Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Template talk:zh-pron. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Template talk:zh-pron, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Template talk:zh-pron in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Template talk:zh-pron you have here. The definition of the word Template talk:zh-pron will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTemplate talk:zh-pron, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Pronunciation file
Latest comment: 10 years ago13 comments2 people in discussion
Here it is if you haven't heard it: . It's another non-native pronunciation by Peter Isotalo - inaccurate consonants, exaggerated tonal contours. Wyang (talk) 00:00, 8 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
When you add "=y" (e.g. |ma=y|ca=y|ga=y|ha=y|ja=y|mna=y|wa=y|xa=y) it adds to " terms with audio links" categories but there is no link to audio. --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)01:01, 8 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 10 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
In categories that include the language name, that name and the canonical name for the language code in the language data modules have to match- otherwise, the catboiler templates won't work. Of all the names in Module:zh-pron, Jin seems to be the only one that doesn't match: WT's canonical name is Jinyu, not Jin. That means we have to either change zh-pron to use Jinyu, or go to RFM to get the canonical name changed to Jin. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:26, 2 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
WT:RFM: Requests for moves, mergers and splits. Even though language codes are no longer templates, that's where we still discuss such things. You really need to get out of the habit of acting first and then thinking about the consequences. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:59, 2 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
As I said, this time it's not a big deal, but it's not a good practice, in general. As for "posting", you first broached the subject at 5:11, got one response at 5:19, said at 5:22 you were going to make the change, then made the change at 5:24- 13 minutes.
We're not all in the same room- it usually takes hours or even days to get people's attention. It just happens that most of the editors active in Chinese happen to be in either Australia or New Zealand, but most of the people who deal with language codes, templates and modules are in North America or Europe.
I'm not accusing you of trying to slip something by anyone- that would be completely out of character. I've never had any reason to question your intentions- just your lack of patience. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:02, 2 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
Another variant pronunciation question
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Because we have to understand and maintain it. It's just my opinion but there are too many transliterations. Why this one, out of all? Even Wade-Giles is better known. (BTW, sorry for accidental reversals today)--Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)14:42, 28 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
I would also like to see Wade–Giles included. It's not that similar to Pinyin, and older English speakers and people interested in Taiwan may be more familiar with it than with Pinyin. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:10, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply
I second that. It's simply everywhere in older English-language reference works, often without the Chinese characters. I doubt there are many Chinese speakers that need this, but it would really come in handy for English-speaking casual users who are trying to find out more about words mentioned in those reference works. Chuck Entz (talk) 17:19, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply
I'm also perplexed and would like to add my voice of complaint that the Wade-Giles information is being systematically removed. As a Wikipedia editor I routinely resort to somewhat older or public domain references, and they all use Wade-Giles. I dont think it was very nice to systematically overhaul Chinese character pages, which used to all give Wade-Giles transliteration pretty much, and delete the information. The older template {{cmn-hanzi}} accomodated the wg= parameter, so this one should have as well. --Kiyoweap (talk) 04:55, 26 July 2016 (UTC)Reply
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Belated thanks to Wyang. I did realize after repeated use that Wade-Giles is displayed in "expand". But I concur with Chuck Entz that it is everywhere in English-language references (probably pre-1990's), so I think Wade-Giles should be shown by default.
Presently I have another concern that the module used to converting to Wade-Giles needs debugging, but I'll start a new section.--Kiyoweap (talk) 22:56, 4 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Hanzi templates and headers
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I have already removed a lot of ===Hanzi=== when merging but I'm having second thoughts. They may contain alternative readings, which are not present in {{zh-pron}} for specific PoS, e.g. a pronunciation only used in a component, a rare reading. Should we keep ===Hanzi=== and {{cmn-hanzi}} (move to {{zh-hanzi}})? --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)23:07, 28 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
I think we should merge the definitions into one header named "Definitions", and divide it by MC readings, not by PoS, with the help of additional templates. In that way {{zh-pron}} accounts for all readings and is used only once, whereas the L4 reading templates in Definitions account for multiple readings. Wyang (talk) 02:32, 30 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
I haven't fully accepted your idea about "Definitions" header yet, even if I understand your point, sorry. This approach has pluses and minuses and both approaches are challenging. However, using PoS headers is more common and most people are used to it, you don't have to change anything radically. Besides, this may not be accepted by the community, including Chinese, Vietnamese, etc. editors. It may require another vote. Sorry for not fully supporting you on this one! --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)02:41, 30 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
Wu Entry Transliteration Ideas
Latest comment: 10 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
I think stripping all numbers would probably be better. There are words following phrasal tone sandhi rules as well, which are currently written with numbers after letters. 儂好Wyang (talk) 03:04, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
Perhaps the transliteration without any numbers could be adopted in translations, see also's, synonyms, etc., e.g. "non hau", otherwise, complete numbers (for each syllable), e.g. "non33 hau34" should be used, which is error-prone (the only person who could do it error-free would be Wyang :)). I've got a textbook, which ignores tones. It's not perfect but accurate tone numbers could be reserved for Chinese entries. --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)03:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
Numbered pinyin, Jyutping, Wade-Giles with superscript?
Latest comment: 9 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion
@Kc kennylau, @Wyang Can numbered pinyin, Jyutping and Wade-Giles (if introduced) use superscript numbers? E.g. gwok3 in 國? I don't why we need linked numbered pinyin hyperlinked, just displaying guo2 in monosyllabic entries is sufficient, IMHO. (There's some problem with the expand button in 國). --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)00:09, 18 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
What should be the format (pinyin, jyutping) for terms written in multiple scripts, such as β粒子? The module will obviously crash if Latin, Greek, etc. letters are not replaced with standard transliteration. --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)03:10, 23 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
It should read
Lua error in Module:yue-pron at line 258: Please do not capitalize the Jyutping.
or possibly
Lua error in Module:yue-pron at line 258: Please do not capitalize the Jyutping.
