Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/05/Category:Chinese script
How is this different from Category:Chinese writing? 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:30, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understand either, but en:Chinese script redirects to en:Chinese characters, while en:Chinese writing redirects to a different article, en:Written Chinese. That doesn't mean separation on commons makes sense, but if there is a reason, it may be contained in those articles. - Themightyquill (talk) 18:56, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill:
Comment ∃ Category:Chinese characters, too. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 20:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill:
stale discussion. Specific, and still unsolved. Nominated categories and some analogues:
- Category:Chinese script vs Category:Chinese writing vs Category:Chinese characters
- Category:Zhuang script vs Category:Zhuang writing vs Category:Zhuang characters
- Category:Arabic script vs Category:Arabic writing vs Category:Arabic characters
- Category:Cyrillic script vs Category:Cyrillic writing vs Category:Cyrillic characters
- Category:Latin script vs Category:Latin writing vs Category:Latin characters
--Estopedist1 (talk) 13:19, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
- In my opinion categories about characters are for isolated CJKV characters used to write Chinese, or Japanese or Korean, and also independant of their different styles/presentation; while categories for "writing" are more general (featuring only a subset of the CJKV scripts used by these languages but including also other scripts used jointly, notably Hangul, Bopomofo, and Kanas, but also specific forms for Latin, Greek, Cyrillic, and symbols/punctuations, including composite characters used as abbreviations or symbols), and include the CJK characters needed, as well as any other media related to texts written using the script, or to its composition on pages, or use for various languages. Finally there's the CJKV script itself (Hanzi+Hanja+Kanji+Chunom) that groups all unified forms encioded as Unicode (and represented in ISO 15924 by the code "Hani", which makes also distrinctiions between "Hans" and "Hant" needed for Chinese languages writen in CJK script, but usually not needed for Korean, Japanese and Vietnamese languages which use their Traditional forms when not using Hangul, Kanas or Latin without making distinctions for Simplified forms).
- The Chinese scripts (Hans, Hant) are complex but still requires a distinction with Japanese/Korean traditional CJK scripts (Kanji/Hanja). We also still need a grouping category for Hans+Hant+Kanji+Hanja+Chunom.
- This discussion is in fact generic for all scripts (as encoded and unified in Unicode, possibly with additonal variants encoded in ISO 15924): they all contain several specific subsets (termed "alphabets") depending on the target language using them with specific usage and composition rules defining their own "writing system" (possibly with variants: orthographies); languages are then more generic because they are not just written and can have several scripts with addionnal specific rules (either by transliterations between scripts, or by transcriptions of their phonology). verdy_p (talk) 23:44, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
- there's no "Category:Latin characters" because the equivalent is Category:Latin alphabet.
- what i understand is, xx characters/alphabet refer to the individual graphemes.
- xx script refers to the writing system, i.e. the whole thing with all the graphemes, punctuations, directions, decorations... all aspects of "writing".
- dont know what xx writing refers to. RZuo (talk) 08:21, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
- I also agree that "xx writing" is not the best choice, and that it should be "xx script" (for basic simple scripts, including "Hans", "Hant", "Hani') or "xx mixed script" (some of them are defined in ISO 15924 for specific languages using several scripts concurrently, e.g.: "Chinese mixed script" with [Hans]/[Hant]+[Bpmf]/[Latn], "Korean mixed script" with [Hang]+[Hani=Hanja], or "Japanese mixed script" with [Hani]+[Kana]+[Hira], or "Vietnamese mixed script" with [Hani=Chunom]+[Latn]). There may be additonal "mixed scripts", notably in China for "Zhuang mixed script", and "Yi mixed script", but also in Tadjikistan (mixed with Arabic or Cyrillic), Ottoman Turkish (old transitional, mixed Latin and Arabic), India, Thailand and Myanmar (various Brahmic scripts mixed with Arabic or Latin; in northern Myanmar or Southern China, there exists also some use of Chinese characters mixed with Myanmar script), and in US and Canada (Latin mixed with Cherokee, or with Canadian Syllabary), countries of the former Yugoslavia (Cyrillic+Latin, though now this is deprecated as there are strong transliteration rules allowing the separation instead of the former mixing), and in the Middle East for Aramaic (many scripts) or for Kurdish or minority languages in Iran (Latin+Arabic); "xx mixed scripts" would also be roughly the same as "xx writing system", except that a writing system may possibly take into account several competing orthographic conventions in the same basic script (this occurs in the Arabic script for various languages). verdy_p (talk) 06:33, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- As per my analysis, I have proposed the following category scheme:
- Writing systems
- CJK scripts — for the ideographic writing systems used to write modern Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese (since the Ming period with the publication and adoption of the Kangxi dictionary).
