (Jallancheok hajima!, Don't be a show-off!). I tried to pronunce this, but until now, it took me three months to realise that 잘난척 하지마 was actually pronounced as [t͡ɕa̠ɭ.ɭa̠n.t͡ɕʰʌ̹k̚ ha̠.d͡ʑ̠] instead of [t͡ɕa̠ɭ.ɾa̠n.t͡ɕʰʌ̹k̚ ha̠.d͡ʑ̠]. What do you reckon about this linguistic story? My theory is that it's not necessarily due to the orthography, but (l) is allophonically pronounced both as /l/ and /ɾ/, thus confused me – AWESOME meeos * (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 07:44, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

PS those Koreans who were making fun of me thought it was so cute and funny when I pronounced it wrong XD – AWESOME meeos * (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 07:46, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
It will be helpful to have a thorough read of Korean phonology and make sure you are familiar with the ins and outs of the Korean pronunciation system. This is part of the basic and widespread phenomenon of assimilation, which converts a ᆯ-ᄂ sequence to ᆯ-ᄅ. ‹ᄅ› has a number of allophones, and in a ᆯ-ᄅ sequence both are pronounced as /l/. Compare the {{ko-IPA}} output for this:
  • IPA(key)[t͡ɕa̠ɭɭa̠nt͡ɕʰʌ̹k̚ ha̠d͡ʑima̠]
  • Phonetic Hangul[ ]
Revised Romanization? jallancheok hajima
Revised Romanization (translit.)? jalnancheog hajima
McCune–Reischauer? challanch'ŏk hajima
Yale Romanization? calnanchek hacima
Pronouncing it as /l.n/ would sound as if you are trying to enunciate the syllables separately. A similar case is in diff which you edited earlier - it is variantly pronounced as /ŋ.m/ (in usual speech) and /k̚.m/ (when one wishes to pause between the two). Wyang (talk) 11:26, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
OMG you are so knowledgeable! Thank you for giving me your remarks and your interpretation on this story! Do you know all the assimilation pairs of Korean? – AWESOME meeos * (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 11:47, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
The Wikipedia article Korean phonology is a very detailed description of the Korean pronunciation system, and contains a relatively complete chart for the assimilation outcomes. The part that is missing from their table is the outcome of assimilations involving the composite letters (겹낱자), but they are uncommon and sometimes difficult to predict even for a native Korean speaker. {{ko-IPA}} should handle these assimilation patterns without problems. To familiarise yourself with Korean phonology, I would suggest doing some readings, such as the abovementioned Wikipedia article, and other books providing an overview of the Korean language (there are a couple of them - for example Lee and Ramsey's A History of the Korean Language). Wyang (talk) 11:53, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Will do! Already had a brief look at the Wikipedia page and its contents; but I'm about to go to sleep soon, that means I'll have a more thorough look tomorrow. Perhaps I can show these articles you've suggested me to my Korean friends so that I can surprise them (⊙ω⊙) – AWESOME meeos * (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 12:05, 3 February 2017 (UTC)


When you get the time, would you mind adding the Cantonese meaning of 成本? I found it in moedict: 廣東方言。指整本。如:「成本書都要考,範圍太多了。」九命奇冤·第二回:「據貴造而論,一生事業不少,一個大批說不盡許多,不如批個成本的好。」Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:46, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

I think this may be a sum of parts: 成 (entire) + 本 (classifier). @Justinrleung I remember the discussion about 成年 (chéngnián) before. What do you think about this one? Wyang (talk) 03:16, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, this looks SOP to me. You could have 成 (seng4) + any classifier, like 成個 (the whole thing), 成碗 (the whole bowl), 成嚿 (the whole piece)... That said, I think we can have 成 (seng4) + time classifier, like 成日, 成年, 成朝, 成晚 because they can act as adverbs. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:34, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

意大利, 義大利[edit]

I assume these come from English Italy, and not Italian Italia, would I be right? ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:46, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure. It could be from English, but I think it could as well be a shortened form of 意大里亞, 意大理亞 etc.; for example, s:zh:海国图志/卷039 uses both 意大里亞 and 意大里. The 大 in 意大利 or 義大利 perhaps suggests Italian is more likely, and the nearby 奧地利 also corresponds to -ia. Wyang (talk) 04:54, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
French Italie might be a possibility to consider? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:29, 6 February 2017 (UTC)


What do you think: 皮包 + or ++? ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:02, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

@Tooironic, I'd say the latter for sure. If it were 皮包 + , it would mean something like "handbag bone", which makes no sense whatsoever. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:26, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
I agree. Wyang (talk) 08:26, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:53, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Etymology of 脣 and 嘴 (and 喙)[edit]

Could you take a look at the etymologies for 脣 and 嘴? STEDT connects both of these to PTB *m-ts(j)ul, but Schuessler doesn't make the connection, so I wasn't too sure. Also, 嘴 probably needs a note about 喙 (is it related?). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 02:56, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Not a problem. I expanded the etymologies of and . Re 喙 and 嘴: I don't think 喙 is related to 嘴. IMO they are two separate words for "mouth; beak", although the Min and Hakka readings of 喙 may derive from 嘴/觜. I'm not sure about the etymology of 喙; Schuessler's explanation seems a bit off to me. Wyang (talk) 07:31, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for expanding the etymologies! 喙 seems complicated. The Mandarin huì reading corresponds to Guangyun 許穢切 or Jiyun 呼惠切, whereas the Min (and maybe Hakka) readings are connected to Guangyun 昌芮切 and Jiyun 充芮切. I'm not sure if these two would be related. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:59, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
I think so too. Wyang (talk) 08:10, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

, and ; and [edit]

Hi, when you have time, could you take a look at , and , especially their etymologies? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 21:02, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Also for and . — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 22:00, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
All done now. (This is the frustrating part about Chinese etymology - often there is no definitive answer and it's only various authors proposing their etymologies of some characters.) Wyang (talk) 07:28, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for adding to them! Just a question about : Schuessler suggests that the verb senses extend from "barrier" (the meaning in Shuowen), but you have it the other way around. Any particular reason for that? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 08:06, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
The ST comparanda all refer to the action - I felt that the original meaning would be verb too. However, the noun meanings match the glyph origin, so it may be better to switch the order. Wyang (talk) 08:17, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


I added the code for Proto-Karen, "kar-pro". Now, if we could add Proto-Karen as an ancestral language... --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 08:51, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Great, thanks for that. If you can, could you also help add the codes for: Proto-Tani, Proto-Kuki-Chin, Proto-Central Naga, Proto-Tangkhulic, Proto-Lolo-Burmese and Proto-Loloish (e.g. [1]), as well as Proto-Hlai and Proto-Kam-Sui? I'm not sure what codes would be appropriate though. I'm happy with making all of these ST proto-languages etymology-only. Thanks! Wyang (talk) 09:04, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

phonetic for tone sandhi[edit]

Hi. Would it be possible to indicate a phonetic reading for tone sandhi like we do for words with 一 and 不? May be useful for learners. ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:12, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

@Tooironic: I that that's a great idea! But we'll see what Wyang thinks first – AWESOME meeos * (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 04:59, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
This has been suggested in 2014 by Kinamand, and again in Sep last year by Шурбур. I added the function now. The delay... I guess people (me included) have been intimidated (and horrified) by the code in Module:cmn-pron, hence the inaction in the 2+ years. Some examples are 你好, 紅果果, 一無所有, 一點點 and 指指點點. Wyang (talk) 05:45, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
On a related note, could you take a look at why the toneless variant of 分寸 (fēncùn) is messed up? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:52, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
This is not only related, but directly consequential... Fixed. Wyang (talk) 05:56, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
@Justinrleung: Whatnexactly happened? (I wasn't around to witness) – AWESOME meeos * (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 07:10, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
@Awesomemeeos: the last syllable of fēncùn was analysed as ncùn instead of cùn, so the tone was not "removed" from cùn. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:13, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Many thanks! Excellent work, as always! ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:09, 12 February 2017 (UTC)


Could you help me with the formatting for the etymology when you have a spare moment? Thank you. ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:54, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Sure thing! Done. Wyang (talk) 23:40, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:58, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

reading and pronunciation of မင်္ဂလာ[edit]

Hi Frank,

Could you please explain why မင်္ဂလာ ( is pronounced the way it's pronounced, the first part? Although I now have textbooks, they only explain obvious reading rules.

