Mike Ayers wrote:
> > From: Kenneth Whistler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> > > Also, I see that the script for Chinese is listed as "Han", not
> > > "Chinese". Must we insist on confusing people?
> >
> > The script in question is designated "Han" in the Unicode Standard,
> > and has always been so, in part because it is also used for
> Japanese,
> > Korean, and Vietnamese, and not just Chinese.
>
> That might be an argument, if "Han" *didn't* mean
> "Chinese". The
> script is called "Chinese characters" in the local language in every
> language I've come across, including English. Only amidst
> the Unicode crowd have I encountered any other name.
This is not correct: I have found the term "Han" or "hanzi" in any kind of
literature, not only on Unicode documentation.
It is true that "Chinese" or "Chinese characters" is also common and,
personally, I tend to prefer it.
I am not sure, however, that the two terms are 100% the same, in Western
languages. "Hanzi" is less ethnically marked than "Chinese characters",
regardless that they mean exactly the same thing.
(The choice between synonyms is rarely neutral, when politics are involved.
In Italian, e.g., both "tedesco" and "germanico" simply mean "German".
However, while "tedesco" is the normal word to be used, "germanico" took a
political connotation during the fascist regime, and people who use it now
probably want to show their far-right affiliation.)
> No, Japanese and Korean should be listed as using
> Chinese script as well, since they do.
They do, using the term "Han".
BTW, I notice that a single "Chinese" entry is listed. This should probably
be split in several entries for the various Chinese languages (or
"dialects", e.g. Mandarin, Cantonese, Hakka, etc.). This split may be handy
because the different languages could need different information.
Ciao.
Marco