but both of those currently give "module errors". I'm not sure what in the script could cause it to get so buggy when properly capitalized and hyphenated Cantonese and Shanghainese are included, but whatever it is needs fixing. — LlywelynII13:06, 7 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
Jyutping does not capitalise proper nouns (see how the article Jyutping treats "jyut6 ping3"). The Wiktionary romanisation of Wu does not capitalise proper nouns either and does not make use of hyphens. For Jyutping, normal numbers are used for tone numbers, since the original Jyutping scheme does not actually make tone numbers superscripts (see the link above). Making them superscripts is a modification of the original scheme adopted by Wiktionary and some other sites. Normal numbers are also easier to type. Wyang (talk) 00:05, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
I wonder, why are you asking now, when it's been used like that for a long time by a very large number of entries, which have converted to use {{zh-pron}}? I have asked a while ago on GP about sorting in {{zh-noun}} and I thought you knew it all along. All categorisations and sorting is done by this template and modules. User:Wyang could explain this better - it was his idea and design but this template contains pronunciations for various Chinese topolects and as soon a pronunciation is given (transliteration or audio file), it adds to PoS categories for that topolect and they are sorted by the transliteration, e.g. 醫院/医院 (yīyuàn) has 5 topolects and one PoS category. A template like {{zh-noun}} would require some complex logic to do that. Also pinging @Kc kennylau who has been taking an active part in the development and the use. --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)23:43, 7 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
I'm asking now because I am adding the lemma categories to {{head}}, but I'm finding that a number of Chinese entries has no part of speech specified at all, which prevents categorisation. I still don't understand why part of speech categories are added in the pronunciation section; what does the PoS have to do with pronunciation at all? Why not use normal headword templates like any other language? —CodeCat00:10, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
I'll try to explain again. The overwhelming majority of Chinese words use the same characters but have different pronunciations in topolects and dialects, so 醫院 is just a Chinese word for "hospital". "yīyuàn" is Mandarin transliteration, "ji1 jyun6-2" is Cantonese, etc., without pronunciation "ji1 jyun6-2", there is no point in adding 醫院 to Category:Cantonese nouns because it wouldn't contain anything Cantonese. 噉样 is a Cantonese specific term, it's not used in Mandarin, there is no pronunciation for Mandarin, so it's not added to any Mandarin PoS categories. Potentially, "zh" headword templates could be used for Chinese PoS categorisations, which is also handled nicely by this and other PoS templates. --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)00:23, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
No, you misunderstood the purpose. How can users find Cantonese pronunciations, usage examples? They can't assume that every Chinese entry will have Cantonese Jyutping, it's not automatic but it's now made easy to add contents in at least 5 topolects + Old and Middle Chinese. Chinese topolects are now thriving with the merger. Cantonese nouns have grown tenfold, with IPA, usage examples and proper transliterations. Wu has grown from nearly nothing to a few hundred. There is work going for Old Chinese and Middle Chinese. Hakka and Min Nan entries are improved and increased. --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)00:52, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
The exact categorisation and formatting may not have been thoroughly thought through and discussed but it's now accepted by Chinese editors (natives and learners). I personally see no problem with the usual Category:Cantonese nouns, which may contain other topolects as well. Well, only those who supported and understood the merger discussed and took part in it. The opponents didn't suggest anything constructive. --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)01:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
I don't object to Chinese editors working with it and understanding how it works. But it's a problem when it comes to editors like me who are not familiar with the Chinese practices. It's a real headache. Furthermore, there are a lot of technical difficulties because the way templates and modules are being used deviates so strongly from how the equivalents in other languages work. That's not a problem if the languages' stuff is maintained by its own set of editors, but it's confusing when it comes to points where the language-specific stuff meshes with general templates, like {{head}}, which I am currently working on to allow proper categorisation of all lemmas and non-lemma forms. If Chinese handles part-of-speech categories in a totally different way, then all of that breaks down, and it's a real mess for me to make it work for Chinese. —CodeCat01:24, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
The primary problem is that Module:headword/templates contains a list of recognised parts of speech that I am working on. As part of this, I'm trying to ensure that {{head}} always has a second parameter, so that the template is able to categorise it properly. However, there is currently the template {{zh-pos}} which does not give a POS, and it's used in quite a few entries. Furthermore, because the {{zh-pron}} template is not a headword line template that can use {{head}}, it entirely bypasses this, so Category:Cantonese lemmas will not be populated by it. —CodeCat01:36, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
E/C: What you did now doesn't actually work the way it should. Now, not just lemmas will be categorised, but also non-lemma forms. That is why I am creating the list of POSs in the first place, so that the template knows what parts of speech are lemmas and which aren't. It also seems that it's categorising this talk page, so something is clearly wrong. —CodeCat01:44, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
Not sure if it matters but Chinese is not an inflected language and every Chinese (also Vietnamese, Thai, Lao, etc.) entry is a lemma. Should phrases, idioms, etc. be broken apart? --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)01:54, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
Idiom is not a part of speech in any case. Rather, other parts of speech can be optionally considered idioms. —CodeCat01:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
I was just checking, if idioms, proverbs, phrases in general (not just Chinese) are considered lemmata, sorry if it was a silly question. "Lemma - the canonical form of an inflected word" and phrases (and many idioms) are not words. --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)02:05, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
I didn't say they weren't lemmas. I said that idiom is not a part of speech. "Phrase" is, but "idiom" isn't, nor is "proverb". Part of speech relates only to the use of the word in a sentence, to syntax. And idiomatic phrases act like any other phrase, and are therefore not parts of speech in themselves. They are just phrases that happen to be idioms. —CodeCat02:08, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
