Talk:學以致用

Traditional or simplified?
How can this term be traditional when 致 is listed as simplified? 71.66.97.228 01:18, 25 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Contrary to popular belief, there is no pure one-to-one correlation between simplified and traditional characters. 致 is both a simplified and a traditional character.  However, when it is used as a traditional character, it does not carry the definition of "fine" or "delicate".  Only when it used in that sense is 致 replaced with 緻.  Let me make it simple for you: nine times out of ten, unless the word is 細緻, 致 should be used in both traditional and simplified.  Why is this not explained in the Wiktionary entry for 致, you ask?  The short answer is: too many entries, too few contributors.  Hope this helps :)  -- A-cai 02:54, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Let's add those details to the entries as we notice them. These talk page queries can serve as a paper trail, assisting Chinese learners who don't always know these fine details of usage, but rely on what the entries say as far as whether a character is simplified or traditional. 71.66.97.228 08:05, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

I see that I asked about this at Talk:致 in 2008. 71.66.97.228 08:06, 25 December 2010 (UTC)