Talk:Thai numeral
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Inqilābī in topic RFD discussion: February–April 2022
The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
Appendix stuff. (In contrast, I think Arabic numeral & Roman numeral should be kept, for they’re lexicalized.) ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 22:38, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- I'm open to being swayed either way here, but I'd like to see evidence that Chinese numeral, for example, is less "lexicalized" than Roman numeral. My a priori assumption would be to treat them the same (include or exclude both), but if there is some real difference in terms of usage, that is obviously relevant evidence for making a decision. Of course, Roman numeral would be more common in any English corpous, since anglophone writing is generally situated in a Western context, but being less common is not the same as not being a valid term. 70.172.194.25 22:56, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- In English, Chinese numeral seems to be less lexicalized than Roman numeral. The degree of lexicalization would vary from language to language, so I guess the Chinese translation of ‘Chinese numeral’ itself could be dictionary material— it’s up to Chinese language editors to decide, though. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 23:06, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- It might be more lexicalized for some speakers, like (hypothetically) for Sinologists or for English speakers in the Sinosphere. But anyway, I'm more interested in concrete evidence. What makes you think the term is treated as Chinese + numeral rather than a single term? It could be true, but I'm not yet convinced. 70.172.194.25 23:20, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- My immediate thought is that it's ambiguous what "Chinese" could mean in "Chinese numeral". Is it the Chinese language? Then it wouldn't be equivalent to "Roman numeral". Is it "China"? Then we run into issues of their use outside of China (and what even is China anyway?). Its unsatisfactory to say it's SoP, as it's too complex, just like Chinese character. Theknightwho (talk) 22:07, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Of course the language. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 22:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Their use isn't restricted to Chinese, though. Theknightwho (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Theknightwho: Our entry (Chinese numeral) itself says that Chinese numerals are used in the Chinese speaking world. Am I missing something? ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 17:48, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
- Well it says:
Theknightwho (talk) 18:15, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Chinese speaking countries/areas, Japan, at some stage in Korea and Vietnam.
- Well it says:
- @Theknightwho: Our entry (Chinese numeral) itself says that Chinese numerals are used in the Chinese speaking world. Am I missing something? ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 17:48, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
- Their use isn't restricted to Chinese, though. Theknightwho (talk) 00:22, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
- Of course the language. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 22:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- My immediate thought is that it's ambiguous what "Chinese" could mean in "Chinese numeral". Is it the Chinese language? Then it wouldn't be equivalent to "Roman numeral". Is it "China"? Then we run into issues of their use outside of China (and what even is China anyway?). Its unsatisfactory to say it's SoP, as it's too complex, just like Chinese character. Theknightwho (talk) 22:07, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- It might be more lexicalized for some speakers, like (hypothetically) for Sinologists or for English speakers in the Sinosphere. But anyway, I'm more interested in concrete evidence. What makes you think the term is treated as Chinese + numeral rather than a single term? It could be true, but I'm not yet convinced. 70.172.194.25 23:20, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- In English, Chinese numeral seems to be less lexicalized than Roman numeral. The degree of lexicalization would vary from language to language, so I guess the Chinese translation of ‘Chinese numeral’ itself could be dictionary material— it’s up to Chinese language editors to decide, though. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 23:06, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
- On one hand, google books:"Chinese writing was used in" Korea, Vietnam, and Japan too, and "Chinese glyphs", and "Chinese ___" for a number of writing-related "___"s; for that matter, google books:"the Chinese tradition spread to" (Japan, Korea,...), etc. This seems like at least partially historical rather than lexical information, that Chinese culture had hegemony during certain eras. On the other hand, we do have Chinese character. Perhaps that's because there are Japanese-only characters (but then we don't have any of the synonyms I just mentioned, like "glyph", even though it's equally true of them: maybe because those are less "set" phrases?). Are there Chinese numerals that are only used in e.g. Japanese and not in Chinese? - -sche (discuss) 00:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- It gets a bit complicated. Vietnam, for example, had:
- There's also the term Hán Nôm, which refers to the combined corpus, but that's not important. What is important, though, is the difference in the numbering systems:
- Delete. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 15:05, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Delete or make a
{{no entry}}. —Svārtava (t/u) • 08:24, 16 March 2022 (UTC) - Weak keep Chinese numeral per the above discussion. AG202 (talk) 08:29, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- Deleted all save Chinese numeral. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 10:13, 4 April 2022 (UTC)