Talk:話

feedback
Wiktionary is great, but these days I'm only interested in the "Translingual" and "Japanese" sections of a page. It would be really nice if I could set some option to only show these unless I explicitly ask for the Cantonese, Mandarin, Korean, etc., sections. (I guess I should figure out Greasemonkey again.)

Also, it makes a fantastic reference, once you get to the character you're looking for, but the search doesn't really work for kanji: you can't search by stroke count or radical (or if you can, I can't find it). I usually go to to look up the character. I'd rather have the additional information that Wiktionary has, but it's a pain to search for kanji here, and usually Saiga ends up being just good enough. So I use Wiktionary if I find a character on the web I don't know, and I use Saiga if I see something in real life I don't know, because Wiktionary has better content (usually) but Saiga has much better search. But it seems like something that would be relatively easy to improve. (Maybe I'll take a crack at it...)


 * Needs a lot more work, but we do have Category:CJKV radicals. —Stephen 17:28, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Min Nan literary
TDJ shows both ōa and hōa as literary...has this changed since then? Hongthay (talk) 05:46, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * What's considered as literary maybe different depending on the dictionary and on the region. There's no doubt about hōa being literary. Minnan Fangyan Da Cidian considers ōa and ōe as vernacular for Xiamen. For Zhangzhou, it only has ōa as vernacular, and for Quanzhou, it only has ōe as vernacular. I think both ōa and hōa are rarely used in Taiwan, so it's not included in THCWD. If we look at a similar word, 花, we have hōa as literary for all regions, hōa as vernacular in Zhangzhou and hōe as vernacular in Quanzhou and Xiamen. I don't know if ōa 話 would then be considered as both literary and vernacular. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 06:53, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Appreciate the time and effort. Hongthay (talk) 07:23, 3 May 2016 (UTC)