Jyut talk:00026: Difference between revisions
(A note for future consideration.) |
discussion |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Every now and then I come upon something that makes me wish I could have seen an early draft of this dictionary - and had a chance to raise questions with the author. This is a good example. When I lived I Hong Kong in the early 1960s, I always heard (including from my own children) "po4po2", never "po4po1" and seldom (maybe in some special contexts) "po4po4". I wonder if, at an earlier stage of production, it would have been feasible to give dominant forms 1st position among a group of synonyms? | Every now and then I come upon something that makes me wish I could have seen an early draft of this dictionary - and had a chance to raise questions with the author. This is a good example. When I lived I Hong Kong in the early 1960s, I always heard (including from my own children) "po4po2", never "po4po1" and seldom (maybe in some special contexts) "po4po4". I wonder if, at an earlier stage of production, it would have been feasible to give dominant forms 1st position among a group of synonyms? | ||
--Please do go ahead and make any suggestions, thanks! [[User:Tangmu|Tāngmǔ 汤姆]] ([[User talk:Tangmu|talk]]) 19:50, 17 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 19:50, 17 October 2019
Every now and then I come upon something that makes me wish I could have seen an early draft of this dictionary - and had a chance to raise questions with the author. This is a good example. When I lived I Hong Kong in the early 1960s, I always heard (including from my own children) "po4po2", never "po4po1" and seldom (maybe in some special contexts) "po4po4". I wonder if, at an earlier stage of production, it would have been feasible to give dominant forms 1st position among a group of synonyms?
--Please do go ahead and make any suggestions, thanks! Tāngmǔ 汤姆 (talk) 19:50, 17 October 2019 (UTC)