From: Jon Babcock
Message: 84
Date: 2000-10-26
>>>>>>>>>> Thomas Chan <tc31@...> writes:Also, some of these Taoist 'tallies', fu2, U+7B26, can be found in the
> Another place for
> similar-looking characters is the _Tong Shu_ (U+901A U+66F8) Chinese
> almanac (also known under a few variant names), which one should be able
> to get [a 2001 edition] at a Chinese bookstore or grocery in a month or
> two, which has some Taoist charms with similar outlandish characters; a
> few are excerpted in Martin Palmer's _T'ung Shu: the Ancient Chinese
> Almanac_ (Boston: Shambhala, 1986), which contains an explanation and
> partial translation of the invariant parts of the almanac.
>> A more serious challenge ... but I'm sure there will be more ... toI should have said, 4th one down from the top. But the 5th one works, too.
>> the idea of a hemigramic notation for *any* Chinese characters may be
>> trying to deal with characters such as the one Thomas Chan mentioned at
>> URL, http://member.nifty.ne.jp/Gat_Tin/kanji/sinji.htm 5th down from
>> the top. I'm still trying to get my mind around this one.
> I would question whether that character is even part of the same system^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> as all of the rest that we are dealing with; while its components are
> the same, the way it's assembled is not.
> Vietnamese demotic characters, chu+~ no^m, are of the same system (withWould these 'new components' all be amicable to the term 'hemigram'? I know
> a few new components), as are "national characters" of Japan and Korea
> (although some of the latter's as used in Kugyol and other early writing
> systems may require new components as well).
> Zhuang characters (how extensive are they?) alsoCould you say something about what the new methods of assembly might be. No
> seem to follow the same rules. On the other hand, the Khitan, Jurchen,
> and Tangut characters seem to require much more additional components,
> and different manners of construction; one might also say the same of
> some of the newly created characters used in post-1950's China.
> Another character we might want to consider is U+56CD. It's reading,Well, in any event, it poses no special problems for a system of hemigram
> xi3, and meaning, 'double happiness' (referring to marriage), are
> well-known; yet, none of the three juggernaut dictionaries above contain
> an entry for it! About the only place it really occurs is for
> decorative purposes like a wall sign (although I am aware that the title
> of two movies, from Hong Kong, contain this character). Is it a
> character, or a not?