Phrase is a part of speech, and is also a lemma because it's not an inflected form of a lemma. But idiom is not a lemma because it's not even a part of speech. —CodeCat02:11, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
To me, idioms in Chinese (e.g. 大驚小怪) do not behave any differently from nouns, verbs and adjectives. Lemmas are clearly a concept stemming from inflecting languages, as are the headword templates themselves, and the idea that word senses should always be split by part of speech. I'm not sure whether such a distinction of lemmas and non-lemmas is traditionally made for inflecting languages, but personally I think carrying this distinction over to non-inflecting languages would be an unnecessary complication. Wyang (talk) 03:46, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
I have just added examples of noun, adjective and adverb usages. Why? It's actually endless. Many Chinese words behave that way - they are used in various functions. Dictionaries just make arbitrary choices about parts of speech to make it a bit easier for foreign learners. It's even more complicated with single-character words. That's why our current translingual sections have vague definitions without the part of speech info. --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)12:37, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
This kind of Chinese exceptionalism is aggravating me to be honest. Chinese has parts of speech just like other languages, as those concepts are common to all human languages and even wired into our brains. I don't see why Chinese should be treated differently from other languages. In other languages, if words have more than one part of speech, we list them all. The same can easily be done for Chinese as well. —CodeCat12:42, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
There is no Chinese exceptionalism. Chinese also has parts of speech but they are often ignored or shown only partially in dictionaries. Editors, dictionary publishers make choices but other editors do it differently. I don't know, e.g. why 那邊 is shown as adverb and noun. It's also used as a postposition, Wenlin has it as "place word" and pronoun! Languages, which were originally monosyllabic and completely lack inflections have this in common. If you dig deeper into Vietnamese, Burmese, Thai, Lao, etc. they are very similar in this respect. It's possible to classify them comprehensively but too damn hard. --Anatoli(обсудить/вклад)13:01, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 10 years ago13 comments3 people in discussion
Correct pronunciation of 你好 is níhǎo but the other form (root tones) is used here on wiktionary in zh-pron. On the page Wiktionary:About_Chinese#Tone_sandhi there are a description of it. The text is written before the zh-pron template was introduced and is about the inflection template. I think was has happened is that the infomation from the inflection template has been copied to zh-pron. I think we need to update the info in zh-pron. There are very clear rules about pronunciation so I think a bot can make the update. What do you think? Kinamand (talk) 09:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
Have you read the section Tone sandhi on About Chinese which I link to in my question? There are to ways to convert 你好 into pinyin: converted tones (níhǎo) or root tones (nǐhǎo). Notice the different tone on the first syllable. Both ways are used in dictionaries. The first way follow the correct pronunciation. Currently we use the other conversion in zh-pron and I think that is wrong. You can also read about it on wikipedia:]. Kinamand (talk) 12:30, 9 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
Have you read the section Tone sandhi on About Chinese which I link to in my question? Your link is a personal site make by a guy named Mark Swofford which states some rules without giving any source or reason. On the page I link to they link to two dictionaries. The one which use the standard I think is most logical is HSK and HSK is supported by Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China so it must have much bigger weight than the personal site you link to. Kinamand (talk) 06:34, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
Mandarin tone sandhi is a common knowledge. One needs to know the expected tone changes but nǐhǎo is the standard pinyin, not níhǎo, which is reflected in most standard dictionaries, including HSK. It is possible to include additionally the phonetic pinyin but that's another story. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)06:46, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
I know that IPA reflects tone sandhi but I have never heard of people learning chinese pronounciation from IPA. Every textbox about chinese I have seen use pinyin. Kinamand (talk) 06:34, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
I have now tried to google: nǐhǎo og níhǎo. Nǐhǎo seems to be used far more often than níhǎo. So maybe we should just keep it and write that in the documentation. Do you know if there exists an official standard for pinyin maintained by Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China or other big authority? Kinamand (talk) 06:39, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
(edit conflict)Yes, learning pinyin includes learning tone sandhi. If a learner doesn't know how to read pinyin correctly, taking into account tone sandhi, it's a flaw in learning, not in pinyin. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)06:46, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
Standard pinyin uses nominal pinyin, not the actual pronunciation. It's basics, taught at HSK Basic level. You can check any HSK references, textbooks or various dictionaries - ABC (Wenlisn software), Pleco, CEDIC, Nciku, MDBG, etc. Also, mainland China's and Taiwan's systems coincide on this. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)06:50, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
Our "About Chinese" page says: "Some Mandarin dictionaries are inconsistent when it comes to depicting tone sandhi in Pinyin.". Can you correct the text on our "About Chinese" page with your info so that it is clear how we do it here in wiktionary? And many thanks for your answer :-) Kinamand (talk) 07:58, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
Separate languages
Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion
Cantonese, Hakka, Mandarin, etc., are separate and different languages. It's meaningless to merge the sections. Please undo the merge. Thanks. — This unsigned comment was added by 116.48.86.189 (talk). 19:18, 5 October 2014 (UTC)Reply
You'll need to make a stronger case if you want to convince all the editors here to undo hundreds of hours of their work. —CodeCat19:45, 5 October 2014 (UTC)Reply
Spoken Cantonese, Hakka, Mandarin, etc., are indeed separate and different languages, but as written with Han characters, they're dialects of written Chinese. This split in nature between the spoken and written languages means that neither merged nor separate approaches will be without problems, but the current approach is what we arrived at after extensive discussion, and I don't think anyone would want to change it again without really compelling reasons.
