Edge Rewrite
// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a28d6392aee3b5b3

Jump to content

Talk:Two-cell Chinese Braille

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 2 years ago by 143.92.32.2 in topic neutral/toneless syllables

Split

[edit]

This info was added to the main Chinese braille article by user Silas Brown here before being split of by me. — kwami (talk) 02:43, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Corrections

[edit]

There are the following initials. But this means biao = zao, which seems unlikely, so I think we have some typos.

Oh, and we have b = zh, which can't be right. I'm commenting out the assignments.

bi-, pi-, mi- [no f-]
di- du-, ti- tu-, ni- nu- nü-, li- lu- lü-
ji- gu- jü-, qi- ku- qü-, xi- hu- xü-
zhu-, chu-, shu-, ru-
zu-, cu-, su-

Given forms:

b p m f
d t n l
g k h
zh ch sh r
z c s
y w yu

Predicted forms:

bi pi mi
di ti ni li
ji qi xi
du tu nu lu
gu ku hu
zhu chu shu ru
zu cu su
ju qu xu

kwami (talk) 07:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

The error seems to have been present in the original. The assignments for z and zh are part of a consistent pattern for the velars and sibilants. It seems the error is that b should be , using dot 2 like the other labials. Kanguole 12:32, 18 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

With that correction, the coding for the first cell looks like this:

y- w- yu-
f- p- pi-
b- bi- m- mi-
t- ti- tu- -
d- di- du-
n- ni- nu- nü-
l- li- lu- lü-
k- qi- ku- qu-
g- ji- gu- ju-
h- xi- hu- xu-
zh- z- zhu- zu-
ch- c- chu- cu-
sh- s- shu- su-
r- ru-
unused
unused

Kanguole 13:26, 18 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hey, thanks for that. — kwami (talk) 03:02, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
There are some overlaps in the second cell: -ōu = -ēng (), -ǒu = -ěng (), óu = -ěn () and òu = -én (). Kanguole 01:31, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
I wonder if we're misinterpreting s.t., then. Seems like an unlikely oversight, and we don't actually have the tables set out.
Can you tell if every syllable must be written with two cells? That would make sense of the comment on the zero rime / no dots for the labials: there's no way to indicate tone otherwise. (I'm going to change the wording on the assumption that's what they meant.) — kwami (talk) 03:02, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
There are several other things which appear to be typos: er, the variants of , the -she suffix, etc. I think we need a 2nd source to verify. — kwami (talk) 04:23, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Well, I think I figured it out. According to the other copy of that doc, the rime -ou is , or at least it's the same as the initial zh-. Probably why only -ei is mentioned as having a dot 3! Also, the rime e/o is (or at least it's the same as the initial b-), which makes sense of the latter obscure remark about . Also, the three s have the same rime, so that's also wrong.

The dunhao and colon are also wrong.

So the doc w digits substituted for braille points is also full of typos and thus not a RS. I commented out the charts again. — kwami (talk) 05:43, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Okay, internally cross-ref'ng the doc w the PUA braille, I can confirm all the phonograms as we now have them (incl. several corrections) apart from f-, which however is the same as the suffix -shi, and we give f- and sh- the same shape, so that's promising. Haven't been able to confirm all the supplementary symbols and punctuation yet, but there's a limited number of possibilities, so anything a source has that doesn't conflict w known cells is likely to be correct. Un-commenting out the article. — kwami (talk) 08:56, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Reply
The proper-name mark should be 3-5; that's the only character that's not accounted for. — kwami (talk) 09:22, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Silas just ran a Python script. Turns out the order of the cells in the PUA of the doc is the same as the Unicode order. His conversion was identical to mine, so we've confirmed the identities of all braille cells in the PUA document. Here it is, converted:

question on homophones

[edit]

From what I understand, ⟨⟩ is used to fill in omitted syllables, and ⟨⟩ to supply synonyms. However, we give 啼(叫) as an example of the latter, and yes, (叫) would clarify what was meant by 啼 , but then 啼叫 is also a word, so why not just use ⟨⟩? Is it a bad example, or am I missing something? — kwami (talk) 21:17, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Where is this used?

[edit]

How widespread is it? Is it just a proposal? Does it cover Taiwan? — kwami (talk) 23:08, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

neutral/toneless syllables

[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-cell_Chinese_Braille says neutral share symbol with Tone 4, while https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%BC%A2%E8%AA%9E%E9%9B%99%E6%8B%BC%E7%9B%B2%E6%96%87 claims it shifts down(3 for ei) 143.92.32.2 (talk) 08:34, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply