wherestip Jun 11, 2005:

Anyway, don't let me bog down this thread with my own opinion on things. It probably belongs somewhere else. :-)

wherestip Jun 11, 2005:

I totally agee with you, Wenjer. The most difficult thing is to identify what is the commonly accepted usage "nowadays". And the commonly accepted terms are not necessarily always the best translations IMHO.

Non-ProZ.com Jun 11, 2005:

@wherestip: I don't see any problem at all.
We have a lot of problems having a common way to say thing in a great variety of cultures included in a vague idea of the Chinese identity in East and South East Asia.
You see, I don't have any problem to identify myself as a Chinese from Taiwan, in the way as a Chinese from Singapore or somewhere else would do.
As to the new coined terms, there are indeed a lot of nonsense, but they are accepted widely nowadays and we don't have a choice other than picking them up as they "are."

wherestip Jun 11, 2005:

...vast culture called Chinese.

wherestip Jun 11, 2005:

Let me clarify that last "nasty" commentof mine. I am not trying to offend anyone. Just giving my honest opinion about some of the newly coined Chinese phrases. I also understand there are different dialects, different ways of saying things in this...

wherestip Jun 11, 2005:

I understand, Wenjer. I've been out of the loop for a long time now. 26+ years of not reading/speaking any Chinese can do that to a person. In my opinion some of the new terminology is absolutely necessary, but some of it is merely ק��. ;-)

Non-ProZ.com Jun 11, 2005:

@wherestip: It is more valuable than 2 cents. I would avoid �īI, too. The problem is with "�ĕ�", "�ļ�" and "�ęn". People nowadays are using interesting terms and make them "standards", what they should not be, but the public accept them as if they were. I just want to make sure how far this process of �s���׳� has gone. Thank you for your help.

wherestip Jun 11, 2005:

IMHO, �ļ� or ���� would be most commonly used in Mainland. However, ���� has the connotation of being well-researched, comprehensive and having literary/historic/scientific significance. Therefore I would suggest �ļ�. Just my 2 cents.

Non-ProZ.com Jun 11, 2005:

�����޸��������������ɻ���:
��� "�ڙ��īI" �� "�ڙ��ĕ�" �ķQ�����׮a��`�⣬���Ԟ����ڙ�ʹ�õ��īI���ĕ�������қQ��ʹ�� "������ĕ�" �� "������ļ�" �� "������ęn" �ķQ�������^������Ȼ�Ѓɂ��ɻ������P�̨���c�Ї��Z�IJ�ϵ��ɻ� "�ĕ�"��"�ļ�"��"�ęn" �� "�īI" ��������ӵIJ�e����̎ documentation ָ�����u�����A�ε� documents �Ĺ������N��ԓʹ����һ�~���DZ��^��_���أ�

wherestip Jun 11, 2005:

how about �ļ�����?

Non-ProZ.com Jun 11, 2005:

��ҵ��⣬�� wherestip �����࣬authoritative documentation ָ���������_�ֿ���ه���ĕ�ӛ䛣��@���ڮaƷ�_�l���ɵ��^��֮�б���M�ЁK��ɵĹ�������M�д˹���r��ÿ���_�l�A�ε�ӛ䛶�����ܵ��ڙ��׼���˼�������֮���������ɴ˹���ᣬ�@���ĕ�ӛ�Ҳ����Á�׫�����g�փԺ�ʹ���փԵ���������ɞ鼼�g�փԼ�/��ʹ���փԵ��Ҫ���֡���� "�ڙ��īI" �� "�ڙ��ĕ�" �ķQ�����׮a��`�⣬���Ԟ����ڙ�ʹ�õ��īI���ĕ�������қQ��ʹ�� "����ĕ�" �� "����ļ�" �� "����ęn" �ķQ�������^������Ȼ�Ѓɂ��ɻ������P�̨���c�Ї��Z�IJ�ϵ��ɻ�"�ĕ�"��"�ļ�"��"�ęn" �� "�īI" ��������ӵIJ�e���@�e�� documentation ָ�����u� documents ����w�������ԓ����һ�~��Q֮���DZ��^��_���أ�

Non-ProZ.com Jun 10, 2005:

�@�N documentation ���u��S�̞�����ĮaƷ����g�͙z�ȷ�����f֮����u����ĕ�ӛ䛣���̨���ķQ�������Ї��ķQ���ܿ��ܲ�̫һ�ӡ���Ŀǰ��ֹ�ƺ�߀�]�ж��g�����^ Yi Yuan �� Fancie Kao �Ľ��h���ܲ��e��Ո�����ٿ��]һ������Q����