User talk:Justinrleung/Archive 33

Greetings! Can you please help me, whose Chinese is undeniably rusty, translate this Nanqi Shu's passage (source) which contains the earliest extant attested usage of 民族?

Chinese original:

今諸華士女，民族弗革，而露首偏踞，濫用夷禮，云於翦落之徒，全是胡人，國有舊風，法不可變。

My rough translation:

Nowadays the men and women of the various Hua, their ethnicity unchanged, yet have openly headed off to and leaned towards the occupiers and overused the Yi rites; 'tis said that among the sort of folks who have cut themselves off, all are Hu persons; the nation has its ancient customs, the norms may not be changed/the Dharma cannot be changed.

Many thanks beforehand!Erminwin (talk) 16:52, 4 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Erminwin: I think I'd translate it like this:

Nowadays, the men and women of the various Hua have not had their ethnicities changed, yet they have bared their heads and recline when sitting, overusing the barbaric rites. It is said that among those who have shaved , all are foreigners . The nation has its old customs; its norms may not be changed.

Based on 郝时远：中文“民族”一词源流考辨, this passage seems to be disapproving of people in the Central Plains converting to Buddhism. I'm not entirely sure about 露首偏踞, but it seems to be particular Buddhist practices. @RcAlex36, 沈澄心, Nosog, wondering if you could verify this. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 07:55, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

When talking about money, the cents portion is counted in poat in Penang Hokkien. chi̍t-poat is ten cents nō͘-poat is twenty cents and so on. — Fredrick Campbell (talk) 09:09, 11 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I just found another source for Singapore Teochew: . The downside that it is designed for English speakers who don't understand Mandarin, so there are no Chinese characters. The dog2 (talk) 01:31, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@The dog2: Sorry for the late reply. Yes, this seems like a good resource, but we'll have to figure out the characters ourselves. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 16:25, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

About the Hakka's pronunciations, base on Handian and this, I think both hau2 and ho2 are coexist in PFS system. -- 白布飘扬 (talk) 08:54, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@白布飘扬: I wouldn't trust zdic.net too much. It's unclear where they got their data (for the first link). The second link doesn't have Sixian. The main source for Sixian should be the Taiwanese MoE dictionary, which only has hò. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 08:58, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi: What's the reason to revert the translations I added here https://en.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%E9%99%A4%E5%A4%95&oldid=prev&diff=65578265? In general, should probably provide some info in the commit message by default, especially when removing others' work. — This unsigned comment was added by Meng6 (talk • contribs) at 23:15, 30 January 2022 (UTC).Reply