What I see is + + + . Why is it /mɪ̀ɴ.../? Sorry for the silly question. I can't find anything on the rules for ("Burmese virama"). Burmese alphabet article incorrectly calls a "virama". Also @Angr. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:46, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Anatoli. No question is silly. :) This is a sequence of:
(m) + (ng) + (coda termination symbol) + (stacking symbol) + (g) + (l) + (ā)
The stacking symbol is basically the equivalent of Devanagari . In the case of Burmese, the stacking symbol can usually be removed, provided that one bears in mind the previous consonant acts as coda and does not have an inherent vowel. Removing the stacking symbol here gives မင်ဂလာ (, which is why there is the /mɪ̀ɴ/ part in front (MLCTS ang = IPA /ɪ̀ɴ/). The phonetic respelling of this word is essentially {{my-IPA|word=မင်ဂ'လာ}}. Wyang (talk) 05:01, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Still feeling stupid. should drop the inherent vowel, so it should be "maŋ" ("maŋa" with the vowel, if there was no virama)? What does do and why is the vowel "ɪ̀"? Perhaps I should start with understanding မင် (mang). --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:30, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
is merely to indicate that the word may be of Indian origin; the combination င်္ဂ (ngg) is written like Sanskrit ङ्ग (ṅg), but is essentially equivalent to င်ဂ (ng-g) (More explanation can be found at Burmese alphabet#Stacked consonants). Written Burmese reflects the Burmese phonology several centuries ago - /maŋ/ at the time regularly developed into /mɪ̀ɴ/ in modern Rangoon phonology. Wyang (talk) 05:56, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, I've got something to work on. I understand that /maŋ/ has changed to /mɪ̀ɴ/ over time but what rule or pattern tells me how to read it? The module knows how to read it. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:17, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
The table at Wiktionary:Burmese transliteration#Syllable rhymes gives a good comparison of the spelling and pronunciation relationship (compare MLCTS with IPA). There are some vague patterns in the various rhymes, but for the most part the developments have to be remembered individually as they are. The module uses an algorithm that converts the rhyme of a Burmese syllable to its IPA pronunciation using the same logic as the transliteration help page. :) Wyang (talk) 06:28, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Rhyme/Rime page for Chinese[edit]

I think it would be great to implement this. Mteechan (talk) 14:25, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

What kind of rhyme/rime page do you have in mind Mteechan? Something similar to :zh:維基詞典:漢語拼音索引? Wyang (talk) 22:57, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
I'm thinking something like
So we can have
  • Mandarin
(Pinyin): guā
(Rime): -ā
Since rimes can be deduced right from Pinyin, this could be done by scripts automatically. Mteechan (talk) 13:56, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Truthfully, I feel the utility of this would be much less compared to “multisyllabic languages” (such as English). @Justinrleung, Suzukaze-c, Tooironic, Atitarev, Mar vin kaiser, Hongthay Thoughts? Wyang (talk) 09:06, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Indeed, it's not something I would really look for in a Chinese dictionary. ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:08, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Im not looking for rhymes in Chinese but I find useful using words with the same tone contour for learning and teaching Mandarin, e.g.
地圖地图 (dìtú) / 練習练习 (liànxí)
喜歡喜欢 (xǐhuan) / 我們我们 (wǒmen).--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 10:56, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
I would agree that most modern Chinese dictionaries don't have lists of rhymes/rimes. FWIW there were many rime dictionaries in ancient times. Also, the entries in all the dictionaries of the Great Dictionary of Modern Chinese Dialects are sorted by rimes. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 19:27, 28 February 2017 (UTC)


學改習慣算唔算學習? 14:37, 27 February 2017 (UTC)


Outstanding. DCDuring TALK 00:54, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. :) Wyang (talk) 00:56, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Shan pron module[edit]

Hi Wyang, I wonder if you could improve Module:shn-pron so that it automatically detects syllables without meeding hyphens. Check ဢေႃႇၸတြေးလီးယိူဝ်း (’òa tsǎ trée líi yóe), for example. Maybe an automatic transliteration module will be good (and also to remove the manual ones as well) — AWESOME meeos * (не нажми́те здесь [nʲɪ‿nɐʐˈmʲi.tʲe zʲdʲesʲ]) 06:58, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

I don't know Shan unfortunately, and the Shan term is showing up as boxes for me, which is somewhat of a nuisance. On the positive side it looks doable from the Library of Congress romanisation scheme (I don't know what romanisation is in use for Shan here and if there is multiple orthography standards for Shan). It would be good if you could create the testcases for this and/or transliteration- perhaps based on the above LoC romanisation link- and I will look into it when there is a bit of leisure time. Wyang (talk) 07:30, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
You should download Noto Sans Myanmar [2] to remove the boxes (in this Google project, calls it tofu). That is their goal. However, the current romanisation scheme in Wiktionary seems to represent more like this hereAWESOME meeos * (не нажми́те здесь [nʲɪ‿nɐʐˈmʲi.tʲe zʲdʲesʲ]) 07:50, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. That was a big file, but it is now working. Anyway, the transliteration really should be documented at Wiktionary:Shan transliteration before the Shan content is expanded, so that there is something to reference. Wyang (talk) 08:12, 1 March 2017 (UTC)


Hi Frank,

I wonder if "d" in the automatic transliteration of 무엇입니까 is intentional. Shouldn't it be "mueosimnikka"? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 11:16, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Anatoli, it wasn't intentional. Corrected now. Wyang (talk) 11:20, 2 March 2017 (UTC)


When you get time could you check my formatting for this entry? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:25, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

No problem. I switched the two etymologies, since the slang sense was sort of inspired by the literary sense... I can't think of its use as "bitchy" though - what kind of uses did you have in mind Tooironic? Wyang (talk) 22:21, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
While we're at it, I also think it would be better to have an actual quotation instead of putting "Attested in ancient Chinese texts". @Tooironic, where exactly is it attested? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 22:44, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
There are some examples here (looks quite difficult to translate...). Wyang (talk) 22:53, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  • I know it's not ideal, but I'd rather not add quotations, as they are a pain to translate into English. For the adjective form of 碧池, just Baidu "很碧池" and you'll see some. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:31, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
    @Tooironic and Frank, I added those quotations and attempted to translate them. Any improvements? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:33, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
    Great effort - I corrected the translation for 凌晨黼帳碧池開. I'm not sure what 拂露金輿 means exactly, perhaps a golden sedan with dew still on it (or brushing the dew off the sedan). Wyang (talk) 07:22, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
    Thanks! Yeah, I'm not so sure about 拂露 either. According to Hanyu Da Cidian, 金輿 means 帝王乘坐的車轎. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:28, 4 March 2017 (UTC)


Hi Frank, could you take a look at ? I feel like I'm splitting the etymologies too much. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 02:35, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

I think the etymologies are correct, though perhaps due to idiosyncrasy, I find the multiply split Etymologies for Chinese somewhat unaesthetic when there is a single pronunciation. Personally I would probably prefer using a -like style for etymology, just listing the present theories on etymology of the various senses, to avoid having to go through the trouble of splitting the etymology, sometimes with uncertainty. Wyang (talk) 02:41, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
Alright, that makes sense. I've collapsed them into one. See if you can add anything to it. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:11, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! Wyang (talk) 03:14, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Literal meaning of 三令五申[edit]

Shouldn't and be verbs? I would translate it as "To give orders three times and to explain five times". --kc_kennylau (talk) 05:22, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. (I'm innocent.) Also, Cantonese saam3 for this too? Wyang (talk) 05:27, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
Guoyu Cidian doesn't use sàn for this, so maybe not. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:06, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
@Wyang, Justinrleung: I learnt saam1 in school. --kc_kennylau (talk) 15:13, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
@Kc kennylau: I see. My thought is that the meaning of 再三 is conveyed in using both 三 and 五, which are numbers, as opposed to 三思, which is only conveying that meaning with the adverb 三. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 02:22, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Korean long vowels[edit]

Hi, where do you get the data for this non-orthographic phenomenon? — AWESOME meeos * (не нажима́йте сюда́ [nʲɪ‿nəʐɨˈmajtʲe sʲʊˈda]) 05:35, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Many Korean dictionaries have it. Some online ones include Daum and Naver. Wyang (talk) 05:39, 5 March 2017 (UTC)


If both the physics and Min Nan sense derive from Japanese, this should be reflected in the etymology, however I'm not sure how to format it, could you take a look when you are free? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 07:37, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Justin has split the Min Nan pronunciation. I think we need to double-check the reliability of all the Japanese origin claims here, since a number of the claims have been suspected to be dubious (Talk:文學 recently). We should only keep the ones verified by sources which have done proper literature research on the word, in order to avoid spreading incorrect information. Wyang (talk) 08:09, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
The tín-tāng reading in Min Nan certainly doesn't come from Japanese. As for the physics sense, it seems very different from the original sense used in literary texts, which doesn't seem to mean "vibrate" either; from the examples at Guoyu Cidian, its meaning in literary texts seems to be more abstract. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 08:23, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Some of literary attestations mean "to shake, to vibrate, to tremble", and many others mean "to shake; to be shaken" (figuratively). A difference between literary and modern meanings does not automatically imply a Japanese origin though; the change could be spontaneous or deliberate, and repurposing could take place in China (民主), Japan (自由), Korea or elsewhere, so we need good sources to be sure. Wyang (talk) 08:45, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
I just went ahead and removed the etym for now. I think my source for that was TDJ, and we have shown that to be unreliable. Hongthay (talk) 16:55, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Thanks for everyone's input on this. I think it is a good idea to not indicate any etymology at all unless we are reasonably certain and, when controversial, have references to back it up. Otherwise we may indeed be spreading incorrect information. ---> Tooironic (talk) 03:08, 7 March 2017 (UTC)