Before this, we tried having everything with separate language sections, but most of the non-Mandarin sections were either empty or had exactly the same definitions as the Mandarin sections. This way, we have the writing merged, but can provide information about the differences in pronunciation and grammar, among other things, that make the spoken languages distinct. It's not perfect, but it's much better than it was before. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:28, 5 October 2014 (UTC)Reply
Yes, nobody's going to undo changes, especially after anonymous comments. There's no information loss and Chinese topolects can now be added, including terms specific to topolects. They are treated equally. Languages or dialects is a political topic, we deal with information here. 歷史 is a Chinese word. Mandarin, Cantonese, Hakka, Min Nan, Wu are different ways to pronounce it. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)00:13, 6 October 2014 (UTC)Reply
I've noticed, and it's exciting that you've put effort into it. (My paternal grandparents are Taishanese, but my dad doesn't speak it.) There aren't many resources for Taishanese out there, so it might be hard to have much coverage. However, I'd like to see it added to Wiktionary. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }08:56, 29 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
It's not very scholarly so I thought it might need a bit of review before it goes live, especially regarding romanization. Feedback is welcome of course. —suzukaze (t・c) 00:06, 30 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
Xiaoxuetang clearly marks pronunciations as "Taicheng, Taishan, Siyi", unlike other sources (as far as I can tell); should it become the basis for the romanization? —suzukaze (t・c) 07:10, 30 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
I added Taishanese-to-IPA in Module:yue-pron. A list of Stephen Li's words is at Module talk:User:Suzukaze-c/04 (I have tidied his original data up quite extensively to produce this page, still there are inconsistencies in the notation). Three things need to be discussed: (1) pronunciation of prenasalised consonants, (2) pronunciation of 'y' (/ʒ/ or /j/), and (3) pronunciation of 'ia/ie' and 'au'. This is a very useful overview on the various Siyi dialects: , again written by the legendary Wang Li. Wyang (talk) 09:56, 12 July 2016 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 9 years ago8 comments5 people in discussion
What's the difference between Pha̍k-fa-sṳ and Pe̍h-ōe-jī in terms of Hakka? Isn't Pe̍h-ōe-jī for Min Nan? If so, why is Pe̍h-ōe-jī listed as one of the romanizations for Hakka? Justinrleung (talk) 05:14, 13 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
I understand, but aren't Pha̍k-fa-sṳ and Pe̍h-ōe-jī the same in the context of Hakka? Why are there two different parameters (pfs and poj)? Justinrleung (talk) 06:58, 15 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
Maybe I wasn't clear enough before. I know pfs is used for Hakka, but why is poj also given as a valid option for Hakka romanization? Justinrleung (talk) 21:54, 15 June 2015 (UTC)Reply
Template does not function properly in conjunction with template:wikipedia
Latest comment: 8 years ago10 comments4 people in discussion
So you know how this template his a little button in the top right corner that says "Expand"? Well, if Template:zh-pron is used in conjunction multiple Temlate:wikipedia, then that button gets misplaced, like on this page. VulpesVulpes42 (talk) 17:34, 5 March 2016 (UTC)Reply
@suzukaze-c Oh, and also; the number of Wikipedia templates seem to affect how displaced the "Expand" button gets. On this page, there is only one Wikipedia template, but on this page, there are as many as seven templates. Observe how the "Expand" button is much closer to its intended position on the page that only had one Wikipedia template, compared to the other page. - VulpesVulpes42 (talk) 14:50, 6 March 2016 (UTC)Reply
@Justinrleung You seem to be right about that! Now, with these observations in mind, is there a possibility for the bug to be fixed? I personally do not have the programming knowledge necessary to do that myself. - VulpesVulpes42 (talk) 08:05, 12 March 2016 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
@Wyang Is it possible to do something like MC/OC, where we can choose the pronunciation if there are more than one pronunciations? For example, in 更, there are three pronunciation sections, but the dialectal data is showing the two sets of pronunciations under each pronunciation section. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }06:37, 7 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
The template can become hard to read when there are too many pronunciations listed especially on mobile. Is there any sort of reason that we can't just have each pronunciation listed as a separate subsection on each page?--Prisencolin (talk) 00:59, 9 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 years ago11 comments3 people in discussion
Thinking about rewriting this atm, to make it more "holistic". Perhaps a single collapsed table for all pron, dial, mc and oc, similar to {{th-pron}}. Also to add: expected Mandarin reading from MC. Wyang (talk) 21:39, 13 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
There is a full table if you click on the 'More' button on the top right. The alternative is to use a single table and hide certain lines in the table by default. Wyang (talk) 21:48, 14 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
This is perhaps the ideal layout, although I can't seem to selectively use rowspan (enable when expanded and disable when collapsed) or something equivalent...
@Kc kennylau, Wyang I don't know about things like A型肝炎, but 亞洲 still needs to be fixed. The capitalization is wonky. I tried to fix it, but I don't understand what this in MOD:cmn-pron (export.str_analysis), which might be the source of the problem, does:
I have fixed it - there was no capitalisation for strait diff aside from this. I hope I have not broken anything... Module:cmn-pron probably needs a rewrite. Wyang (talk) 01:29, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply
Wenzhou dialect
Latest comment: 8 years ago6 comments5 people in discussion
@Suzukaze-c I think that's a great idea, since Shanghainese and Wenzhounese are quite different. That being said, we would need to have a romanization scheme for Wenzhounese. @Mteechan, do you have any ideas if there are any common romanization schemes out there, or do we need to make our own? (Wikipedia only has 溫州話羅馬字. Is this a good romanization scheme?) Also, I notice that you've been adding some Rui'an pronunciations. Would there be some dialectal variations within Wenzhounese to consider? — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }07:21, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply
Minidict has data not only for Shanghainese Wu, but for Wenzhou and other dialects. By default it's 上海 but you can select 温州, 苏州, etc. in the drop-down box. Wyang has already defined Wu transliteration. Perhaps it needs some tweaking for Wenzhou. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)07:30, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply
Are we ready to tackle the hardest Chinese dialect on Earth? lol. Anyway, I'm all for adding in additional Wu, either Suzhou or Wenzhou, or both. I added some stuff to zh:溫州話 before. It should be possible, and it would have to be a new parameter in zh-pron since Wenzhounese is not inferrable from Shanghainese. We need to decide on what the best way to handle sandhi is, and this will depend on how irregular the tone changes are. Wyang (talk) 07:37, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply
"Are we ready to tackle the hardest Chinese dialect on Earth?" Me, certainly not, ha-ha. I'm glad if the method is added, even if it's incomplete (work-in-progress) or only for single syllables. It makes little sense, though when there is no data or very little predictability. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)08:00, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply
"The hardest Chinese dialect on Earth"? Well I'd suppose Min dialects to be much much harder. About the romanization scheme, I'm for the one that Minidict currently uses. But the problem is Minidict mentions that "禁止以任何形式盗用本站任何内容". So we may not be able to grab the data right from the site. And about the tone sandhi, I've made a sheet of 2-character tone sandhi. However, it's too complicated and not exhaustive for all the irregular ones. Not to mention my dialect is different from the "standard" one. Mteechan (talk) 09:21, 2 October 2016 (UTC)Reply
"Category:Chinese lemmas"
Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
My theory is it depends on how the word is made up. For example, 纸老虎 is pronounced, after tone sandhi, as zhi3lao2hu3, while 展览品 is pronounced as zhan2lan2pin3. The difference between the two is the former is made up for a one-character word followed by a two-character word, while it is the other way around for the latter term. If my theory is correct, we will need to change the way tone sandhi is annotated on Wiktionary, as 纸老虎 should not be pronounced as zhi2lao2hu3. ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:45, 21 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Yes, zhǐláohǔ is the sandhi pronunciation. Perhaps we could add in a feature to allow 3rd-3rd tone sandhis to be blocked, such as using 'zhǐ/lǎohǔ'. Wyang (talk) 08:33, 21 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
I don't like the idea of using / since it's already used in other sections to separate pronunciations. (Off the top of my head, what about _?) —suzukaze (t・c) 08:55, 21 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Perhaps # could be used (it's used in phonology to indicate a word boundary, if that makes any sense in this context). If not, we could stick with Suzukaze-c's idea of using an underscore. I think this is needed in Min Nan as well. The tone sandhi in Hokkien is kind of messed up because it relies on the hyphens and spaces. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }09:03, 21 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Can capitalization be allowed for Jyutping? On the word list compiled by LSHK, they also uses capital letters and spacings are not required. And I believe we should adhere to the official Jyutping system where tones does not have superscript as it was designed this way for easy input and I've not seen any textbooks that uses superscript. Jyutping also does not indicate tone change, this is something created by an unaffiliated website (see bottom). Littlepenny413 (talk) 12:25, 2 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
The only online resource for Gan, Jin and Xiang readings that I'm aware of is 小學堂, which has coverage of many characters in many Chinese varieties. I think the readings for 水 come from this website. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }07:06, 1 April 2016 (UTC)Reply
Module error
Latest comment: 7 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
In no way is W valid pinyin. The anonymous editor doesn't seem to care too much about module errors, and has been producing an enormous amount of them since they don't touch-up {{zh-pron}} input appropriately when using {{zh-new}}. —suzukaze (t・c) 03:13, 20 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
It's too exotic. There is too little stuff on this, plus no one speaks this s*** here... so a lot of it will end up being guesswork. Wyang (talk) 10:17, 3 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
I'm taking, that the situation calls for adding transliterations for only single characters? (Such as 國, transliterated as gŏ)
All Chinese varieties don't only have transliterations but also pronunciations to match. Some sources had different transliterations but have been normalised and standardised here to produce consistent results. While Min Bei may have a few texts transliterated, no-one knows how to pronounce them with certainty and what tone sandhi are used. It's not worth adding a couple of hundred Min Bei transliterations when there is no good resource for this lect. --Anatoli T.(обсудить/вклад)11:45, 3 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
I do have 建甌方言詞典, but I'll have to look into how the pronunciation actually matches with the romanization. Using Kienning Colloquial Romanized could be problematic, since there have been changes in the phonology of the Jian'ou dialect since the creation of that romanization, including a merger of the 陽平 tone into 陰去. On a good note, I understand that tone sandhi is pretty much nonexistent in the Jian'ou dialect. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }12:22, 3 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
IPA module
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
@JohnC5 I'm too lazy to change it... since there are deeply embedded within the zh-pron structure, are behaving well atm, and the IPA module may throw up errors for Chinese IPA. (btw, ping didn't work) Wyang (talk) 07:11, 10 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
Default label for Mandarin pronunciation
Latest comment: 7 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion
Thanks. I didn't realise you filed this bug before. Pity it's still unresolved. (Probably would have resorted to a bit of $$$ in real life, but too bad Phabricator doesn't allow this) Wyang (talk) 07:57, 14 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
Yale alongside Jyutping
Latest comment: 4 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
@Suzukaze-c: I'm not a fan of that, but if you think Yale is still popular, sure. Bopomofo is still the main phonetic system in Taiwan, so it should be there with pinyin. A potential problem is "colloquial sounds not defined" - which should also be fixed in collapsed mode. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }17:24, 20 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
The word spacing is also problematic (;´∀`)
I suggested it only because I get the impression that Yale isn't entirely dead yet, and is more established. I don't really care about it that much otherwise. —suzukaze (t・c) 20:52, 13 January 2018 (UTC)Reply
Yale isn't dead and it's far more readable to anyoneone coming at Cantonese from English than Jyutping. We should really add it. Why would word spacing be an issue in the Yale with diacritics version? Akerbeltz (talk) 11:10, 1 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
Shaozhou Tuhua
Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
There're now a number of Shaozhou Tuhua entries created by User:Octahedron80, e.g 𛅰, 𛅸, 𛆤, 𛇃, 𛇤, 𛈕.
Questions:
Should incorporate Shaozhou Tuhua information into {{zh-pron}}? Nüshu is a syllabary but tonal distinctions are frequently ignored so we can not derive pronunciation uniquely from Nüshu.
In addition entries in Chinese characters probably should be categorized to Category:Shaozhou Tuhua lemmas if Shaozhou Tuhua pronunciation is present.
I must say that Shaozhou Tuhua sounds similar to many Chinese dialects (a reason it is uncategorised) and Nüshu script is directly derived from Chinese character. So I somewhat disagree about "cognate to Mandarin" changed by someone. A Nüshu letter already gets original meaning from its Chinese character, but according to syllabary system, it may also be used to write other words & different meanings. I think Shaozhou Tuhua should not be integrated into Chinese to confuse readers.--Octahedron80 (talk) 02:19, 16 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Octahedron80: I think you might be confusing etymology with glyph origin. Shaozhou Tuhua should be considered a variety of Chinese, so saying that a Shaozhou Tuhua word is derived from Chinese is slightly incorrect. I see nothing wrong with saying that it is cognate to Mandarin. You can also say that the glyph is derived from the Chinese character.