@Meng6: Sorry for not providing a reason, but please see WT:TRANS#Project scope. Translation sections should only be in English entries. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:10, 31 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I found the following in WT:TRANS#Project scope: “Translation between two foreign languages is handled on the Wiktionaries in those languages. For example, a reader who wants to translate a Hindi word to Japanese should have some command of either language and look in the Hindi or Japanese Wiktionary.” So, it seems translations to a word xxx of language X to language Y should be added in the X-language Wiktionary page of the word xxx, right? I tried to move the translations to here: https://zh.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%E9%99%A4%E5%A4%95&diff=7079544&oldid=6484752. Is that OK? Meng6 (talk) 01:58, 31 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Meng6: Sorry for the late reply. Different Wiktionaries have different formatting conventions. I don't know how things work over at Chinese Wiktionary, so I don't know if the edit there is right. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 16:15, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Why did you redirect {{R:Online Aboriginal Language Dictionary}} to {{R:ami:Dictionary of the Central Dialect of Amis}}? (Special:diff/58102548) I don't think these two dictionaries are the same, at least the latter's name does not match the website's title. --TongcyDai (talk) 15:39, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@TongcyDai: 原住民族語言線上辭典 is made up of many different dictionaries. The original template was linked to the Amis dictionary, which is 阿美語中部方言辭典. On a related note, it seems like the link has changed, so I should fix that. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 16:19, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Maybe we should consider remove the redirect and create a different template, which can be shared with all Formosan languages (some what like zh:Template:R:族語詞典). --TongcyDai (talk) 06:03, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi Justin. Could you check the non-Mandarin varieties here when you get a chance? Thank you. ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:04, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic:  Done. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 13:19, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Perfect. Thanks mate! ---> Tooironic (talk) 22:09, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi Justin. Do you think this would be 牙 + 床子 or 牙床 + 子? ---> Tooironic (talk) 21:40, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic: I'd say probably the former. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Agreed. I have made the changes. Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:42, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello- I made Category:English terms derived from Tongyong Pinyin and Category:English terms derived from Wade-Giles, filing them with various entries that I (almost exclusively) made. I am operating in an "echo chamber of one" and I don't technically 'know' if these categories are valid vis-a-vis the overarching policies and structure of Wiktionary (I asked Frigoris one time, and the user seemed to think they were okay). Also, I have recently made a big push to fully document the Tongyong Pinyin category's entries up to the minimum three cites standards, but I don't actually know if the entries have fully met that standard (the pre-two week debate standard is what I'm aiming for, since that's the "safe zone") so if you see any of those entries (there are 28 at the moment) that are weak, I would appreciate some comments or advice. If you have a single thought on any these issues that may help me, please ping me and let me know, otherwise I will just assume I'm doing fine. Thanks! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 23:12, 16 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Geographyinitiative: Hi! First of all, welcome back! (Sorry for not saying this even though you've been back for a little while now!) I think these categories should be fine, but I'm not exactly sure if the category name should be worded this way without mentioning "Mandarin". The term isn't exactly derived from a romanization system but from Mandarin via the system. I think you might want to bring this to WT:BP for more discussion. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 23:41, 16 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I didn’t notice the formatting carefully, I wrongly thought Lao, Thai, Zhuang were listed as ‘independent’ borrowings from Sinitic. On a different note, do you think adding ''Others'': is necessary (and a standard formatting), given that the CKJV descendants are already listed together? ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 15:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Inqilābī: No worries. Yes, I think the Others label is necessary. First of all, I don't think the green shading is enough to differentiate the Sino-Xenic from non-Sino-Xenic, so having others would make it more apparent. Second, the formatting messes up if you just have bullets after {{CJKV}}. Third, the Others label is already used in many entries, so I'd say it's standard practice on Chinese entries. BTW, it is also standard practice for Compounds and Descendants to be at the same level as Definitions in single-character Chinese entries. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 15:48, 22 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I am curious what resources you usually consult to determine how to properly distribute old and middle Chinese pronunciations. In many cases it's quite clear, but sometimes I can't really tell for myself, like at 頡 and at 筑. The latter you split not too long ago, so I was wondering if you could say how you knew to do it. Thanks, ChromeGames (talk) 12:35, 25 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@ChromeGames: Hi, I usually split them based on dictionaries like 漢語大字典 and 王力古漢語字典, which list the Mandarin pronunciation with qieyun from rime books. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 16:08, 25 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Thanks for the reply, I'll look into acquiring those or some similar ones. I've been eyeing 漢語大字典 for quite some time now since it seems very good but just have not gotten around to it yet. I do wonder though, would you say those two that you mention are considered authoritative when there's a conflict with other sources? For example Kroll's Student Dictionary gives 筑 with only the sense zither under drjuwk, but it doesn't seem to fit with etymology 2 as listed on Wiktionary so I am not sure if it is correct. ChromeGames (talk) 05:03, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@ChromeGames: I'd say the Chinese sources are more accurate. If you check the "primary" source Guangyun, you'll find that the "zither" sense is only given under the 張六切 reading. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:21, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: That makes sense, and thanks for the suggestion that I should be checking the rhyme dictionary sources. I had not been the most familiar with reading them up until now, but I see that Guangyun gives the two listed pronunciations as the instrument and the river. Actually I have not previously read the rhyme dictionaries outside the kangxi dictionary, but I realize now that kangxi seems to not include their entries sometimes so I will definitely be checking separately. Thanks, ChromeGames (talk) 05:32, 11 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@ChromeGames: Yes, definitely check the older rime dictionaries because Kangxi is a compilation of those rime dictionaries and may leave out certain things. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:06, 11 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi mate. Is there any chance you could help me add the variant pronunciation for this character: fán. This is really common — in fact, I think the standard reading fàn is pretty rare in the wild. Is it possible to make fán appear automatically as a variant reading, like we do for 蝸 in 蝸牛, ("|m=蜗") etc. Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 08:30, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic:  Done — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 23:22, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Brilliant. Thanks! ---> Tooironic (talk) 23:24, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung:I made an edit according to 與 by referring to 彙集雅俗通十五音 volume 6 acquired from archive.org. I am uncertain if what I had done is fine, so I thought I would better write this. — Fredrick Campbell (talk) 06:11, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Fredrick Campbell: Thanks for checking it with me. I've fixed it. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 07:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Thanks for the edit. It helped me out too. — Fredrick Campbell (talk) 07:25, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I will be making an edit on this page based on 彙集雅俗通十五音 and https://taigi.fhl.net/dick/. As I do not have access to a digital version for the earlier source, my edit will only include the instance I found in there. As my knowledge of Hokkien character pronunciation is limited since I only speak Hokkien, I decided to notify you of these edits. — Fredrick Campbell (talk) 12:56, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Fredrick Campbell: I would suggest you not make edits just based on one historical source because you actually take away information by doing so. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:18, 28 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: Ok. I have only made one edit since I told you I was going to. — Fredrick Campbell (talk) 02:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi Justin. We currently claim this term comes from English "beg sir". I note that the guifan cidian provides the following etymology and definition: 英语 pit sense 音译。流行于上海及周边地区，原指无正当职业的游民，现指形体干瘪、举止猥琐的人. What do you think? ---> Tooironic (talk) 05:16, 28 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic: I wonder what "pit sense" means. The "beg sir" etymology is given in 上海话大词典 and 新华外来词词典. The latter also gives "beg say" as another possibility. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:31, 28 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I have no idea. Google claims it is "a form of knowledge constituted by tunnellers as a way to navigate and assess risk". ---> Tooironic (talk) 05:51, 28 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Found this character in the '柳' column for '數' here. I have no idea what this is supposed to be. — Fredrick Campbell (talk) 07:19, 1 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Fredrick Campbell: I have no clue either. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 15:56, 1 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Fredrick Campbell: https://zi.tools/⿰豆攵? —Fish bowl (talk) 03:04, 4 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Fish bowl: Thanks. This does raise the issue of what "數⿰豆攵小皃 𠒋⿱心" means — Fredrick Campbell (talk) 04:13, 4 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Fish bowl: Yeah, I know it's a variant of 䜴 or 豉, but I'm not sure how to interpret it in the context of 數⿰豆攵. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:43, 4 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

