Re: Your vote on a common global language
From: Lee Sau Dan (danlee_at_informatik.uni-freiburg.de)
Date: 12/05/04
- Next message: Lee Sau Dan: "Re: Your vote on a common global language"
- Previous message: Lee Sau Dan: "Re: Languages in Europe - Who understands what ?"
- In reply to: Miguel Cruz: "Re: Your vote on a common global language"
- Next in thread: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Your vote on a common global language"
- Reply: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Your vote on a common global language"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 05 Dec 2004 22:17:07 +0800
>>>>> "Miguel" == Miguel Cruz <mnc@admin.u.nu> writes:
Miguel> Holly J. Sommer <sommer@mugs.net> wrote:
>> "Hatunen" <hatuunen@cox.net> wrote:
>>> I'm curious now as to what the generic term for Chinese
>>> characters would be.
>> Radicals?
Miguel> Only 200-some Chinese characters are themselves radicals;
Miguel> the rest are built upon radicals.
Yes and no. No when you take the _broad_ sense of "radical", which
can refer to any spatially coherent subpart of a character. In this
sense, a radical does not have to belong to the 214 Kang1xi1 radicals,
which is what you meant. Those 214 Kang1xi1 radicals is usually what
"radical" means _in the narraw sense_. But even the 214-set is not
_the_ convention. There are other conventions of which radicals
constitue the set of "elementary radicals". Kang1xi1 is just the most
widely adopted convention.
--
Lee Sau Dan §õ¦u´° ~{@nJX6X~}
E-mail: danlee@informatik.uni-freiburg.de
Home page: http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~danlee
- Next message: Lee Sau Dan: "Re: Your vote on a common global language"
- Previous message: Lee Sau Dan: "Re: Languages in Europe - Who understands what ?"
- In reply to: Miguel Cruz: "Re: Your vote on a common global language"
- Next in thread: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Your vote on a common global language"
- Reply: Peter T. Daniels: "Re: Your vote on a common global language"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|