RE: traditional vs simplified chinese

From: Rick Cameron (Rick.Cameron@crystaldecisions.com)
Date: Thu Feb 13 2003 - 15:54:43 EST

  • Next message: David Oftedal: "Re: traditional vs simplified chinese"

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Edward H Trager [mailto:ehtrager@umich.edu]
    >
    > On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Rick Cameron wrote:
    >
    > > The Win32 API includes a function that can do this folding,
    > on Windows
    > > NT/2000/XP: LCMapString, with the option
    > LCMAP_SIMPLIFIED_CHINESE or
    > > LCMAP_TRADITIONAL_CHINESE.
    > >
    > > I know little about Chinese, but I have the impression that
    > it is much
    > > more common for several traditional characters to correspond to one
    > > simplified character than vice versa. If that's true, it
    > seems to me
    > > that it would make most sense to fold to simplified.
    > >
    > > - rick
    >
    > Hmmm ... Suppose I'm searching for some relatively obscure
    > traditional character that occurs mostly in Wen Yen (u+6587
    > u+8A00 : Classical
    > Chinese) and has a very specific meaning in Classical
    > Chinese. This character gets "folded" or "mapped" to a
    > fairly common character in modern bai hua (u+767D u+8BDD)
    > Chinese, and then the search proceeds. The result set
    > contains hundreds or thousands of irrelevant results related
    > to the modern meaning, and I still have to sift through them
    > looking for the needles in the haystack. I'll try to provide
    > a concrete example once I think of one ... it's been a long
    > time since I studied Classical Chinese.
    >

    One solution would be for the user to indicate whether she wanted
    simplified/traditional folding to be done.

    - rick



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Feb 13 2003 - 17:43:21 EST