亊 U+4E8A vs 事 U+4E8B 鉱 U+9271 vs 鑛 U+945B 礦 U+7926.vs 砿 U+783F 非常高兴Chris可以看懂我写的中文邮件，而且愿意帮我们译为通畅的英文，太好了！太感谢了！ Chris 的邮件还给了我两个有意思的提示，供大家参考： 1． 大家看问题的角度和重点不一样。作为文字专家，Chris喜欢参考日本的《常用汉字表》之类资料，中国大陆的文字专家可能会强调《通用规范汉字表》；我作为一个IT工作者，可能会重视Unicode建立时引用的各国编码字符集，对日本而言，可能JIS x0208会被重视些。以上这些字，可能不在某个字表中，但却都存在于日本的基本集JIS x0208中，在IRG中，我们记作J0。0，代表基本、重要。这些尺度和准则（creteria），需要大家坐在一起讨论清楚，然后一个字一个字地敲定，不能泛泛而谈。否则永远得不出有工程意义的结论。 2． 现在我们考察一个汉字是否另一个汉字的“变体字”，第一步先不能强调在某个语境“常用不常用”、“规范不规范”、“正规不正规”，而是要看他们“是不是”变体（同义乎？同源同用乎？）因为在一个语境中被认作是“异体字”的往往使用较少，不正规（unoffiacial）；但在另一语境就未必。把这个“是不是”的问题解决了，我们再走第二步：“常用否？”、“值得列入TLD 中吗？”鑛是一个很好的例子。 在hans,矿的变体字组可能是：矿礦鑛 在hant,礦的变体字组可能是：礦鑛 在jpan,鉱的变体字组可能是：鉱砿礦鑛 经过讨论协商，coordination，也许会滤除一些频度很低的变体字，建立如下的异体关系： 矿for hans-礦for hant-鉱for jpan 当然还可能有其他选择。但这表示了一个工作步骤和coordinating的过程和目标。 张轴材 发件人: chinesegp-bounces@icann.org [mailto:chinesegp-bounces@icann.org] 代表 齐超 发送时间: 2014年9月22日 18:12 收件人: Dillon, Chris; ChineseGP@icann.org 主题: [ChineseGP] C-J mapping rule examples Dear Chris and CGP members, Hello! Here is an attachment of cases to show some relationship between Hani and Jpan, which may not be comprehensive. But I hope it makes some sense for the CGP meeting. And I add the homework from Hanchuan. Through it, we shall forecast the results of JGP or KGP and prepare the concept for the coordination. It is revised according to Chris' comment. Thank Chris and Professor Zhang! _____ Qi Chao via foxmail 发件人： Dillon, Chris <mailto:c.dillon@ucl.ac.uk> 发送时间： 2014年9月22日(星期一) 下午4:59 收件人： <mailto:qichao@cnnic.cn> 齐超 抄送： JOEZHANG43 <mailto:JOEZHANG43@HOTMAIL.COM> ; wangwei <mailto:wangwei@cnic.cn> ; yanzhiwei <mailto:yanzhiwei@cnnic.cn> 主题： RE: RE: C-J mapping rule examples Dear Qi Chao, You are very welcome. I’m glad what I wrote was helpful. My spoken and written Chinese is not good. We’re all in the same situation. I can now understand written Chinese, for example what Professor Zhang wrote. I’m just about to reply to that. As long as the Japanese community recognizes situations like 紀伊國屋 and 紀伊国屋, I’m hoping there will be a concept of variant there. It somehow feels right that a shop where I spent many happy hours is now acting as a useful example. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) <http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon> www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon From: 齐超 [mailto:qichao@cnnic.cn] Sent: 20 September 2014 11:52 To: Dillon, Chris Cc: JOEZHANG43; wangwei; yanzhiwei Subject: Re: RE: C-J mapping rule examples Dear Chris, I very appreciate you for your comments, hope my poor english did not trouble you much. I think, handling two repertoires separately and blocking the variant(maybe no variant in Jpan) for the other side, is an easy and experimental method, at least for computer processing . Thank you. Qi Chao -----原始邮件----- 发件人:"Dillon, Chris" <c.dillon@ucl.ac.uk <mailto:c.dillon@ucl.ac.uk> > 发送时间:2014-09-19 20:49:00 (星期五) 收件人: "齐超" <qichao@cnnic.cn <mailto:qichao@cnnic.cn> >, JOEZHANG43 <JOEZHANG43@HOTMAIL.COM <mailto:JOEZHANG43@HOTMAIL.COM> > 抄送: wangwei <wangwei@cnic.cn <mailto:wangwei@cnic.cn> >, yanzhiwei <yanzhiwei@cnnic.cn <mailto:yanzhiwei@cnnic.cn> > 主题: RE: C-J mapping rule examples Dear Qi Chao, I’ve added some comments to the attached file. Basically I’m suggesting: * That the word variant is being used differently on the CGP and in the Japanese community. On the CGP, it means a character that can be used in all situations to create either SC or TC, a universal variant. However, in the Japanese community, the word variant is disliked, as there is no situation (except possibly in Hawaii) where traditional characters are used to write modern Japanese. The reality is though that local variants are in use and, for example, a lot of people know that the bookstore 紀伊國屋 prefers that form to 紀伊国屋, even if they write the latter. * The use of forms only listed in Japanese Ministry of Education pre-War and modern tables e.g. 常用漢字 and 人名用漢字 would hugely reduce the number of Japanese variants. I think situations like TC and old Japanese 龍, SC 龙 and Japanese 竜 (all meaning “dragon”) are unlikely to be troublesome when Chinese and Japanese repertories are amalgamated, as it doesn’t matter that such a character ends up with variants not in use in the countries. However, cases where one of the languages has simplified two originally different characters e.g. 發 ‘send’ and 髮 ‘hair’ both became 发 in the PRC, may cause some strangeness, as it won’t be possible to have two separate Japanese labels whose only difference is 発 and 髪. However, I can’t think of a situation where this phenomenon would actually cause trouble, and it’s a small price to make the system as a whole work. It would be useful to be able to amalgamate the repertoires experimentally so that any issues may be solved before submission to the IP. Regards, Chris. -- Research Associate in Linguistic Computing, Centre for Digital Humanities, UCL, Gower St, London WC1E 6BT Tel +44 20 7679 1599 (int 31599) www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon <http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dis/people/chrisdillon> From: 齐超 [mailto:qichao@cnnic.cn <mailto:qichao@cnnic.cn> ] Sent: 19 September 2014 12:56 To: JOEZHANG43; Dillon, Chris Cc: wangwei; yanzhiwei Subject: C-J mapping rule examples Professor Zhang, Chris, Hello! Hanchuan ask for some examples to describe the mapping rule between hani and jpan yesterday . The attachment includes some examples from Yan Zhiwei and Professor Zhang in recent mail. Please review whether the examples are accurate and comprehensive, or give some new idea for coordination of CGP? Thanks. _____ 齐超 via foxmail