Take the 2-minute tour ×
Chinese Language Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for students, teachers, and linguists wanting to discuss the finer points of the Chinese language. It's 100% free, no registration required.

It is said many words here http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr38/#SCTC about kSimplifiedVariant and kTraditionalVariant field cases (5 cases). But I didn't understand, if these two relations reflect each other? For example if A is simplified version of B, then does it mean that B is traditional version of A?

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer 1

Let me summarize the cases and try to answer your question (TC = Traditional Chinese character set, SC = Simplified Chinese character set).

  1. Some characters were never simplified. For example, 井 U+4E95 is in TC and in SC (and for that matter, most characters). In the Unihan database, codepoints like these have neither a kSimplifiedVariant nor a kTranditionalVariant (both fields are empty).

  2. There is a traditional version of the character, only present in TC. For example, 書 U+66F8 is in TC (and not in SC). The kSimplifiedVariant of is .

  3. The is a simplified version of the character, only present in SC. For example, 书 U+4E66 is in SC (and not in TC). The kTraditionalVariant of is .

  4. The character is used in both character sets depending on context. This is a bit of a mess, and I've written more about it here

The relations should "reflect each other", but they're not a bijection

It should be the case that if X.kTraditionalVariant includes Y, then Y.kSimplifiedVariant includes X. When I last checked the data about a year ago, there was at least one bug where that wasn't the case.

This does not mean that the relation is one-to-one or onto. There are some cases that are truly bizarre; check this out here for all of the weird cases

share|improve this answer
1  
As an example from the weird cases page, SC "干" corresponds to four (!) TC characters: "乾干幹榦", with different meanings and different pronunciations. This sometimes creates comical results when SC users translate things via Google, such as translating "干货" into "fuck goods". –  congusbongus Oct 22 '13 at 4:59
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.