Wikipedia isn't up to date with the classification. The Language Atlas of China (2012) reclassifies it as a variety of Tuhua called "Yuebei Tuhua". It is definitely a variety of Chinese, but I'm not sure how it should be incorporated into zh-pron. Dungan, usually written in the Cyrillic script, was recently incorporated into {{zh-pron}}, so it might not hurt to include Shaozhou Tuhua as well. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }03:22, 16 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
Bug report 2
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
The erhua-ed pronunciation in entry 蒼蠅不叮無縫的蛋 is currently "cāngyingbùdīngwúfèngrdedàn". Is it possible to make it generate "cāngying bù dīng wú fèngr de dàn" or at least could I manually input an erhua-ed orthography? Dokurrat (talk) 17:04, 16 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I was looking up 鼉 and it lists the Wade-Giles pronunciation as "t'uo<syp>2". However, I looked at the ja and fr pages and they give " t'o2<syp>2" and in books I've consulted "t'o" is given also."t%27o"+alligator
@Justinrleung: In Chinese Wiktionary it is called m-l, because 南京 is Lang2jin1 in this Pinyin. But m-nj or m-n is also good, since the English world calls it Nanjing. You can decide. Who will implement tone sandhi? If it is not my task, we can just wait.--柳漫 (talk) 16:07, 3 February 2021 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Currently, on pages like 屋企, the pronunciation is listed as uk1 kei5-2, and as a key the page links to w:Jyutping, which makes no mention of what "5-2" means. As far as I can tell, this is not standard notation. Here's a similar confusion someone is having with a dash used in w:Chao Tone notation on Wiktionary. My understanding is that this notation basically means "5 or 2", but this is just a guess and I haven't found anything to back that up.
The status quo seems rather confusing, and the notation is not discoverable. It's possible this is actually a part of standard Jyutping/etc notation, but I can't find much on this, which means most other users probably can't either, which means that this notation probably brings little value in its usage here. It's not just used in Template:zh-pron either, it's also seen in usages of Template:zh-x, but I figured this would be the best place for this discussion.
Perhaps we should have a dedicated "Chinese tones on Wiktionary" page that goes through the various tone systems, linking to Wikipedia, and has a section for what the dash means? We could then potentially make this template convert the dash into a link, or add a little (?) to it. It seems less than ideal that we link to the Wikipedia pages directly as a key but then make additions.
Latest comment: 2 years ago11 comments4 people in discussion
Hello, I would like to request for an edit to add pronunciations for Hakka as pronounced in Kuching, either as a subset of Hakka h=kuching, or as a separate variety h-kuching. Thank you. Wiikipedian (talk) 07:59, 29 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Justinrleung: No, I do not think there is a standardized romanization system for this variety, but for some words, the Sixian/PFS and/or the Meixian/Guangdong pronunciations are very far away from how they are actually pronounced in this variety. Wiikipedian (talk) 08:43, 29 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Wiikipedian: So how did you want to go about adding these pronunciations? Add IPA? We generally want to have a romanization that makes it systematic. Like other varieties, we could possibly make our own romanization. The only study I am aware of is 馬來西亞砂拉越古晉石角區甲港客語詞彙調查與比較研究, which should have a systematic way of looking at the sounds in this variety. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }09:04, 29 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Wiikipedian: Okay, we can definitely make it based on the Guangdong Romanization system, but are all the symbols enough, and are all the symbols used? We also need to know the tone values, and whether there is tone sandhi. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }19:28, 29 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This template or some transcluded template therein results in an opened <strong> tag which is causing part of this template and the entire page thereafter to appear in boldface on 魚. If someone knows what could be causing this or how to fix it, I should be very much obliged. 104.246.222.19101:23, 30 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
Hi. I noticed that the Gwoyeu Romatzyh for 也 is given as "yyie". It should be "yee", but you can't edit it directly. Does anyone know how to fix this? The same problem occurs for 野, and 野犬, and presumably anywhere the GR equivalent of pinyin yě (namely "yee") is needed. Richwarm88 (talk) 01:09, 10 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
{{zh-pron}} is supposed to generate broad IPA transcriptions for the pronunciations of words in different varieties of Chinese. In my opinion however, the transcriptions generated by the module right now often contain more phonetic details than needed. Below, I will describe the situation for some varieties of Chinese as it stands.
Mandarin
ä should instead be shown as a (e.g. for a)
ʊ̯ should instead be shown as u (e.g. for ao, iu, ou and iao)
ɪ̯ should instead be shown as i (e.g. for ai and ei)
Should ɛ be instead shown as e for ie and ue?
Should ɔ be instead shown as o for o and uo?
Should ʊ be instead shown as u for ong and iong?
Even though , and are allophones of /t͡s/, /t͡sʰ/, /s/, I support continuing using t͡ɕ, t͡ɕʰ, ɕ in broad transcription. The article on Standard Chinese in the Journal of International Phonetic Association (link) uses the three consonants in the transcription of the sample passage in the article.
Perhaps I have missed some other issues that other fellow editors can add.
Cantonese
Are showing the vowels aa as ä and oe as œ̽ necessary?
y̯ in oi and eoi should simply be y.
I would like to hear Justinrleung's comments on /t͡s/, /t͡sʰ/ and /s/ (if he has any).
Hakka
Should we be showing t͡ɕ, t͡ɕʰ and ɕ as patalized realizations of /t͡s/, /t͡sʰ/ and /s/ for Meixian Hakka? Whether such palatalization exists (and its extent) is debatable. Some sources (e.g. 林立芳. (1993). 梅县话同音字汇. 韶关学院学报, 1.) note it. I think we can keep c, cʰ and ç, the palatalized realizations of /k/, /kʰ/ and /s/ before the vowel /i/ since they are notable and described in many sources. Perhaps Justinrleung and Tomascus and other fellow editors can comment on this and Sixian Hakka.
Min Nan
I'm not sure if we should be showing t͡ɕ, t͡ɕʰ and ɕ as patalized realizations of /t͡s/, /t͡sʰ/ and /s/ for Mainland varieties of Hokkien or even Hokkien in general. Right now we are assuming all mainland varieities of Hokkien have this palatalization which is not ideal in my opinion. Perhaps other fellow editors can comment on Taiwanese Hokkien.
I really hope we can divide Teochew by locations and show correct tone sandhi for each location. I think we can at least do Chaozhou, Shantou, Chenghai and Jieyang. We can allow more ambiguity for the location of words since we do not have that many resources for Teochew compared to Hokkien.
