Talk:一見鐘情

一見鐘情
Two characters exist in Chinese, 鍾 and 鐘. They have the same pronunciation and similar shape, but exactly different meanings. The former is related to love or like, whether with a romantic sense or not. The latter character is related to clocks. This entry used the wrong character. --kc_kennylau (talk) 12:33, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * It looks like a very common misspelling, also used in many archived resources. ABC dictionary has (used by Wenlin software), Pleco, Cedic has, Nciku has . Keep with a soft-redirect (a common misspelling of ). --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 13:00, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
 * How often does it appear in a single work? TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 22:32, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I haven't counted but saw over 300 in Google books. The correct spelling has over 10,000 hits. It may be a typo, including conversion from simplified to traditional. In simplified Chinese both 鍾 and 鐘 are 钟. As I often hear, the knowledge of traditional characters drops in Mainland China, Singapore, Malaysia, etc. The fact that Wenlin and Pleco has the incorrect version and no correct one is quite annoying. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 22:54, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Oops. I've done a bit more research: 鐘 is a so-called z-variant of 鍾 as in the Unihan database. CEDIC simply says "a variant of 鍾".
 * I'm changing my vote to: keep with a usage note and change a common misspelling of to an alternative form of . Restoring my trust in Pleco and Wenlin (with ABC dictionary, it has some character errors but vocabulary errors must be very rare). --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:13, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * @Atitarev, no 鐘 is not a variant of 鍾, but 鍾 is a variant of 鐘 in ancient literature. 一見鍾情 is the correct form, 一見鐘情 is the incorrect form resulting from faulty simp-trad autoconverters implemented in many simp-based dictionaries. Wyang (talk) 23:39, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't disagree with you, if you say it's non-standard but 一見鐘情 is recorded in archived literature, despite being considered incorrect. I don't know what "z-variant" is but we have, so if you think it's not a variant but misspelling, we should use this. It's too common to be ignored. Cf, mortage, a common misspelling of mortgage, etc. Autoconverters have generated a new type of "misspelling" or typos, specific to Mandarin. Dictionaries such as Pleco, Wenlin software, CEDIC (not 100% reliable but extremely popular) have this term as well, we need to guide users to the correct form. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:57, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes it is a misspelling not an alternative form. Wyang (talk) 00:03, 15 January 2014 (UTC)


 * That looks more like a verb or verb phrase than a proverb. Is this the correct part of speech? TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 00:08, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It's both an idiomatic verb "to fall in love at first sight" and a idiomatic noun expression - "love at first sight". --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:26, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, looks like it's been fixed up by Wyang et al quite appropriately. This might be a question for RFV, but are you sure this is an actual misspelling (i.e. intentional and throughout a single work/corpus) and not just a typo from translations? TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 01:01, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Let's see what Wyang says but to me, a common typo, conversion error is still a misspelling. It's probably hard to establish but inclusion in dictionaries and in literature spread the error. It's not just simplified to traditional conversion flaws but various IME (input methods) flaws used for Chinese. I had a Chinese female classmate when I studied Chinese who received education in Hong Kong. Her written Mandarin was excellent but she needed to improve her spoken Mandarin. She always wrote her emails in traditional Chinese. Our focus was on simplified, so sometimes her characters puzzled me - the characters, when I looked them up were sometimes obsolete, Japanese/Korean (rare) variants. When I asked where she gets those, she says - "whatever comes up on the computer". Microsoft IME is known to have issues with traditional Chinese but so are other input methods. If you really want to get a particular character, you sometimes need to draw it, use non-phonetical methods, like Wubi or forget it and use "whatever comes up". --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:16, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Interesting, that sounds like one of the ways an ancient language dies. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 01:21, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * @TeleComNasSprVen. I disagree, other people say computing gave Chinese a new life. It doesn't seem like it's dying judging by the penetration of Chinese on the Internet and how much software is available to use or to learn Chinese. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:54, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Isn't Cangjie, which is shape-based and not phonetic, the most common input method for traditional Chinese? --WikiTiki89 01:30, 15 January 2014 (UTC)


 * People choose between Cangjie, Wubi and phonetical inputs. Phonetical input is good if you mastered pinyin (toneless), which was easy for me. Now phonetic input allows "fuzzy" pinyin, so that incorrect pinyin is not a big problem to enter characters but it takes longer and one needs to play with choices or use longer words that use them. Simplified Chinese can also be entered in different ways. Even Androids, iPhone inputs allow to enter characters one doesn't know how to pronounce just by drawing them. I tried to learn some other methods, such as Wubi but gave up. It's so much easier to use pinyin. When I find a rare character, as in people's names, I use words that use those characters, then delete the parts I don't need. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:41, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Kept as a common misspelling of. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:48, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

--Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:50, 3 February 2014 (UTC)