Talk:Chinese family of scripts
Latest comment: 19 days ago by Remsense in topic Orthographic borrowing
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Chinese family of scripts article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 28 days ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 22 June 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Chinese scripts. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
Orthographic borrowing
edit@Kanguole (one of infinite patience for answering my questions):
- Do you think Orthographic borrowing between Chinese and Japanese could be its own article?
- If not, is this the best article to write about that in?
Remsense诉 04:51, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Um, what topic is that? Kanguole 08:23, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for being unclear: the exchange of technical vocabulary between the two languages during the 19th and 20th centuries as orthographic/morphemic loans, as opposed to phonetic loans. Remsense诉 08:27, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- OK, I would include Korean and Vietnamese too, though almost all of the coining of compounds occurred in China or Japan, and include coining the neologisms (or re-tasking classical phrases) as well as borrowing them. It seems like a subtopic of Sino-Xenic vocabularies (the last two paragraphs touch on this). The characters provided a ready mapping between languages, but only because the Classical Chinese words they denoted were already at home of each of the languages. There are lots of examples, and many different patterns, so it could well grow into an article. Not sure what the title would be, though. Kanguole 09:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Makes sense! I agree, Sino-Xenic vocabularies is a good spot for it. Thanks! Remsense诉 09:06, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- OK, I would include Korean and Vietnamese too, though almost all of the coining of compounds occurred in China or Japan, and include coining the neologisms (or re-tasking classical phrases) as well as borrowing them. It seems like a subtopic of Sino-Xenic vocabularies (the last two paragraphs touch on this). The characters provided a ready mapping between languages, but only because the Classical Chinese words they denoted were already at home of each of the languages. There are lots of examples, and many different patterns, so it could well grow into an article. Not sure what the title would be, though. Kanguole 09:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for being unclear: the exchange of technical vocabulary between the two languages during the 19th and 20th centuries as orthographic/morphemic loans, as opposed to phonetic loans. Remsense诉 08:27, 6 June 2024 (UTC)