Is the term 精氣神精气神 (jīngqìshén) a real one? (I asked this to Tooironic.) --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 23:48, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, of course. Wyang (talk) 23:51, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
I came across that term while watching a Korean-subtitled video on classical Chinese dance. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 00:58, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
I almost forgot: thank you. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 00:59, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
No problem! Wyang (talk) 06:45, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
In the same video, I also came across this term: 盤腕手盘腕手 (pánwànshǒu). I think it's related to the term 雲手云手 (yúnshǒu). --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 02:52, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
I'm afraid that neither Google search hits, nor my personal knowledge, is sufficient to verify or define this one, unfortunately. Wyang (talk) 10:07, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
As an acknowledgement, here's the video that I'm talking about. It also lists three different terms: 技巧 (jìqiǎo) (mentioned as technical skill), 身法 (shēnfǎ) (mentioned as form), and 身韻身韵 (shēnyùn) (mentioned as bearing). --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 07:47, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
P.S. I'm not sure where you live, due to the nature of the video. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 07:49, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
I could view the video. The video is nearly 20 min long though, and I'm not sufficiently patient to play the entirety of it. Could you let me know when the word was used? Wyang (talk) 04:27, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
The term panwanshou is after seven minutes and fourty-five seconds (7:45). (Also, it's not the video's time that I'm talking about, but the mention of the you-know-what party.) --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 10:51, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
P.S. And that political party's ruination of classical Chinese dance. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 10:59, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
I think the subsequent movements of the guy after he mentioned the word explains what a 盤腕手 is much better than words can. As a side note, I'm very impressed with your language skills and interest in languages. Wyang (talk) 06:56, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

an idea[edit]

Take for example the Japanese entry for 繁華 - it links to two categories: Category:Japanese terms spelled with 繁 read as はん and Category:Japanese terms spelled with 華 read as か. Could we do something similar for Chinese? Like Category:Chinese terms spelled with 繁 and Category:Chinese terms spelled with 華? That way, we would be able to automatically link all entries that share the same characters, and we could add a link to these categories at their respective 字 entries. In other words, we would not have to manually add Derived Terms in 字 entries anymore. (PS. I don't think "spelled" is a good choice of words, but I can't think of anything better right now.) ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:02, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

You can do this now by adding a standardChars field for zh in Module:languages/data2 (see en for an example). DTLHS (talk) 04:10, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry I'm not very technically proficient, could you explain? ---> Tooironic (talk) 06:30, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
@Tooironic I suggested the same a while ago but the Chinese community didn't welcome it. I still think it's a good idea if it's automated.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:32, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
This was raised before (multiple times I think), and I vaguely remember you said there were too many Hanzis Tooironic. :) Personally I find the categories probably wouldn't be as useful as the Japanese ones, since the character entries contain lists of compounds too, sorted by reading. This needs to be discussed more widely. @Justinrleung, Suzukaze-c, Mar vin kaiser, Hongthay. Wyang (talk) 07:12, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
If we just have Category:Chinese terms spelled with 繁 and such, it might not be that useful. Perhaps we could have Category:Mandarin terms spelled with 繁 read as fán, but that might mean a lot of categories if we are to include all topolects. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:28, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
I think it would still be useful. Currently the average user has no way of conducting such a search. We do not need to add pinyin or anything like that, that would just complicate things, especially when you consider all the alternative pronunciations, etc. ---> Tooironic (talk) 07:34, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
(If we did it may be a convenient way of error-checking for pronunciations. —suzukaze (tc) 04:26, 19 March 2017 (UTC))

당신을위한 질문[edit]

한국에 가보셨어요? 한국에서 일년동안 살았어요.AWESOME meeos * (не нажима́йте сюда́ [nʲɪ‿nəʐɨˈmajtʲe sʲʊˈda]) 07:19, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

아니요, 아직 기회가 없었어요. Wyang (talk) 07:29, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Romanization of Jin?[edit]

I started marking Chinese borrowings in Mongolian which exhibit mazuration as deriving from Jin specifically (Am I correct in presuming this?), but giving a Mandarin-based transcription seems odd in such cases, how would you approach this? Crom daba (talk) 22:42, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

It may not be necessarily correct. Merging of the retroflex and alveolar affricates and fricatives is not a distinguishing feature of Jin from Mandarin dialects; many Northeastern Mandarin dialects that Mongolian is in contact with also show merger or a different distribution of the two series. An example is shown here for 窗. I think the variety should only be specified when it is certain (with distinctive Jin or Mandarin features, etc.), and the Mandarin-based transcription should be omitted if it seems flawed. Wyang (talk) 00:14, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, that's very informative. I'll write it like this and hope that the reader will figure out the rest. Crom daba (talk) 03:49, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Help requested with スィンドル[edit]

The kana combo スィ is generally used to express /si/. However, in this particular term's case, it's meant to express /swi/ instead.

I can force correct romanization in {{ja-noun}} etc. just by using rom=. How do we force correct IPA? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:20, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Eirikr. Does Japanese have /sw/? 0:18 seems to say it is /si/ (perhaps more convincing when it is played at 0.5x speed). Wyang (talk) 08:01, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
  • JA has approximations of /swi/, as in スイング (suingu) or alt-spelling スウィング (suwingu). I suspect the use of スィ in this スィンドル term is another attempt at spelling this non-native sound.
Thank you for the video. My google-fu had previously only pulled up textual representations, which all suggested /swi/. I do note other videos use a pronunciation closer to /swi/ than /si/, such as this one by Rai VieW (at around 0:07 and again very clearly at 3:07), or this one by TRANSFORMERS RED (at around 2:22). However, I haven't done any kind of systematic survey to find out which pronunciation is more common, nor do I currently have the bandwidth to do so. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:01, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
They do have a /w/ sound present. My opinion would be that the /sw/ sound is probably not considered sufficiently native to allow people to pronounce it uniformly, and hence people substitute it with /si/ or /suin/ or /su̥in/ . As such, it may be better to transcribe it as スウィ or スイ with devoicing on the su, and use /si/ as a second pronunciation. Wyang (talk) 07:19, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Get ready to do Shan...[edit]

Hey Wyang, with many hours of work and research, completed a draft of Wiktionary:Shan transliteration. Please create a transliteration module from this, and if you have any questions with the romanisation and IPA formatting, please ask me! Furthermore, the pronunciation module should be improved; currently, it only supports one pronunciation and need to use hyphens to distinguish syllables in multisyllabic terms. I believe that you don't necessarily need to use hyphens there, do you? — AWESOME meeos * (не нажима́йте сюда́ [nʲɪ‿nəʐɨˈmajtʲe sʲʊˈda]) 12:19, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I think this should get other editors' opinions before being implemented. @Octahedron80 (and others) is there anything you would like to change in the transliteration scheme? Wyang (talk) 06:57, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I reckon that Octahedron80 should do something about the transliteration. I've just snagged the transliteration from Omniglot. Hopefully you won't boycott me ;-) — AWESOME meeos * ([nʲɪ‿nəʐɨˈmajtʲe sʲʊˈda]) 07:36, 16 March 2017 (UTC)


When you get time, could you add the non-Mandarin 'lect readings? Thanks! ---> Tooironic (talk) 05:09, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately I didn't have much luck finding non-Mandarin readings either. :/ Wyang (talk) 07:30, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
No worries! Thanks! ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:08, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Memory Weirdness at [edit]

Previewing the "Chinese>Etymology 1" section shows "Lua memory usage 41.89 MB/50 MB"

Previewing each of the subsections shows:

  1. "Pronunciation", "Lua memory usage 5.51 MB/50 MB"
  2. "Definitions", "Lua memory usage 13.42 MB/50 MB"
  3. "Descendants", "Lua memory usage 1.85 MB/50 MB"
  4. "Compounds", "Lua memory usage 8.69 MB/50 MB"

As far as I can tell, there's no content in the "Chinese>Etymology 1" section that isn't in one of the four subsections, and yet, memory usage of the whole is 12.42 MB greater than the sum of its parts. This literally doesn't add up. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:11, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Chuck, it's now fixed. Wyang (talk) 05:20, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Fixed, yes- but the mystery remains... Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 05:50, 19 March 2017 (UTC)


I see the large amount of Module:zh/data/ltc-pron/... for each Han character (~20,000 pages). It make me discourage to copy and update through all of them at thwikt (or another). Is it better to put them into ranges like Module:Unicode data/...? In case of 256 entries per page, there would be only 78 pages. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:46, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

PS. Other pron modules too if they are in the same situation. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:59, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

It may benefit from some merging, but merging will also make them harder to find and edit, especially when one wishes to add data for a new character. Another way would be merge all the data for a single character to a Module:zh/data/char/... page, but that will require some work... The easiest way in this case IMO would be to retrieve a list of articles starting with the prefix Module:zh/data/ltc-pron/..., extract their contents, and upload to the new wiki. Let me know if there is anything I can help with. Wyang (talk) 05:12, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Do you have a database table that your bot uses? Re-generating will take less time than copying (read-and-write) concept. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:38, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
The Middle Chinese data was taken from here, though it is listing some common characters under their now-obsolete variants (still searchable, but may be difficult to extract)... it may be more time-consuming to start from the beginning. :) Wyang (talk) 05:43, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Never mind. I will copy from yours. --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:31, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
(vaguely more centralized data modules +1 —suzukaze (tc) 07:54, 20 March 2017 (UTC))

