Re: Hanzi trad-simp folding and z-variants

On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Stephan Stiller
<stephan.stiller_at_gmail.com>wrote:

>
> For me "non-standardized' means there is not one recognized standard,
> this does not mean that things are completely unstable, nor that there are
> no traditions of what character is used for what word that have been passed
> down for many generations.
>
>
> *As I stated*, for a decent number of syllable-morphemes (probably the *
> majority* of Cheung-Bauer entries shouldn't be considered active or
> passive knowledge), native speakers will have no clue how to write them,
> and the array of characters to chose from (if C&B is used for a
> forced-choice task), or often a good portion of the array, either appears
> unsatisfactory to them or is seen as okay but previously unknown. Native
> speakers have no problem approximating these syllables otherwise if
> pressed, but, yes, things for those syllables are not that stable and if
> there are stable traditions, they might not be well-known except for a low
> percentage of C&B entries – definitely less than half, but I don't want to
> commit to a specific number.
>
>
   Yes. The way the Cheung-Bauer list was compiled certainly hard to see
how most of the characters would be in widely known.

   With Zhuang Sawndip I have examining texts from different locations and
eras, that there exists both evidence of transmission from generation to
generation, of progression and also of unstability.

Regards
John

> Nonetheless, both type and token frequency of such syllable-morphemes are
> low.
>
>

> Stephan
>
>
Received on Sun Jun 09 2013 - 06:02:10 CDT