- Hanzi — for the Chinese subset of CJK scripts. Includes Chinese-specific Traditional or Simplified variants, as well as historic forms (Bronze, Seal, Big Seal, Oracle...) and calligraphic forms.
- Kanji — for the Japanese subset of CJK scripts. Includes Japanese-specific Traditional or Simplified variants, as well as other non-standard variations, and calligraphic forms.
- Hanja — for the Korean subset of CJK scripts.
- Chữ Nôm — for the Vietnamese subset of CJK scripts.
- Unicode CJK — for the unified and compatibility CJK characters part of the UCS (independently of their normalization and UTF forms including GB 18030 in P.R.China)
- other legacy double-byte or variable multibyte character sets, with encodings supporting a significant subset of CJK characters (JIS X, EUC, KSX, IBM code pages...), often mixing other scripts partly supported
- Latin script
- Unicode Latin
- Romanisations
- Pinyin — for the romanisation of Chinese standardised in PR. China, which can be considered as a writing system of its own.
- Wade-Giles — for the alternate romanisation of Chinese, used in Taiwan and US, which can be considered as a writing system of its own.
- CJK scripts — for the ideographic writing systems used to write modern Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese (since the Ming period with the publication and adoption of the Kangxi dictionary).
- Languages
- Chinese
- Chinese writing — for any written specimen of Chinese languages, in any script.
- Chinese scripts — to group various writing systems used to write Chinese.
- Hanzi — for the main ideographic writing system used to write Chinese (named "CJK script", singular form, in the Unicode and ISO/IEC 10646 encoding standards, but in fact unifying Hanzi, Kanji, Hanja and Chu Nom in their modern form only, excluding ancient forms used before the Ming dynasty, i.e. "Ancient Chinese Characters", which don't match very well with the classification by the modern 214 Kangxi radicals, but better match with the 540 Shuowen radicals at least since Bronze period).
- Nüshu script — for the traditional non-Latin syllabic writing system used to write Chinese by women in some regional minorities.
- Bopomofo — for the traditional non-Latin syllabic transliteration of Chinese as used in Taiwan.
- Pinyin — for the romanisation of Chinese standardised in PR. China, which can be considered as a writing system of its own.
- Wade-Giles romanisation — for the alternate romanisation of Chinese, used in Taiwan and US, which can be considered as a writing system of its own.
- Chinese Braille — for the adaptation of the Braille system to Chinese.
- Chinese mixed script — for the use of multiple scripts concurrently to write Chinese.
- Chinese text — for texts written in Chinese languages, in any script (part of Category:Texts by language).
- Chinese scripts — to group various writing systems used to write Chinese.
- Chinese writing — for any written specimen of Chinese languages, in any script.
- Japanese,
- Korean,
- Vietnamese, etc. — The same scheme can be used.