I wonder how Category:Chinese Middle Chinese pronunciation data modules is collected. Each module does not even have wiki tag. --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:43, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

It's categorised automatically by Module:documentation. As a side note, I think "Chinese Middle Chinese" should be changed to "Middle Chinese" (unless there is some subtlety I didn't appreciate). Wyang (talk) 07:46, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
I didn't think this over too well. Please change it as you see fit. —suzukaze (tc) 07:54, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Now renamed to Category:Middle Chinese pronunciation data modules etc.. Wyang (talk) 07:59, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

In case you weren't aware...[edit]

All 7 of the entries in CAT:E seem to have ""Lua error: Initial data not found." in a Burmese term. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:49, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I wasn't aware of these. The Burmese errors are fixed now. Wyang (talk) 04:31, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Glyph origin and {{zh-see}}[edit]

What do you think we should do when an entry only has a glyph origin and a {{zh-see}} (like )? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 12:58, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Pinging @Suzukaze-c, Atitarev. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 12:59, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
I've put {{Han etym}} under Glyph origin and {{zh-see}} under Etymology because I vaguely remember Wyang doing so at some point in the past. —suzukaze (tc) 05:00, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Yeah there are many entries placing {{zh-see}} under Etymology ([3]), and there are some also having Glyph origin preceding it: [4]. I would support using this format. Wyang (talk) 06:22, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
The thing is that many of them have more than one etymology, so putting {{zh-see}} under etymology # in those cases would make sense. But when there's only one etymology, it seems a bit weird to put it under an etymology heading. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:32, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
If I might offer a suggestion, "For pronunciation and definitions of 裏 – see 裡." doesn't seem to say anything about the etymology of the term, but it does refer to definitions, so perhaps it would make more sense to put that under a Part-of-Speech or Definitions header, in cases where there's only one etymology section and hence no need to clarify that only one etymology section is being redirected. - -sche (discuss) 06:45, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
I agree. Either Etymology or Definitions would be good with me- although neither seems absolutely perfect. Wyang (talk) 06:51, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
I agree with -sche's suggestion as well.--Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:02, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
I think Definitions is a bit better than Etymology. Since everyone here has pretty much agreed, I've changed it to Definitions. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 00:39, 24 March 2017 (UTC)


Hi. When you get time could you help me look at how we can fix the trad/simp box? 南北朝 currently displays as "thes". Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:41, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi and thanks, it is fixed now. Wyang (talk) 06:26, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 10:49, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Chinese dynasties box[edit]

We should probably add 金 to the Chinese dynasties box if possible. ---> Tooironic (talk) 10:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, don't know why I omitted it before but I've added it in now. Wyang (talk) 10:49, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
神速! Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 10:49, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Question about 肥澤[edit]

I tried to figure out what 肥澤 meant but no combination of its component characters made any sense to me. It's one of two definitions for . Thanks! Bumm13 (talk) 17:24, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Also, for , it gives a usage of "浶" and a definition of "惊扰" (to alarm, to agitate). Is "agitated" a reference to waves, like rough waves? Not 100% sure how to say that in English. Cheers! Bumm13 (talk) 18:54, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
For 浳, all the dictionaries I consulted so far have only (1) 肥澤, (2) 潤 as the definition. The most likely meaning of 肥澤 is "plump and tender", but without context, it is hard to be sure what the originally intended meaning was. For 浶浪, I found two citations- it definitely has a figurative sense in one citation (said of heart), but meaning of the other citation is obscure (樛蓼浶浪). But considering the semantic components of the two characters, the word probably had an original reference to waves. Wyang (talk) 22:11, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
@Bumm13 I feel like 肥澤 and 潤 are one and the same; it's just split into two definitions because it comes from two sources. According to Hanyu Da Zidian, the former comes from 《集韻》 and the latter, from 《篇海類編·地理類》. In addition, Hanyu Da Cidian lists "土地肥潤" (of land, fertile) as a definition for 肥澤. Since this character is found in the geography section of 篇海類編, I think it's reasonable to think that it means "fertile" in the context of land. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:34, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
As for , I think we can use {{zh-only|浶浪}}, since it seems to be used only in this compound. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:38, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Strange recursive definition for [edit]

Hi Wyang, I looked up the definition for but all any of the sources I tried could give me was "涋", which includes the unknown character itself as the second character of the definition! Is there any way to decipher the meaning of this (as the first character means "slippery", "to slide", etc.)? Thanks! Bumm13 (talk) 02:34, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

It is strange and ... very unhelpful, but probably reflected the paucity of sources on this, suggesting that it was a hapax legomenon. 滑涋 looks suspiciously like an ancient word 滑突, which meant "smooth and round" ... and this seems to be the best guess one could make. Wyang (talk) 04:15, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
It might be. 正字通 says it's a 俗字, but doesn't say what the "orthodox" character is. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 04:18, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Module:columns edits[edit]

Something seems to have gone wrong: CAT:Esuzukaze (tc) 08:52, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I think it's fixed. Running bot to refresh those pages now. Wyang (talk) 10:28, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
There are still problems: some entries are running out of memory, others out of time, and there's "Lua error in Module:columns at line 104: invalid order function for sorting". The entries with the latter error that I've checked seem to be due to one or more of the parameters being substrings of other parameters (removing the smaller parameter(s) clears the problem). In the case of fisic "fisici-" seems to match "fisiciúil"- removing either clears the problem. The error at tungsten may be an exception: removing either "[[tungsten sulfide]], [[tungsten sulphide]]" or "[[tungsten disulfide]], [[tungsten disulphide]]" clears the problem, but I can't figure out why. Chuck Entz (talk) 20:59, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, I think they are fixed now. Wyang (talk) 22:18, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Much better, but there are 7 entries with the "invalid order function for sorting" error: tun, առնեմ, ունիմ, տաշեմ, and տեսանեմ seem to be due to parameters that are substrings of other parameters, while the problem with terra seems to have something to do with "terracotta / terra cotta", and tre has a problem with "trecento, Trecento". In other words, it looks like the same problems, but far narrower in scope. I don't understand it, but there it is... Chuck Entz (talk) 02:11, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
They do like to pop up every few hours don't they... I think they should be (finally) fixed now. Wyang (talk) 02:43, 9 April 2017 (UTC)


How do the two pronunciations differ exactly? ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:16, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

I believe this is likely non-homophonic in non-Mandarin lects. For example, Cantonese may be waa6-2 tou4 (please confirm @Justinrleung). Wyang (talk) 09:48, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
I can't be sure what it is exactly (is there tone change on waa6), but it most likely isn't waak6. @Kc kennylau, any thoughts? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 11:36, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
I have no idea. --kc_kennylau (talk) 14:41, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Well, if no one knows for sure, we might want to collapse it into one pronunciation for now. Cantodict does have the noun sense and only lists one pronunciation (although it might be wrong). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 16:31, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Question about 波流直[edit]

I was just wondering what the word 波流直 meant. Its component characters seem to mean something like "straight stream of water" then adds "wave/ripple/surge" from . I'm just not certain how those would go together in a meaningful way. It's the second definition of when used in the archaic compound word 汫涏. The third definition is kind of strange, too, in that it reads as "Jing River" plus "cold" ; seems like a funny way to describe something in a specific word. Thanks! Bumm13 (talk) 03:25, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

@Bumm13 波流 is not a word, but a phrase meaning "(of a river) straight". 涇寒 seems to be a typo meaning to say 𠗊寒 (see Hanyu Da Zidian), which would mean "cold". I would suggest you take a look at Hanyu Da Zidian (at, which seems more reliable than yedict. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 04:37, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Category:Chinese terms with archaic senses[edit]

Any ideas why 野馬 is filed under の? ---> Tooironic (talk) 03:45, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

@Tooironic, there was a default sort under the Japanese section. It should be fixed now. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:57, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:24, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Another archaic definition question [edit]

The first definition of for the tūn reading is: "涒滩" 古代十二地支中【申】的别称,用于纪年。This seems to be referring to the ninth earthly branch () but I'm not sure what the specific reference is other than somehow related to the traditional Chinese lunar calendar. Thanks for all the help! Bumm13 (talk) 03:56, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

古代[antiquity] 十二[twelve] 地支[earthly branches] 中[within those] 【申】[monkey] 的['s] 别称[alternate name],用于[used in] 纪年[annals]。 —suzukaze (tc) 04:44, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
@Bumm13, by the way, since it's used in the compound 涒灘, I think you can just put {{n-g|Used in 涒灘涒滩.}} and make a request for 涒灘. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 04:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

bug on pinyin entries[edit]

The following message is being displayed on all pinyin entries now: Expression error: Unexpected > operator. Any idea what happened? ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:04, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

There was a change in module:string that affected how template:cmn-pinyin works and it should be fixed now.—suzukaze (tc) 02:25, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:33, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

" phonetic series"[edit]

Does this refer to 𧶠? Right now there are entries such as that use , and in {{Han compound}} this comes out as *mreːs instead of *l'oːɡ. —suzukaze (tc) 07:54, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

