Talk:況

Senses: "let alone" vs "furthermore"
, senses 2 and 3 are probably one single sense. Guoyu Cidian defines it as a conjunction "表示更進一層的語氣. 相當於「何況」、「況且」". How should they be merged? RcAlex36 (talk) 14:28, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, I don't think "let alone" and "furthermore" carry the same force as English terms. The first one is more rhetorical and puts stronger emphasize on the words that follow it, by making an implicit comparison with what precedes, in order to persuade. The problem here I think is whether "furthermore" is a good definition or translation. Personally I can't at the moment think of a situation where 況 could be accurately explained as "furthermore". If we can't find the examples, we may as well just remove the definition. --Frigoris (talk) 16:22, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Does 況 mean 況且? If yes, then isn't "furthermore; moreover" a good translation? RcAlex36 (talk) 16:26, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I feel these two 況 / 況且 were different by usage. The former (as an independent word) appears to be associated older language while the latter is the more "living" one. It's my impression that 況 in the old literary works was also chiefly a rhetorical particle, similar to "let alone", e.g. 嚮之所欣，俯仰之間，已為陳跡，猶不能不以之興懷. 況修短隨化，終期于盡.  --Frigoris (talk) 16:38, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * What does 況 mean in "你兒子又小，官府見了，只有可憐，決不會難爲他的，況又實實是骨血，腳踏硬地，這家私到底是穩取的了. " in 爾刻拍案驚奇卷十? RcAlex36 (talk) 16:42, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * without reading over the full story, I'd say this looks roughly equivalent to 更何況, similar to "not to mention that...", or more idiomatically "" (sense 1). Perhaps "after all" may be a more precise translation of the sense currently (vaguely) identified as "furthermore"? --Frigoris (talk) 17:17, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd like to enlist the help of please. To summarize, I am (or we are) wondering what the current definition entry "furthermore" is supposed to mean on the page of . Is "furthermore" a useful translation of 況 (that is distinct from the existing other definitions) in certain contexts? If so, can we provide these contexts? --Frigoris (talk) 11:17, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure. But all the monolingual dictionaries I've consulted have only provided one such sense, e.g. the Gudai Hanyu Cidian says 连词. 况且，何况. 表示更近一层. So the question is whether we want to split the nuances of 况且 and 何况 and make them separate senses. I would say no because 何况 can also be used to mean 况且 so it seems kind of pointless. Unless of course you can find the distinction in the wild. ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 01:04, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

RFV discussion: July 2022
Japanese. Rfv-sense: of course Added here:. I know Heisig uses this as a keyword but his keywords don't necessarily have to do with the actual meaning. In fact, this particular one is regularly cited as proof that the RTK keywords are sometimes quite bizarre. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 21:59, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Rubbish. If I squint really hard, I can kinda sorta see how a sloppy translator might get to "of course", but it's really not any sense of this kanji or any of its kun'yomi.
 * Considering that the IP that added this sense geolocates to Colombia, that they included no references or sources, and that I cannot confirm this sense in any of my own resources, bilingual EN↔JA or monolingual JA, I've gone ahead and just removed that sense line as bogus.
 * FWIW, I've found Heisig to be a bothersome source of various "noise" edits like this over the years. His mnemonics appear to help certain people remember the kanji, but they are only mnemonics -- they, all too often, have nothing to do with the actual meaning or derivation of the characters.  But readers seem to get confused about this and mistake these mnemonics to be the meanings.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:12, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

RFV-failed (speedied). &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 17:15, 20 July 2022 (UTC)