汉语方音字汇:声母 ts、ts'、s 在齐齿韵前腭化,实际音值接近舌叶音 tʃ、tʃ'、ʃ。
厦门方言研究:关于 ts、ts'、s 声母。这是一组舌尖前清塞擦音和擦音声母,在与韵母 i 或以 i 为介音的齐齿呼韵母结合时,这组声母有腭化音变的趋势,但仍未达到舌面音 tɕ、tɕ'、ɕ 的音值。况且,tsi、ts'i、si 和 tɕi、tɕ'i、ɕi 并无音位上的对立。因此,给厦门方言设立一套 tɕ、tɕ'、ɕ 的声母是不必要的。
Cantonese - Not Justin, but I believe that if we are to ditch the in Standard Mandarin then the diacritics on and here can also be removed. Also, the allophonic variation of (if that is what you’re referring to) seems to be rather idiolectal, and most phonological papers still tend to only use
Shanghainese - What I have here is a consensus formed by several well-informed individuals reguarding a good IPA notation. If implementation of the above-mentioned Wugniu scheme can be discussed, that would also be greatly appreciated. A significant amount of the Northern Wu community uses this scheme and if Suzhounese and/or Auish additions are to be discussed I believe switching to Wugniu would be the best way forward. If you have any questions, please let me or @Musetta6729 know ND381 (talk) 18:31, 27 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
I think I agree with the general principle that we should be using a broader transcription in slashes.
For vowels in Mandarin, I think we can do away with diacritics. As for whether ⟨ʊ⟩, ⟨ɪ⟩, ⟨ɛ⟩ and ⟨ɔ⟩ should be written as ⟨u⟩, ⟨i⟩, ⟨e⟩ and ⟨o⟩, respectively, I think they could be, following the Journal of the IPA article. I would also agree with the use of ⟨t͡ɕ⟩, ⟨t͡ɕʰ⟩, ⟨ɕ⟩ since which allophones to assign them to is not agreed upon.
Cantonese: The vowel diacritics are really unnecessary. For the /s/ series, I think we don't need to show palatalization. They are essentially "optionally" palatalized.
Hakka: If we're keeping with broad transcription, I don't think we should show palatalization at all. Most sources do not normally show it, even for the /k/ series. The vowels should probably also be more broad, so ⟨ʊ⟩, ⟨ɛ⟩ and ⟨ɔ⟩ should be ⟨u⟩, ⟨e⟩ and ⟨o⟩, respectively.
Min Nan: We should not show palatalization. Most sources do not show it. Another issue is whether we should show ⟨m⟩, ⟨n⟩ and ⟨ŋ⟩ initials; I think this issue might be similar to the ⟨ɕ⟩ series in Mandarin, so we could keep them as nasals even though some analyses might treat them as allophones of /b/, /l/ and /ɡ/. I do also hope to have the Teochew regional variation implemented, but it might take some time to figure out. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }21:10, 27 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
One more note: I do think the current display has its merit of being more helpful to non-native speakers for grasping pronunciation better. It may be helpful to show both phonemic and phonetic transcriptions. — justin(r)leung{ (t...) | c=› }21:11, 27 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This template should probably list the Wade-Giles romanization of Mandarin alongside Pinyin and Zhuyin. There's already code to do this in Module:cmn-pron, e.g. {{#invoke:cmn-pron|py_wg|Zhōngnánhǎi}} produces Lua error in Module:cmn-pron at line 199: attempt to call method 'match' (a nil value). 70.172.194.2519:33, 29 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
This template should absolutely auto-generate Wade. It's far more common and searched for than most of what the template deals with and far important than the current emphasis on zhuyin, which is only helpful for Taiwanese kindergarteners who might happen to be visiting Wiktionary for some reason. — LlywelynII20:23, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
varient->variant
Latest comment: 2 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Attempting to add Hoipingese pronunciations to various articles but no such template exists
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Suggestion: Implement dialectal differences for Taishanese like for Hokkien and the others so I can add Hoipingese pronunciations. (And a similar request for Hong Kong Hakka.) Vampyricon (talk) 00:15, 24 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
Label not displayed plus Beijing versus standard
Latest comment: 2 years ago9 comments6 people in discussion
The documentation says |xna= and its siblings allows to change the label. I think it has been broken (maybe as result of #Default label for Mandarin pronunciation), because I don't see the parameter value being visible on the rendered page. In this form, Wiktionary entries are currently providing false information, showing many variants as equally correct, with no comment (no label).
The template documentation points to 娶 as an example how this parameter works. The parameter is used there, but no effect is seen.