I suggest using 𧷏 (consistent with this) for these derived ones. Wyang (talk) 13:30, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Hmm, the Ministry of Education Variant Character Dictionary seems to have an investigation suggesting that 𧶠 is more suitable though (which would make sense since it traditionally appears in characters derived from it). —suzukaze (tc) 02:45, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Well... then in that case I'm good with 𧶠 too. Wyang (talk) 02:48, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


Any idea what happened with the formatting of the example sentence here? ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:33, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

The comma in the phrase is interpreted as a word boundary. It is fixed now. Wyang (talk) 02:42, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:04, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Module:zh-dial-map errors[edit]

See CAT:E. —suzukaze (tc) 18:22, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

It's caused by a lack of colours for the dots. I've attempted to fix it, but I don't know if it's a good solution. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 19:03, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Clarification of definition[edit]

The first definition of ("kōng" reading) is: "(涳濛) 古同 “空蒙”, (細雨) 迷茫". It seems to mean "stunned, confused" but with the "細雨" text in there, I wanted to make sure there wasn't some nuance of the definition that I was missing. Thanks! Bumm13 (talk) 14:23, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry for the delay in reply (forgot to reply yesterday). 細雨迷茫 means the drizzling rain creates a misty atmosphere in the air. Hope it helps. :) Wyang (talk) 08:58, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

th-alt + obsolete[edit]

I wish I can put (obsolete) annotation at some words in th-alt as I can do with a simple list. My idea is to put a dagger † before or after that word and then the module convert it to the annotation. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:50, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

And archaic or dated too? --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:36, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether it needs to be a generic 'obsolete/archaic/dated' feature (with a dagger in front), or a comment/qualifier feature in Thai. Feel free to go ahead and make changes. :) Wyang (talk) 10:32, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Are these entries fixable?[edit]

00後 and 囧rz are both in CAT:E, because the Chinese IP who added them included the non-Chinese part of the term in the {{zh-pron}} parameters. If our whole Chinese framework is built on pronunciation, how do we deal with terms like the second one that probably don't even have a pronunciation? Chuck Entz (talk) 04:57, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

They're easily fixable with overrides. It looks like Justin is dealing with it right now. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:13, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
I only fixed 00後. I'm not sure if 囧rz is pronounceable. We'll have to wait for Frank or someone else (@Tooironic, Suzukaze-c). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:31, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
I don't know. —suzukaze (tc) 05:41, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Until the pronunciation is added, the entry shouldn't produce module errors. I have replaced the bad code with {{rfp|lang=zh}} --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:58, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
I don't think 囧rz is usually pronounced. I added a note in that entry. Wyang (talk) 09:39, 19 April 2017 (UTC)


Please check the non-Mandarin 'lects when you get the chance. Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:04, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Also, 應聲, 當日 and 犄角. Also, I'm not sure how to translate the two different readings of 當日 into English. Cheers. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:33, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi. I tried my best, and Justin has checked the Cantonese readings on those entries. Also replied at Talk:當日. Wyang (talk) 04:47, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! ---> Tooironic (talk) 00:27, 22 April 2017 (UTC)


Could you edit some code to get this work: {{zh-forms|s=⿰钅尔}} in ? --Octahedron80 (talk) 09:58, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

It's fixed now with code {{zh-forms|s=⿰钅尔|type=3}} and some mercy from the module. Wyang (talk) 10:29, 21 April 2017 (UTC)


Is toast always pronounced tou3 si1 in Cantonese? It seems we are not very clear on this. In the alternative form 土司 we provide tou2 si1. ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:25, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@Tooironic: neither 吐司 nor 土司 is actually used in Cantonese. The Cantonese readings are only based on the individual characters. Also, tou2 si1 would be used for the archaic senses for 土司. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 04:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
I see. But if we provide a Cantonese reading, and it is categorised under Cantonese lemmas, isn't that misleading to users? ---> Tooironic (talk) 07:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
I guess this is similar to literary terms categorised under Category:Mandarin lemmas, etc. They are not used in everyday speech to refer to the item or concept in particular, but it is a valid word in the written language. Hopefully the reader realises the dialectal synonyms box below contains the dialectal colloquial equivalents of 'toast'. Wyang (talk) 09:11, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
The term is also included in CC and Sheik Cantonese dictionaries with the reading "tou2 si1" (CC) and "tu3 si1" (CC and Sheik), CC is downloadable with Pleco app. Changing now. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:17, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
tu3 is not a valid Cantonese syllable, though. tu3 si1 would most certainly be Mandarin, if it were in indeed correct. Wyang (talk) 09:24, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes, sorry, very sloppy of me. It's been a while since I used Sheik. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)


Is this a legitimate variant form? ---> Tooironic (talk) 07:15, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

It certainly is. See, for example, the note at the top of Chinese Wikipedia page, or the snippet of the Hanyu Da Cidian entry here. Wyang (talk) 07:24, 28 April 2017 (UTC)


Any idea how to fix the problem in the hanzi box? 生命 currently displays "life m,c:條". ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:55, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Ah sorry, fixed. Wyang (talk) 04:56, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Now 參宿七 is broken... —suzukaze (tc) 00:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
...Fixed. Wyang (talk) 03:05, 1 May 2017 (UTC)


Are anon's edits kosher? —suzukaze (tc) 00:00, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes, kosher desu. Wyang (talk) 00:07, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Template similar to {{zh-dial}} for "non-dialectal" terms (e.g. place names)[edit]

Hi Frank, do you think we should have a template that holds regional terms (like the 地區詞 over at the Chinese Wikipedia, if you know what I mean)? I don't feel like using zh-dial for entries like 赫爾河畔京士頓. Maybe also one for differences in Christian terms (Protestant vs. Catholic vs. Orthodox)? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:38, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I favour the idea. It can be supported by a new template/module, calling the data in Module:zh/data/dial to generate the regional equivalents in a style similar to the dialectal ones. Wyang (talk) 07:30, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Do you think should have data modules for these? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 02:02, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Yeah. I think the current data module (Module:zh/data/dial) for zh-dial would probably suffice, if there is an extra location link, for "Hong Kong" or "Taiwan" (instead of "Hong Kong Cantonese" or "Taiwanese Mandarin"). A dedicated module may be needed, with an altered display (only two columns: variety name with link to Wikipedia (or elsewhere), and word), and the "special groups" can be incorporated as valid variety labels in the regional term table too. Wyang (talk) 03:10, 1 May 2017 (UTC)


I wonder if Nanjing people in everyday life prefer reading 南京 and 北京 as Nanking and Peking the dialectic to Nanjing and Beijing the standard? Would you advise me here? KYPark (talk) 10:13, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

k- was the historical, Qing-dynasty pronunciation in Nanjing. It is pronounced with a j- initial in Modern Nanjing dialect. You can see the dialectal pronunciations at under "Dialectal data". (Previous question at Module talk:zh/data/dial-pron/京.) Wyang (talk) 11:35, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for quite a clarification. KYPark (talk) 13:53, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


When you get time, could you check the non-Mandarin 'lects'? Cheers. ---> Tooironic (talk) 13:45, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

It seems Justin has checked them. As an additional note, I believe Pronunciation 1 for Mandarin is also pronounced zi4 tie1. Wyang (talk) 08:43, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks everyone. I haven't heard zi4tie1 before, and none of the dictionaries list it. Perhaps it's a non-standard variant? ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:16, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes, it is a non-standard variant. 《现代汉语规范词典》 has the note of '“帖”这里不读 tiē 或 tiě。' for 字帖. Wyang (talk) 09:31, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Etymology of 拂菻[edit]

Hi, which language the source is particularly pointing to, Middle Persian or Parthian? These are closely related Middle Iranian languages, both were previously called "Pahlavi", and some sources may still use this inaccurate term. The Parthian word for Byzantium is From (with a macron over o), if I remember correctly, it is mentioned in SKZ inscription. I guess the Parthian variant fits better. --Z 14:45, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

@ZxxZxxZ It is from the article linked to in the etymology, specifically this passage:


In other words, the process via which (the country name) Rum (Rōm) became 拂菻 was: Rum (Rōm) entering Armenian to become Hrom (Horum), and Iranian “Pahlavi” to become Hrōm, and Khwarezmian and Sogdian to become Frōm (Furum), and finally entering Chinese, transcribed as "拂菻".
This is from P. Pelliot, Sur l’origine du nom de Fu-lin, Journal Asiatique, 1914, pp. 497-500. Wyang (talk) 01:45, 7 May 2017 (UTC)


Any ideas about how we might translate the adjective form (i.e. the popular neologism). ---> Tooironic (talk) 15:57, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

I would phrase it as "(neologism, especially of a girl) cold, nitpicky, and assuming a haughty air in one's usual self, but bashful, shy and eliciting feelings of moe when in the presence of someone one likes". Wyang (talk) 23:38, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
@Tooironic: "Tsundere." Then add a corresponding adjective section to the English entry, supported by Usenet cites or something? The sense Wyang describes isn't a Chinese invention and fits what has been my understanding of the word. —suzukaze (tc) 00:40, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Wyang's definition looks good to me. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:04, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Clarification of definition[edit]

