Talk:創傷後
Add topicLatest comment: 7 years ago by Atitarev
@Atitarev, Tooironic I think this is a loose association of 創傷 + 後. 後 is not typically an adjective- or noun-forming suffix, unlike 性 (as in 創傷性). 青春期前 was deleted previously. Wyang (talk) 08:10, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
- This is a special case, as it collocates with many terms: 創傷後壓力, 創傷後骨萎縮, 創傷後緊張症, etc. If we are going to keep attributives, then we may as well keep this one, as it behaves exactly as one. ---> Tooironic (talk) 08:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
- OK then. (I think this should be the limit of these types of combinations allowed as entries on Wiktionary.) Wyang (talk) 08:21, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
- I see what you're saying. I think we should include Chinese translations for affixes when they attach themselves to other terms to form full units, wherever possible. It would be unreasonable to include words like 戰後 and 史前 just because they are made up of two characters, while banning terms that just happen to be longer. ---> Tooironic (talk) 08:29, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
- I think 戰後 and 史前 should be considered separately. There are two reasons: the first is that they are two-character words, which generally have a much lower threshold when judging their word-like-ness; second is that "war" in modern speech is "戰爭" not "戰", and "history" is "歷史" not "史", so they are not quite SoP in modern Chinese, whereas "trauma" is "創傷". Wyang (talk) 08:58, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
- Languages like Chinese (scriptio continua) require special CFI. It's not easy to define what meets the criteria for inclusion and what's not but the rules can be built over time. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 10:27, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
- I think 戰後 and 史前 should be considered separately. There are two reasons: the first is that they are two-character words, which generally have a much lower threshold when judging their word-like-ness; second is that "war" in modern speech is "戰爭" not "戰", and "history" is "歷史" not "史", so they are not quite SoP in modern Chinese, whereas "trauma" is "創傷". Wyang (talk) 08:58, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
- I see what you're saying. I think we should include Chinese translations for affixes when they attach themselves to other terms to form full units, wherever possible. It would be unreasonable to include words like 戰後 and 史前 just because they are made up of two characters, while banning terms that just happen to be longer. ---> Tooironic (talk) 08:29, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
- OK then. (I think this should be the limit of these types of combinations allowed as entries on Wiktionary.) Wyang (talk) 08:21, 17 May 2017 (UTC)