I think a strong emphasis should be put to clearly distinguish in Chinese entries between standard and non-standard Mandarin. Without such a distinction, if you use Wiktionary for preparation to the HSK exam, you may fail the exam. Take for example 因為. According to David Moser's 'A Billion Voices', the standard says to pronounce it yīnwèi, but in common Beijing speech it is yīnwéi. Radio and TV presenters are literally fined for using the second pronunciation. MDBG dictionary only provides the 1st form. So I think it should be a priority to make it very clear for a user what is the difference between many Mandarin variants. Derbethtalk05:46, 19 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
Wiktionary is not teaching the HSK, it is documenting language. HSK/PSC are incidental. Being fined for linguistic expression is just an effect of authoritarianism and has 0 effect on descriptivism. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:52, 20 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Justinrleung:: I used "more" only after you mentioned it. Before, I thought it opens some exotic 'dialects' (languages, I don't know how we call them on Wiktionary) of Chinese, so I avoided it. Even when I used it, it was quite confusing. If you did not say it works, I would have ignored the result. I found it very confusing that the Mandarin section stays the same, but another section on Mandarin opens far away below. It's the same information (Mandarin pronunciation) given in two distant places, in a different form. I'm not a UX specialist, but this is not the best possible UX. Imagine opening https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/vogue and seeing something like: pronunciation: /vəʊɡ/, /voʊɡ/ , and only after clicking 'more' see that one is British and another American. This is an absurd idea, but an idea not far away from what we offer now. Paper dictionaries use some symbols like a cross for 'archaic', exclamation mark for a frequently mistaken form etc. I think we also should add a marker provoking user to 'see more'. Plus change 'more' to better explain what will be shown: 'detailed pronunciation' or something like this. There are 4 'mores' in 1 table, that's confusing. Maybe we should add an asterisk '*' (yīnwéi*), or something like: yīnwéisee more. --Derbethtalk12:26, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
FWIW, I've been looking at Chinese entries lately (looking at Old vs Middle vs modern pronunciations, out of curiosity), and I also find the current UI/setup unintuitive, for the same reason Derbeth mentions. Some of the Mandarin, Cantonese, Gan, Hakka, Min Bei, Min Dong, Min Nan, etc information for a wide range of lects is presented by default, but some of the other information (like the IPA) is hidden, and then upon pressing "more", is not added to the Mandarin, Cantonese, etc sections of the displayed template, but instead shows up in a second set of sections offscreen further down the page, which I wouldn't even see if I didn't go hunting for "OK, what did that button actually do, since it seems like it didn't do anything". But I understand that it's probably difficult to code the template to hide vs reveal multiple "inline" or "interlaced" sections all at once (and without causing the page to "jump" if they initially load but then collapse, when first going to a page), if that's why the UI ended up being what it is. - -sche(discuss)17:43, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
I like that it looks good on mobile browsers. However, I am confused by the number of 'more' links. I click 'more' in 'Other', it opens a section with 'General Chinese' that has another 'more'. I think 1 level of collapsible content is enough. The fact that Cantonese is not opened by default may be controversial. --Derbethtalk14:44, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
& not displaying properly on Shanghainese
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
In pronunciation boxes only. Right now there's a band-aid fix that displays it as + but this ought to get fixed soon in the near eventual future — 義順 (talk) 07:03, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
Just stopping in to advocate for reform of the Shanghainese system in use here
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Did the support for multiple pinyin transcriptions get broken
Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion
since right now using a comma between transcriptions A and B just produces a nonsense link to a pinyin page for A, B.
If it's been removed, it needs to be added back. The formatting involved (esp. if it changed to something nonintuitive) also needs to be prominently discussed in the template documentation. — LlywelynII20:27, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
Request for Old National Pronunciation
Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Remove extraneous spaces in multicharacter Middle Chinese transcription
Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion
If you have a multicharacter entry with a Middle Chinese transcription, the module is adding two spaces (a nbsp and a regular space) between each of the character transcriptions. e.g. 中國 is transcribed as /ʈɨuŋ kwək̚/.
There's a super-easy fix, but the module is locked from editing so I can't fix it myself.
All that needs to be changed is line 710 needs to be changed to:
Latest comment: 6 months ago15 comments5 people in discussion
@Ioaxxere, Kc kennylau The recent changes to zh-pron broke the rendering of the pronunciations box for me on mobile (both Firefox and Chrome). On a random page like 屆時, I now see the heading Pronunciation written vertically to the left of the zh-forms box, followed by a huge huge section of whitespace, finally followed by the part of speech heading and definition. Notably, there is no pronunciation anywhere to be seen. So my page layout looks something like this:
Chinese
P
r
o
n
u
n
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
Adverb
Note: I use relatively large (but not enormous) font size and I've had issues with headings in the past, like Etymology or Pronunciation ending up crammed vertically to the left of the zh-forms box, and I've generally just learned to tolerate it and the random white space it would sometimes generate. But never before has the entire pronunciations box been replaced with a huge section of whitespace. Thanks, ChromeGames (talk) 20:51, 13 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
@ChromeGames: I haven't touched the font size, and for me on mobile (Chrome), I could reproduce the "vertical Pronunciation" (which happens because presumably the {{zh-forms}} is interfering with it), but the information still shows up underneath; moreover, when I make my display horizontal (aka landscape), that problem also goes away, and the display is more-or-less normal. Does your problem still occur in landscape mode? --kc_kennylau (talk) 22:03, 13 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
@kc_kennylau: In landscape it works fine, I don't know where the pronunciations go in portrait. It makes sense why the heading is squished and vertical, but the pronunciations being off screen is bizarre. I tried to enable force pinch to zoom but can't zoom out enough to find it. ChromeGames (talk) 22:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
I found a solution that requires css. On Special:Permalink/80235905 I have the following html code:
Basically, what it does is, if the browser width is below 1050px, then the class "test-2813794817" would gain an extra property clear: right; that makes box B appear below box A.
@Justinrleung, Surjection: Pinging two interface admins; should we make this globally accessible? (Summary: the above css and wikicode snippet makes it so that the pronunciation header is forced to appear below the whole zh-forms box if the browser width is less than a certain amount.) --kc_kennylau (talk) 22:47, 13 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
@kc_kennylau: Wow yes that absolutely works, thanks for taking the time to find this! I wonder what a global implementation of it should look like, I would imagine it ought to be built into zh-forms? Weirdly, this issue does not seem to be present with Template:ja-forms, but does occur in Template:ja-kanji forms...
I noticed that Citations pages on mobile are having a problem. Open up Citations:Dasi on mobile and look at the first line. Instead of "English citations of Dasi" it is written as "Englishcitations ofDasi". Let me know if you all are seeing this or what's happening. Geographyinitiative (talk) 07:41, 15 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
I can reproduce this, and from some preliminary investigations (i.e. using "inspect") I think this might have to do with some global css settings for Mobile View, but I can't immediately find out what exactly is causing this issue. This is not a coincidence with zh-pron, and I suggest you bring this up separately in WT:GP. --kc_kennylau (talk) 11:39, 15 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
yeah i cant make much of it either. it seems whoever wrote the code expected that the string literal " citations of " would have its spaces preserved, but suddenly on mobile it deletes those spaces. it may be worth knowing that the CSS style for that segment of the title is apparently #text, which according to Chrome's console has no associated code. It will inherit something from the parent class, Im sure, but maybe there was once independent code for this very specific segment that just now got deleted. —Soap—13:40, 15 June 2024 (UTC)Reply