Just was curious about the second definition of . The Chinese definition is "曲岸外侧" which seems to mean "outer bank or shore" but that doesn't include anything from the , which seems to mean "twisting, crooked" in this context. Thanks! Bumm13 (talk) 04:21, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

曲岸外侧 means the "outer shore of a river at a bend". :) Wyang (talk) 06:50, 9 May 2017 (UTC)


Do you think this formatting is OK? —suzukaze (tc) 05:44, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Hmm.. why not just "vital energy"? Wyang (talk) 06:50, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
The 元氣 entry has a TCM label. —suzukaze (tc) 06:57, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
... Or just "vitality; vigour; strength". Wyang (talk) 06:58, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
I just remembered, another reason I formatted it that way was that the connotations of 元氣 in this word seem to borrowed from Japanese. I'll set it as "vitality; vigour; strength" per your suggestion though. —suzukaze (tc) 07:01, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
I think it is unlikely, cf. the cite on Moedict. Wyang (talk) 07:06, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Although the elements make sense in Chinese, Google results seem to be closely connected to Japanese, which doesn't seem to me like something that should happen if it was purely Chinese. —suzukaze (tc) 01:15, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Its uses in Classical Chinese already cover all the present-day senses: see for example the Hanyu Da Cidian entry and cites in the literature. Wyang (talk) 01:19, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Alright. Do whatever you want to with the entry (rfd?). —suzukaze (tc) 19:38, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

the {{ko-IPA}} redesign[edit]

doesn't cope well with being a list item. It looks like something Wyangbot should fix... —suzukaze (tc) 01:17, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Damn, I can't run a bot at the moment. I will see if others could help. Wyang (talk) 01:22, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Fixing now. Btw, I think you and Justin should look into using bots to do work too; it is very handy at times. Wyang (talk) 01:58, 10 May 2017 (UTC)


WT:Requests for moves, mergers and splits#Dungan is technically Mandarin, or a dialect of Mandarin petered out months ago without any real conclusive decision on how to handle Dungan. I'd like to close it, and I feel like there's consensus in favour of merger, but it's all moot if there isn't a plan for how to handle entries in Cyrillic and Arabic scripts (and {{zh-pron}} needs to incorporate all this). What do you want to do? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:49, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

This definitely needs more discussion, regarding whether there is agreement on this going ahead, and how to format the Hanzi and Cyrillic entries if there is consensus for proceeding. Wyang (talk) 09:55, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Well, more discussion is definitely a good idea! My point is just that while I wouldn't mind actually moving ahead on Dungan, that'll have to be something that you and other Chinese editors do. If you don't want to, then the discussion really is dead and can be archived. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:32, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm okay with the merger as well, but my knowledge of Dungan is very limited. I only have the pdf of a Dungan-Russian dictionary (Краткий дунганско-русский словарь), which doesn't have Hanzi equivalents of Cyrillic words. @Mar vin kaiser Are you still interested in the topic? I saw @Suzukaze-c working on the transliteration of Dungan before. If there is good support from editors I can help with integrating the support for Dungan. Wyang (talk) 04:06, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
I was doing it experimentally to see what would make the most sense to myself. I have no idea what is the best method or what is used in academic literature. —suzukaze (tc) 05:47, 11 May 2017 (UTC)


Pali alternative form and declension boxes are not expandable now, please help. I think Nav classes do not work. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:52, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

I think this is a more global problem. All the translation boxes are not openable for me now as well. Wyang (talk) 03:22, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
@Octahedron80: Switching to vsHide and vsShow classes instead of the navboxes is at least a temporary solution. They don't close, but they stay open at least. —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 13:13, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
I agree. Wyang (talk) 13:23, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Looks like they come back to life. --Octahedron80 (talk) 11:28, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Indonesian/Malay and Javanese pronunciation template[edit]

Hello, @Metaknowledge asked me to tell you whether you want to make pronunciation templates. I asked Metaknowledge a some hours ago about doing this. What do you reckon? ** laki-laki keren itu (yang terbaik dalam segala hal) ** 08:12, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

You are obviously User:Awesomemeeos, and you have no idea about what you are doing with Malay and Indonesian. Please stop. Wyang (talk) 10:12, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
What the heck are you talking about??? I do know what I'm doing!! I don't have any idea who Awesomemeeos is (before you mentioned him to me). ** laki-laki keren itu (yang terbaik dalam segala hal) ** 10:16, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Okay, let me clear up a few things for you:
  1. I am an Indonesian-Australian, a person who has Indonesian background but has grown up in Australia.
  2. I am still learning Indonesian. I may not be perfect, but I'm nearly there.
  3. That so-called Awesomemeeos may be also be an Australian, but I checked his user page, he seems to be 100% Australian.
Please stop accusing me for a randomly blocked person. I'm sorry if I put you into a bad mood. If there's anything I did wrong please tell me; I'm still new here. ** laki-laki keren itu (yang terbaik dalam segala hal) ** 10:23, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Lol. Wyang (talk) 10:34, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry if ranted a bit at the start. I was just very startled that you would suddenly accuse me of being some other person. I only came here to ask because of User:Metaknowledge. And why lol? That's not very kind to me! ** laki-laki keren itu (yang terbaik dalam segala hal) ** 10:37, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
  • I didn't suspect a thing. I also didn't notice any mistakes, although perhaps that's just due to my insufficient knowledge in the languages in question. Anyway, I guess it all comes out as something as an embarrassment for me. @TheDaveRoss, could you confirm? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:05, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
    • (I did, and emailed Chuck Entz about it a few days ago.) —suzukaze (tc) 18:13, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
      To update, I gave the account an indef block. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:24, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
      I can confirm that TatCoolBoy is Awesomemeeos. At first I thought you wanted me to confirm something about Indonesian/Malay or Javanese, which had me momentarily flummoxed. - TheDaveRoss 18:56, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
      I can confirm that Suzukaze-c emailed me, and that I agreed that TatCoolBoy was definitely Awesomemeeos, though I hadn't suspected anything, myself (I was just starting to notice how they were straying further and further from their supposed main interest, so I probably would have figured it out before long). I've been very busy at work and haven't had the time or energy to do or think about much, so I was going to deal with it on Friday (my day off) after a good night's sleep.
      I really can't say much about their Malay/Indonesian edits, but I noticed that they've been making romanization entries out of Latin-script Javanese entries, which seems quite wrong to me: Wikipedia says that more people use the Latin script than the traditional Javanese one or the Arabic-based one- it's not like Chinese or Japanese, where native speakers don't use the Latin script for communicating with each other.
      Awesomemeeos seems to have a lot of difficulty with all the minor assumptions and unwritten rules that most of us use to interact with other people and with reality in general- for them, everything has to be spelled out, and nothing is obvious or second-nature. That means that there's really no way to predict where they're likely to go wrong, and that we have to check everything they've been doing. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:43, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Shanghainese checking[edit]

Are these search results for "-ie" OK? —suzukaze (tc) 07:32, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

No, they are not. They are all corrected now. Wyang (talk) 07:38, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
User:Lo Ximiendo has been adding a few Wu requests/checks in User:Atitarev/Wu_Chinese. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:43, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
(as well as adding some directly) —suzukaze (tc) 07:47, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Ah, I didn't realise the page was still active. I added it to my watchlist and checked the terms on the page. I noticed LX adding Shanghainese pronunciations too, and the ones I happened to accidentally see every now and then were okay. Wyang (talk) 07:59, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

{{zh-pron}} |dial= data[edit]

Can this parameter be made opt-in like |mc= and |oc=? It seems more logical to make it consistent. —suzukaze (tc) 02:59, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Yeah sure. I can't run a bot these few weeks, but feel free to change the code and update the existing uses. Wyang (talk) 08:04, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Entries with [edit]

Hey Frank, are you sure about the entries with 醣? I'm not sure if all of them actually use 醣. AFAIK, those that end in -ose or are called sugar in English are generally not written with 醣. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 19:21, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Justin, I'm pretty sure about 醣 being used for -ose. For example, 葡萄醣 [5][6][7][8][9], 果醣 [10](on the second line)[11][12](p137)[13][14][15], "醣原" -"糖原", "配醣體" -"配糖體" and so on. Wyang (talk) 21:20, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Alright, thanks for all these examples! — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:21, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Chinese abbreviations[edit]

Hi Frank, how does one format the etymology for Chinese abbreviations like 產權, 環保, 閨蜜, etc.? Currently the script only displays traditional Chinese. Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 00:45, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Carl. I suggest using "Abbreviation of {{zh-l|財產權}}." or "Short for {{zh-l|財產權}}." in the etymology if the short form is widely used, or {{zh-short|...}} on the definition line if the short form is not widely used. {{abbreviation of}} is a definition-line template, so should not be used in etymologies. Wyang (talk) 00:51, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Would there be a code for the etymology would would automatically put the entry in the Chinese abbreviations category, while supporting both simplified and traditional? ---> Tooironic (talk) 13:33, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
I don't believe there is; a separate template probably has to be created for that. I'm not sure what name would be appropriate for that template - {{zh-abbreviation-etym}}? Wyang (talk) 21:37, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Clarification of definition[edit]

The first definition given for is "洗尸身". Does this mean as in "dead body, corpse" or is it the usage referring to "lower" functions (as in cleaning something dirty)? Thanks! Bumm13 (talk) 01:21, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

It means the former, i.e. "wash a dead body". Wyang (talk) 01:24, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Clarification of 箿 definition[edit]

The 箿 entry has the following definition: "編織竹器邊緣" Specifically, the "utensil made of bamboo" phrase is tripping me up. Something about "to weave/braid", "utensil made of bamboo" and "edge; fringe" but I can't quite put it all together coherently. Thanks again for all your help! :) Bumm13 (talk) 23:10, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

My interpretation is "to weave the rim/edge of bamboo wares". :) Wyang (talk) 04:53, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Chinese categories playing up[edit]

Is it just me or is {{zh-cat}} not working? ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:03, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, should be fixed now. Wyang (talk) 02:08, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Category:Mandarin Han characters and Category:Cantonese Han characters[edit]

There're many pages in these two categories. Why they don't have a Chinese heading? Should this be fixed? —This unsigned comment was added by (talk).

