Kobo-Daishi wrote:
> >library). Is it a Taiwanese reprint?
>
> Yes, it is a Taiwanese reprint by the Ch’eng-wen Publishing
Thanks for the pointer. I had been wondering about the version that
Cheng & Tsui was selling, since it bore a Taiwan ISBN (957-), signaling
it was a reprint of some kind. $125 doesn't sound bad, when an original
runs at least $500 or so. What're the dimensions like? I have an original
of the 2nd edition of Eitel and Genahr's Cantonese dictionary, published
almost contemporaneously with Giles 2nd ed. (Genahr mentions that he
knew of Giles' 2nd ed., but because of the timing wasn't able to consult it),
and it's two huge volumes--maybe 3.5-4" thick combined (and the paper
size is large, too).
> >Giles' does have some Cantonese and Hakka characters in it, I
> recall,
> >which would help explain why he'd have an actual "loquat"
> entry.
>
> I don’t know which characters are specifically Hakka but the
> book does include character readings in 10 Chinese dialects
> (Mandarin, Cantonese, Hakka, Foochow, Wenchow, Ningpo, Peking,
> Mid-China, Yangchow and Ssuch’uan) as well as in Korean,
> Japanese and Annamese (Vietnamese).
I noticed it had tong1 'to butcher' in it, but with only Cantonese and Hakka
readings given; I figured that lack of readings in other dialects would be a
strong clue that they were dialect characters (for dialect words).
Thomas Chan
tc31@cornell.edu
[%sig%]
Loquat
Re: Loquat
Dear Thomas,
>What're the dimensions like?
The dictionary is about 3 inches X 7 1/4 inches X 10 1/2 inches. It has 1711 pages.
>I noticed it had tong1 'to butcher' in it, but with only
>Cantonese and Hakka readings given; I figured that lack
>of readings in other dialects would be a strong clue that
>they were dialect characters (for dialect words).
Oh. And those characters also have the word “vulgar” instead of characters under the heading “rhyme”.
Kobo-Daishi, PLLA.
>What're the dimensions like?
The dictionary is about 3 inches X 7 1/4 inches X 10 1/2 inches. It has 1711 pages.
>I noticed it had tong1 'to butcher' in it, but with only
>Cantonese and Hakka readings given; I figured that lack
>of readings in other dialects would be a strong clue that
>they were dialect characters (for dialect words).
Oh. And those characters also have the word “vulgar” instead of characters under the heading “rhyme”.
Kobo-Daishi, PLLA.
Re: Loquat
Do you know if “loquats” are called 枇杷 because they are shaped like the Chinese lute, the pipa 紫] (Mand: pi2 pa2, Cant: pei4 pa4)?
Also, what Chinese-English dictionary do you think is the best available? Either in print or as software?
Also, what Chinese-English dictionary do you think is the best available? Either in print or as software?