Re: CJKV ideographic, was Re: Perception that Unicode is 16-bit
Tomasek idatzi zuen: More importantly, Han \u6f22 (Cant. Hon) really isn't an ethnonym used by the Cantonese and other southern Chinese; rather, Tang \u5510 (Cant. Tong) is used instead, e.g., tangcan \u5510\u9910 'Chinese cuisine' (Cant. tongchaan), tanghua \u5510\u8a71 'Chinese (spoken) language' (Cant. tongwa), tangren \u5510\u4eba 'Chinese person' (Cant. tongyan), tangrenjie \u5510\u4eba\u8857 'Chinatown' (Cant. tongyangaai), tangshan \u5510\u5c71 'China (lit. "Tang mountain")' (Cant. tongsaan), etc. Some of these terms are kind of old-fashioned or rustic, though. True, but it would be a bit unfair, since other groups use the same ethnonym. If we're looking for a high register term for Cantonese ideographs, how about 'YuhtJih' [7cb5\u5b57 ] (Mand. Yuzi)? I think I heard of a tangzi \u5510\u5b57 (Cant. tongji) term once; this would be most ideal to make use of, if one wanted to invent new English terminology. But that still leaves the problem of distinguishing the "dialect" characters of other southern Chinese languages from the mainstream characters, and the Cantonese "dialectal" characters. Basically just linguistic transcription, like the recently-created Hong Kong-indigenous Jyutping \u7cb5\u62fc (Mand. Yuepin) system. Unlike some other Chinese languages, romanization (usu. introduced by missionaries) didn't catch on, and the dominant (and conservative) trend is to write in Han characters, even if that means having to create new ones, hijacking existing ones, or resurrecting old ones. Just for the sake of our sanity ; ) with the number of homophones we have, writing entirely in romanization is ... an interesting pasttime. Believe me, I've tried ... and the Yale English Cantonese dictionary still drives me nuts for not having characters ... So apart from dictionaries you find romanization (a myriad of varieties) for the transcription of names and shops, place names ... and that's about it I would think. I believe 'status' comes into this a lot - educated people "know how to write" ... Michael
Re: CJKV ideographic, was Re: Perception that Unicode is 16-bit
On Wednesday, February 28, 2001, at 01:54 AM, akerbeltz.alba wrote: So apart from dictionaries you find romanization (a myriad of varieties) for the transcription of names and shops, place names ... and that's about it I would think. I believe 'status' comes into this a lot - educated people "know how to write" ... Most place names in Hong Kong seem to be modified versions of Wade-Giles, which I (having learned Yale first) tend to find almost incomprehensible. Still, it was always fun to hear British news readers talk about what had just happened in, say, Sham Shui Po. = John H. Jenkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepage.mac.com/jenkins/
Re: CJKV ideographic, was Re: Perception that Unicode is 16-bit (was:
Kenneth Whistler wrote: Doug Ewell asked, on this hopelessly wandering thread: (Is there an English-language term for the subset of the CJK ideographic script that is used by a given language, say, Japanese?) Well, since "kanji" by now has been borrowed into English, at least among a rather large class of specialists who are at least somewhat knowledgeable about Japanese, I would say that the relevant English-language phrase to cover this is "the Japanese kanji". I know, not a good, core English word like "alphabet" or "syllabary" or "abjad", is it. But wait. Hmmm. alpha, beta, gamma... syllaba, syllabae, syllabarum ... syllab, syllabdzo ... *wanders off muttering to himself* And not only "kanji". These terms are all used by specialists: * 'Hanzi' in Beijing Chinese (with reference to "American English", "ha" as in 'hard'; "zi" pronounced like "tsz" where "z" here represents a vowel sound similar to English "z" with the tongue tip lowered slightly, near also to English "r"); * 'Kanji' in Cantonese Chinese (kahn jee; "k" as in 'can', "a" as in 'father', "jee" as in 'jeep'); * 'Kanji' in Japanese (pronunciation similar to that in Cantonese); * 'Hanja' in Korean (Han as in Beijing Chinese, "ja" as in English "jar"; * 'chuhan' in Vietnamese [real Chinese chars]; * 'chunom' in Vietnamese [similar to (i.e., analogical) Chinese characters]. But for core English vocabulary, I don't think "Chinese ideographs", "Japanese ideographs", "Korean ideographs", or "Vietnamese ideographs" would be objectionable terms to anyone ... that is, to anyone who doesn't find the term "ideograph" objectionable.
Re: CJKV ideographic, was Re: Perception that Unicode is 16-bit (was:
On Tuesday, February 27, 2001, at 10:46 AM, Richard Cook wrote: * 'Kanji' in Cantonese Chinese (kahn jee; "k" as in 'can', "a" as in 'father', "jee" as in 'jeep'); I'm afraid it's not "kanji" but "hanji" in Cantonese. Sorry. = John H. Jenkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepage.mac.com/jenkins/
Re: CJKV ideographic, was Re: Perception that Unicode is 16-bit
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, John Jenkins wrote: On Tuesday, February 27, 2001, at 10:46 AM, Richard Cook wrote: * 'Kanji' in Cantonese Chinese (kahn jee; "k" as in 'can', "a" as in 'father', "jee" as in 'jeep'); I'm afraid it's not "kanji" but "hanji" in Cantonese. Sorry. But is a romanized version of U+6F22 U+5B57 based on the Cantonese pronunciation ever used in English writing the way hanzi (based on Mandarin pronunciation) is? For those familiar with "ASCII IPA", it's /hOn33 tSi22/. (O denotes U+0254 LATIN SMALL LETTER OPEN O; s denotes U+0283 LATIN SMALL LETTER ESH.)[1] Yale romanization would write it honjih, a modified Yale would write it hon3ji6, etc. [1] I wish I could assume that everyone can view IPA, and not go through contortions like this. Thomas Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CJKV ideographic, was Re: Perception that Unicode is 16-bit
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Richard Cook wrote: * 'chunom' in Vietnamese [similar to (i.e., analogical) Chinese characters]. If one is going to talk about Vietnamese chu+~ no^m '"southern" characters', then one might as well mention the Japanese kokuji 'national characters' and Korean gugja 'national characters' as well, which are their equivalents of "homemade" characters that do not exist in Chinese.[1] There is also a similar phenomena in Chinese, called fangyanzi '"dialect" character', which may be considered analogous to the above, the most well known being the Cantonese ones, although others (Wu, Hakka, etc) do exist. [1] There is a small chance that they might exist in Chinese, or even in other languages, depending on the criteria for being a "national character". Thomas Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CJKV ideographic, was Re: Perception that Unicode is 16-bit
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Thomas Chan wrote: On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Richard Cook wrote: * 'chunom' in Vietnamese [similar to (i.e., analogical) Chinese characters]. If one is going to talk about Vietnamese chu+~ no^m '"southern" characters', then one might as well mention the Japanese kokuji 'national characters' and Korean gugja 'national characters' as well, which are their equivalents of "homemade" characters that do not exist in Chinese.[1] As for 'gugja' in Korean, its meaning is ambiguous (it could mean Hangul as well as home-grown Hanjas in Korea) and most people in Korea would NOT recognize the word at all. When I was asked about it by Ken Lunde (the author of CJKV information processing), I had to ask around (my Korean dictionary does NOT explain the word as such although some - not all - dictionaries do ) and virtually everyone told me they had never heard of the word as being used to mean Korean-made Hanja. We just refer to Korean-made Hanja as 'Han-kuk-shik Hanja' (or something like that). Jungshik Shin
Re: CJKV ideographic, was Re: Perception that Unicode is 16-bit
Thomas Chan wrote: But is a romanized version of U+6F22 U+5B57 based on the Cantonese pronunciation ever used in English writing the way hanzi (based on Mandarin pronunciation) is? it could be ... it might even be used as a special term to distinguish "Cantonese Ideographs" ... For those familiar with "ASCII IPA", it's /hOn33 tSi22/. (O denotes U+0254 LATIN SMALL LETTER OPEN O; s denotes U+0283 LATIN SMALL LETTER ESH.)[1] Yale romanization would write it honjih, a modified Yale would write it hon3ji6, etc. I think that modern uses of romanized Cantonese are few and far between ...
Re: CJKV ideographic, was Re: Perception that Unicode is 16-bit
Thomas Chan wrote: There is also a similar phenomena in Chinese, called fangyanzi '"dialect" character', which may be considered analogous to the above, the most well known being the Cantonese ones, although others (Wu, Hakka, etc) do exist. [1] There is a small chance that they might exist in Chinese, or even in other languages, depending on the criteria for being a "national character". Yes, [U+65b9][U+8a00][U+5b57] 'dialect character' is also [U+767d][U+5b57] though I think the latter may have pejorative connotations ... Any given dialect is likely to show local variation in the script ... another gazillion characters for Unihan!
Re: CJKV ideographic, was Re: Perception that Unicode is 16-bit
Jungshik Shin wrote: On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Thomas Chan wrote: On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Richard Cook wrote: * 'chunom' in Vietnamese [similar to (i.e., analogical) Chinese characters]. If one is going to talk about Vietnamese chu+~ no^m '"southern" characters', then one might as well mention the Japanese kokuji 'national characters' and Korean gugja 'national characters' as well, which are their equivalents of "homemade" characters that do not exist in Chinese.[1] As for 'gugja' in Korean, its meaning is ambiguous (it could mean Hangul as well as home-grown Hanjas in Korea) and most people in Korea would NOT recognize the word at all. When I was asked about it by Ken Lunde (the author of CJKV information processing), I had to ask around (my Korean dictionary does NOT explain the word as such although some - not all - dictionaries do ) and virtually everyone told me they had never heard of the word as being used to mean Korean-made Hanja. We just refer to Korean-made Hanja as 'Han-kuk-shik Hanja' (or something like that). I just looked in 2 Korean dictionaries, and didn't see gugja either ...maybe I need a bigger dictionary.