I wanted to ask you if there's any Cantonese exclamation that sounds something like "choy" that people say when someone says something inauspicious. The expression is commonly used in Singlish, and conventional wisdom is that it comes from Cantonese, but the tone doesn't sound like a tone that exists in Cantonese (Similar to tone 4 in Mandarin, and tone 2 in Hokkien). And people do often follow it up with 大吉利市. The dog2 (talk) 02:40, 3 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@The dog2: Yes, it's Cantonese 啋 coi1. Tone 1 is high falling sometimes. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:51, 3 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Should we add this definition to the entry? In Singapore, it's typically said to ward of a potential jinx, but I'm not sure if the usage pattern is different in Hong Kong. The dog2 (talk) 03:44, 3 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@The dog2: I've made some changes to 啋. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 07:30, 3 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Would this be considered SoP? It's how people say "to fall down" in Teochew, but it also seems analogous to "跌下去" in Mandarin, which would be SoP. The dog2 (talk) 20:05, 3 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@The dog2: Yeah, I think it would be SoP. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 02:53, 4 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Should we unify them all under the same character? For now, it seems that we use 墘 for Hokkien entries (eg. 路墘) and 舷 for Hainanese entries (eg. 厝舷) even though they are probably etymologically related. I don't know if any character has been agreed upon here for Teochew entries, but im Singaporean Teochew, the word for "roadside" is basically the same as the Hokkien word. And I know that 墘/舷 is also used to refer to the reverside in Teochew in China (as in 韓江墘). The dog2 (talk) 04:01, 5 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@The dog2: I think we should have them all at the 墘 form. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:02, 7 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung: So should we move 厝舷 to 厝墘 then? The dog2 (talk) 17:21, 7 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@The dog2: Yes, I've moved it over. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 22:14, 7 March 2022 (UTC)Reply