Talk:考證
Add topicAppearance
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Justinrleung in topic RFV discussion: February 2021–April 2022
This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
Rfv-sense: "to verify". Tagged by @Tooironic but not listed. RcAlex36 (talk) 16:41, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Tooironic, MDBG has "to verify by means of research (esp. historical details)" as part of the definition. I think "to verify" is just a less accurate translation of the first sense and is not worth a separate sense. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 09:32, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Tooironic, RcAlex36, Justinrleung, the sense being discussed here looks like a dated usage pattern.
- 逵既至行在,歸罪於二人,理官無所考證⋯ [Written Vernacular Chinese, trad.]
- From: 《朱子語類·本朝七·盜賊》
- Kuí jì zhì Xíngzài, guīzuì yú èrrén, lǐguān wú suǒ kǎozhèng... [Pinyin]
- Having arrived at Quinsay, Kui put all the blame on (those) two (dead persons), and the judge had nothing with which to verify (his claim) ...
逵既至行在,归罪于二人,理官无所考证⋯ [Written Vernacular Chinese, simp.]- --Frigoris (talk) 08:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Frigoris Do you think we should have this as a separate sense from the first sense and perhaps mark it as dated/archaic? If so, would you be able to find a few more quotes? — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 22:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Justinrleung, I can't find more quotations that can be securely matched to this usage. I think a
{{lb|zh|dated}}
would be fine. --Frigoris (talk) 19:12, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Justinrleung, I can't find more quotations that can be securely matched to this usage. I think a
- @Frigoris Do you think we should have this as a separate sense from the first sense and perhaps mark it as dated/archaic? If so, would you be able to find a few more quotes? — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 22:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
- Cited with modification to "to investigate and verify". — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 19:03, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- RFV passed. @H2NCH2COOH, please do not remove an RFV tag without commenting on the RFV discussion. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 03:23, 19 April 2022 (UTC)