They are using the old Hanzi format and haven't been converted to a unified Chinese section yet. It should be fixed.... eventually. Wyang (talk) 04:16, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
I found that Wyangbot have cleaned up many Mandarin entries previously. Can this be cleaned up in the same way?-- 01:27, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
It's very hard. It has been more than ten years since the original entries were created, and a lot of edits have gone into these entries in the meantime. Unihan is not a particularly reliable database for pronunciations either. Wyang (talk) 08:13, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes the pronunciations have many error but I think having a Chinese heading is more easy to manage them. Also you may try to fix entries without any definitions first.-- 10:11, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Frankly, I feel this is beyond my ability. People are going to complain about my bot doing unsatisfactory edits. :( Wyang (talk) 10:15, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
You may just create new Chinese sections and remove the old ones.-- 10:18, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
I may look into it, but I'm still quite hesitant about it. I think in some cases the content is better generated anew from a more reliable database (although I'm not sure what). If others are willing to take on the task, by all means please do so. Wyang (talk) 10:23, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Min Dong BUC {} markup[edit]

now causes {{zh-pron}} to not render (目屎, 粉絲#Etymology_3), due to Wiktionary:Wikimedia_Tech_News/2017#Tech_News:_2017-19. —suzukaze (tc) 21:26, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

listsuzukaze (tc) 21:27, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, I think all the Min Dong ones are fixed now. Wyang (talk) 22:42, 28 May 2017 (UTC)


The pronunciation is found here: and -- 10:14, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Okay thanks, reverted. P.S. I cannot find karitan. It looks suspicious like Kelantan though. Wyang (talk) 10:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)


This term does not appear at Category:Chinese lemmas. Maybe it should be fixed.-- 10:34, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Fixed. Wyang (talk) 10:41, 29 May 2017 (UTC)


Hi Frank,

I wonder if 맨션 (maensyeon) is a false friend, just like マンション (manshon). Naver dictionary gives "mansion" but Google images suggest that it follows the Japanese, not the English meaning. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 08:58, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Anatoli. Yes, maensyeon definitely is a false friend. 표준국어대사전 defines it as "큰 저택(邸宅)이란 뜻으로, 호텔식의 고급 아파트를 이르는 말. ≒맨션아파트." I couldn't find sources supporting a Japanese origin of maensyeon, but that would be my suspicion. Wyang (talk) 09:48, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Category:Min Nan terms with IPA pronunciation[edit]

There're several hundred entries in this category. Most of the contents of the pages are duplicate. I think we can:

  1. For entries also written in hanzi, redirect them to hanzi entries using something like template:zh-see;
  2. For entries not written in hanzi, format them like normal Chinese entries, without Template:zh-forms.
  3. Whether to use "Chinese" or "Min Nan" heading is to be determined. I tend to use Chinese as Min Nan terms are also Chinese terms.

See Wiktionary:Sandbox for example (lo͘-lài-bà and a-bú).-- 15:37, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

I think this is a reasonable suggestion, but I think for #1 the existing template will need to be modified, or a separate template should be used to categorise the entries into whatever...POJ..whatever. Also this needs to be discussed more widely. Pinging @Justinrleung, Suzukaze-c, Mar vin kaiser, Hongthay, Tooironic, Atitarev. Wyang (talk) 21:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
I've suggested something similar before (here), but some people have noted that POJ is an actual script used for written Hokkien, as opposed to pinyin or other types of romanization. We could propose it again if more people are in support of this. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:03, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
@Justinrleung So I suggest to use Template:zh-see instead of something like Template:pinyin reading of.--2001:DA8:201:3512:BCE6:D095:55F1:36DE 03:59, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
I second that. Just like the simplified form of entries are also actual scripts used in writing Chinese, POJ is also, so for both, we could use Template:zh-see. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 04:08, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
I see why {{zh-see}} would be appropriate, but I think something like {{pinyin reading of}} is more appropriate because it keeps it consistent with pinyin and jyutping entries. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 04:09, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
For words that have hanzi spellings: I think we should use a {{zh-see}}-ish template along with the ==Min Nan== header. I support usage of {{zh-see}} per Mar vin kaiser's rationale. I think the ==Min Nan== header should be used because POJ is an orthography exclusive to Hokkien, similar to how pinyin entries use ==Mandarin==.
For words that do not have hanzi spellings: I think their format should be reasonably similar to ==Chinese== entries but also feature appropriate deviation (such as using ===Alternative forms=== and {{label}} to note dialectal differences instead of cramming them all into {{zh-pron}}, similar to treatment of English UK/US spellings). —suzukaze (tc) 06:19, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Personally I instead tend to replace all pinyin/jyutping entries to Chinese header and completely eliminate Mandarin/Cantonese headers. (though I don't oppose using Min Nan/Mandarin/Cantonese)-- 06:54, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── See also Talk:a-bú. My personal preference is to convert all POJ entries to soft redirects to Chinese Han entries, if they have a corresponding hanzi entry, with all pronunciation, etymology, etc. info. The L2 heading for POJ entries may stay "Min Nan", not sure. We still treat pinyin entries as "Mandarin", not Chinese but it doesn't have to stay that way. For terms without a Chinese spelling, there is no choice but to have a POJ entry with all the info. I've just created a POJ entry [[a-phá-tò]]. What should this entry be like? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:21, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Comrade in Burmese[edit]

Hi Frank. The Russian Wikipedia claims that the Burmese word for "comrade" (Communist sense?) is something like тэнгэчжин (tɛngɛčžin). Perhaps it's tengejin? Hi @Angr, Does it sound like anything familiar to you guys? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:41, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

@Atitarev: Yeah, it sounds like သူငယ်ချင်း (su-ngaihkyang:, friend). However, neither {{R:my:MED}} nor {{R:my:WBD}} (which was published in East Germany and is therefore fond of Communist terminology) confirms that သူငယ်ချင်း is used to mean 'comrade' in the Communist sense. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:51, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
@Angr: Ah, thank you! --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 06:55, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Tibetan online dictionary is gone?[edit]

Hi Frank. Did you notice that the only online Tibetan dictionary quietly disappeared? The message there that they merged with is not very helpful, as there is no dictionary on that site. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:55, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

I haven't used that website before - I've been using thlib (bo -> en) and Monlam dictionaries (search for ཚིག་མཛོད; bo <-> en, bo-bo, etc.), which are still going strong. ;) Wyang (talk) 03:08, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Great, thank you! That site is not entirely useless, actually. [ allows a partial string search. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:12, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Etymology of [edit]

Hey Frank, when you have time, could you check the etymology of 君? I can't find the title of the essay by Mei Tsu-lin in Linguistics of the Sino-Tibetan Area: The State of the Art; if you can, could you add it to WT:About Chinese/references? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Justin, no worries, I will do that when I get a chance to. I'm a bit flat out these past few days and the coming week, so please forgive me if it takes me some time to reply. I would also like some help on patrolling the recent influx of entries please - [17]; I was up to 藜麥‎, and feeling somewhat 力不從心. Wyang (talk) 08:20, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
That's alright... I'll try helping out with the myriads of anon entries. Thanks for your work and I hope to hear from you soon! — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 16:34, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you Justin! Wyang (talk) 07:54, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
Did a couple more edits. Now up to 陰阜 (all the ones prior to Jun 5). Wyang (talk) 09:59, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
辛苦了.suzukaze (tc) 14:45, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! Now up to 分詞‎ (all the ones prior to Jun 7). Wyang (talk) 11:06, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Up to 朝秦暮楚. Wyang (talk) 11:19, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Now up to 設拉子‎ (all the ones prior to Jun 11). Wyang (talk) 06:09, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
I hope you haven't forgotten about my original question about ... :D — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 22:20, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
I was on the verge of forgetting... Thanks for reminding me. I have added the article to the reference page. Wyang (talk) 09:00, 25 June 2017 (UTC)


You might be interested in this. —suzukaze (tc) 05:12, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Bot-cleaned up those entries. Wyang (talk) 08:29, 12 June 2017 (UTC)


This one definition of is a bit unclear to me: "用人分不清好歹". It seems to be saying something like "servants (employees?) who are unable to distinguish between good and bad (right or wrong?)." Any help with this would be greatly appreciated. Cheers! Bumm13 (talk) 23:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Bumm13. It means "to make use of personnel without having discretion (i.e. recognising the difference between good and evil people)". Wyang (talk) 07:31, 14 June 2017 (UTC)


@Angr. Hi. Could you guys make an entry for ဥဏှဂူ (, the sun), please? I am getting "Lua error: Initial data not found." It may require a manual translit or changes to Burmese modules. The phonetic respelling must be something like "အုန်နှ'ဂူ". --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:14, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@Atitarev Created. :) Wyang (talk) 10:31, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! :) --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 10:33, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

anagrams bug[edit]

Hi Wyang. I think I may have found a bug. Anagrams appears at 皮草, but not at 草皮. Unless it's just my computer... ---> Tooironic (talk) 05:29, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Both pages are displaying anagrams correctly now. I think this may have been a page refreshing issue. Wyang (talk) 07:46, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 15:53, 16 June 2017 (UTC)


Having some difficulty parsing the second definition of . The definition is "槌水深声" which kind of breaks down as "hammer (or "strike, beat") water depth sound". I'm just not sure what it's referring to. Thanks! Bumm13 (talk) 06:42, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure either. My interpretation would be "the sound made when a wooden post is installed in deep water". Wyang (talk) 07:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)


The second definition of has me stumped. "水波后波蓋過前波" seems to be referring to the positioning of one wave in reference to another (cycle of the wave) but I can't quite be sure what it's trying to say. Thanks again for all of your help! :) Bumm13 (talk) 09:19, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Aha, no worries. This means "the waves behind drive on and surpass those ahead". :) Wyang (talk) 09:28, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


When you get time could you help me fix what I broke here? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 14:53, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

@Tooironic, it should be fixed now. You don't need to put Pronunciation 1 if there's only one pronunciation under that etymology. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 14:59, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. ---> Tooironic (talk) 15:05, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
@Tooironic: No problem! — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 15:12, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Etymology of 蘆薈[edit]

When you've got the time, could you check this etymology? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 22:19, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Sure thing, I have added to the etymology. It's taken me quite a while to track down and read the relevant articles/publications on this... It's still mysterious, though. Wyang (talk) 07:59, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Cantonese pronunciation for 愛[edit]

Hi Wyang! I was looking at the Wiktionary entry for and I noticed this odd note in the Cantonese pronunciation:

ngoi3 - colloquial reading from hypercorrection of the "ng-initial loss";

It took a little while to track it down to this edit made two years ago. Anyway, I'm pretty sure this is actually an example of 懶音 instead of a hypercorrection of said 懶音, since 愛 is dark-toned (as w:Proper Cantonese pronunciation states). Chagneling (talk) 01:03, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

懶音 is the reverse of the hypercorrection, isn't it? For example when is pronounced "o5" instead of "ngo5". I tentatively support the inclusion of 懶音 in Cantonese pronunciations, if it doesn't make entries too cluttered. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:19, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi @Chagneling, great investigative work :) I'm not sure I understood you correctly though. As I understand it, 愛 is has a dark departing tone, suggesting a historical null initial rather than an ng-. This is corroborated by a null initial (i.e. glottal stop) in Middle Chinese (MC ʔʌiH). Thus ngoi3 is the result of confusion of the two types of initials, or 'hypercorrection' of the tendency to drop ng-. Wyang (talk) 02:21, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
To clarify, I got the impression from the wording of the note that "ngoi3" was a hypercorrection caused by the "proper" Cantonese pronunciation push against 懶音 (since the article for this was what the note linked to). I was originally proposing that the wording be clarified so that the ngoi3 pronunciation was explicitly stated to be (a) an example of 懶音, and not (b) an example of a hypercorrection in an attempt against 懶音.
But to be honest, now I'm not sure if the adding of ng- to dark-toned null onsets is considered a part of 懶音 or not - the table in w:Proper Cantonese pronunciation clearly states (a), but w:Hong Kong Cantonese#Pronunciation states (b). Chagneling (talk) 02:59, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
I think it depends on what perspective you're taking on this. w:Proper Cantonese pronunciation lists a bunch of phonetic sound changes which deviate from the "proper", but I don't think all of them are usually considered to be 懶音. It is probably hard to track down which caused what. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:08, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Also, I don't even think we should include these minor deviations from the "proper". The IPA could be automatically generated to show them as common variants if wanted. The same thing could be said of Taiwanese Mandarin; I don't think anyone would want to show "sān" for "shān", even though most Taiwanese people alternate between the two. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:14, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
@Chagneling, Justinrleung I also think it depends on the interpretation of 懶音, i.e. whether it is understood to mean "improper pronunciation" or "lazy pronunciation". Reading 愛 as ngoi3 would be perceived as improper, but it is not necessarily the result of laziness, and may in fact be caused by the conscientious but misguided effort to fight laziness. There are two main factors contributing to the ng- pronunciation of 愛, one is increased population mixing in modern times and the (low-intensity) influence of Cantonese varieties which systematically apply the ng- to null-initial characters (there are a few of them per xiaoxuetang), and the other is hypercorrection in the context of a proper Cantonese pronunciation movement. One may never know the actual relative contribution of the two, and in actuality there was probably considerable involvement of both in the addition of this prosthetic sound, although the latter is characteristically considered as the culprit. I think the note in the entry would probably benefit from a rewording to take into account the first factor above, and I think leaving the improper ng- pronunciation in in this case is perhaps warranted, simply due to its frequency. I do think, however, that manual input of the prototypical "lazy pronunciations" (ng- becoming null, n- becoming l-, etc.) should be discouraged at least. Cantonese is not the only variety affected by this indiscriminate prothesis of sound; the Tianjin dialect of Mandarin (about half an hour from Beijing) has n- (< ng-) for a lot of the null-initial characters, for example 愛 is /nai˥˧/ and 安 /nan˨˩/, forming a de facto vernacular layer in juxtaposition with the standard null-initial layer. Wyang (talk) 06:07, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
@Justinrleung's suggestion to have the IPA for variant pronunciations such as these automatically generated sounds like a good idea to me. I don't know any Lua sadly, but I would support anyone who implements something like this.
Putting them into the Dialectal data tables probably makes more sense, but it looks like it's manually inputted. Chagneling (talk) 07:46, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
I don't think 愛 is the only one that's common; I often pronounce null initials as ng- if I'm not conscious about it, like in 屋, 嘔, 惡, etc. Does that mean we should be including all these instances of the hypercorrection ∅ > ng-? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 21:44, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Is it phonologically conditioned? If so, we could use {{zh-pron}} to automatically generate a pronunciation note for these syllables. Wyang (talk) 21:46, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
The only condition I can think of is -i- in loanwords, like ik1 si4 for the letter X, which would never be pronounced as ngik1 si4. Any other null initial can be pronounced as ng-. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 21:53, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
@Justinrleung, Chagneling Thanks. I added an automatic note for null initials – let me know what you think. Wyang (talk) 22:17, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! I forgot that -e- would not take ng- either, like in letters like A and N; also, u/yu can't have zero initials. I've changed the code accordingly. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 01:02, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
Also, do you think it would be better to only have the note in one syllable entries? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 01:14, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, I think that's a good idea. I limited it to only monosyllables. Wyang (talk) 07:14, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the implementation, Wyang! Looks good to me.
I feel silly for not mentioning this earlier, but what's your opinion on adding the other sound changes listed in w:Proper Cantonese pronunciation as well? (This is probably a good time for me to start trying to figure out the ins and outs of Lua.) Chagneling (talk) 10:06, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
I support, so long as it doesn't make the layout too cluttered. @Justinrleung, Suzukaze-c, kc kennylau, Atitarev Wyang (talk) 10:16, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
Alright. —suzukaze (tc) 22:44, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I think the code should be moved to MOD:yue-pron then. Ideally, we should have the actual pronunciation in the note, e.g. ngoi3 should be in the note for oi3, so that it is less technical and easier to understand by common people trying to learn Cantonese. We should also work out what we want for things like ngon6, which might be pronounced as on6, ngong6, or ong6, depending on which rules are applied. Some of these phonetic changes listed are less common/less acceptable. For one, ng- replacing the null initial is so prevalent that even one of the biggest proponents of Proper Cantonese, Richard Ho (何文匯), accepts both ng- and null initial variants in his 粵音正讀字彙. I'll try working on the details when I have time to spare. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 02:54, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Slight digression: Do speakers add ng- to or ? (excluding cases where 哦 means "to recite (poetry)" or "to nag", since they already have ng-) I'm not sure whether this is another exception to the null–ng initial confusion discussed above. Chagneling (talk) 05:01, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
@Chagneling: I wouldn't, and it doesn't sound natural to me to add ng- to any of these particles (also 啊 as another example). We probably need to have a way to deal with these exceptions then. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:33, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
What about making it a parameter, like with Mandarin erhua? —suzukaze (tc) 06:38, 27 June 2017 (UTC)