- Chinese
- Writing systems
- --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 14:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
- what belongs to chinese writing but not chinese scripts? RZuo (talk) 14:30, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
- Chinese languages are not necessarily all written every time in Chinese scripts. I see "Chinese writing" as a linguistic classification (within the families of languages spoken in China or its historical area of expansion) Chinese scritps are limited to the CJK script in Unicode, there are also other related scripts such as Yi, and romanisations, and uses with Cyrillic, Arabic or Indic scripts (notably Tibetan, Manchu) as well as a few syllabaries, and frequently mixed script usages. All this is hard to "unify" in a single parent category, so this is a long term progressive recategorisation that requires lot of work to get some coherence, avoiding "loops" in parent-child categorized relations that break the systematization. verdy_p (talk) 13:20, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
- if we want a category that encompasses everything about "writing a language", i think the established cat tree is Category:Texts by language. RZuo (talk) 13:47, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it seems like all written specimens from calligraphy and inscriptions to print texts and digital texts fall under Texts. Therefore, Chinese text is a better parent category for Chinese writing than Chinese writing. Not only that, there has been a consensus to convert Writing into a dab page and I have completed the incomplete job. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 17:12, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
- thx. i think your suggestions above make sense. i support this categorising scheme. RZuo (talk) 19:05, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it seems like all written specimens from calligraphy and inscriptions to print texts and digital texts fall under Texts. Therefore, Chinese text is a better parent category for Chinese writing than Chinese writing. Not only that, there has been a consensus to convert Writing into a dab page and I have completed the incomplete job. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 17:12, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
- if we want a category that encompasses everything about "writing a language", i think the established cat tree is Category:Texts by language. RZuo (talk) 13:47, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
- As per my analysis, I have proposed the following category scheme:
- I'm still not sure if Ancient Chinese characters belong to CJK scripts (which are only for the modern form since the publication and adoption of the Kangxi dictionary during the Ming period). In my opinion they are not, all these characters are not unified in Unicode/ISO/IEC 10646 and are to be standardized later (in some blocks of the supplementary plane).
- Note however that the UCS has encoded ancient Japanese characters and made them part of Hiragana and Katakana (which both have modern and ancient forms, the ancient forms sometimes using Hanzi characters in ligatures, these ancient Japanese characters were still in official use in the 1st half of the 20th century, up to 1946, and are not really ancient and are still used in Japanese visual arts, including for some logos or in advertizing). A better term than ancient is probably obsolete or "historic" (just meaning "not the current standard"). Japanese has dedicate words for distinguishing the two forms, including for Kanji characters. verdy_p (talk) 15:44, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Japanese terminology for the sub-classification of Kanji characters:
- Kyūjitai (旧字体) The unsimplified traditional Chinese forms. These are still used in Taiwan and Hong Kong. They were used in Japan up to 1949.
- Kyūji (旧字) Another shorter name for kyūjitai.
- Honji (本字) Literally "original character", this is another name for kyūjitai. See also the term Hanja for the traditional Korean forms (often very similar or identical).
- Seiji (正字) Literally "true character", this is another name for kyūjitai, but strictly conforming to the Japanese national standard (it may be non-neutral, used to oppose it to honji and itaiji, if they are considered "non-true" characters, or may be used by opponents to the 1949 Shinjitai simplification).
- Itaiji (異体字) A regional variant form of traditional kanji, like 嶋 instead of 島 (e.g. in Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, Korea and other coastal areas of China, under the former occupation or influence by Japan, or in some remote Japanese areas like the Ryukyu islands).
- Shinjitai (新字体) The Japanese simplified forms of characters. See Writing reforms in modern Japan. The Japanese changes are much less radical changes than the ones done in the People's Republic of China (the kantaiji).
- Shinji (新字) Another shorter name for shinjitai.
- Ryakuji (略字) The Common simplified forms (shared between Shinjitai in Japan and Kantaiji used in P.R. China and Singapore).
- Kantaiji (簡体字) The Chinese simplified forms of characters used in the People's Republic of China and Singapore. These are different from the Shinjitai used in Japan, consisting of a much more radical restructuring of writing. They are not part of Kanji, and opposed to Shinjitai within the set of simplified CJK ideographs.
- Zokuji (俗字) "Folk" characters, abbreviated or otherwise non-standard characters which have no historical basis but are still used. In some cases, this could include some forms derived from Kantaiji, Shinjitai, or Kyūjitai, or some mix of them (generally, this is just a different number of strokes, by keeping some, or merging some in a way different than both Chinese and Japanese standards; this could be also popular abbreviations, or ligatures, especially for fast and informal handwritten usage).
- Kyūjitai (旧字体) The unsimplified traditional Chinese forms. These are still used in Taiwan and Hong Kong. They were used in Japan up to 1949.
- Hope this helps. verdy_p (talk) 15:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC)