Comments on: a red guard’s documents :: http://56minus1.com/2009/05/a-red-guards-documents/ Tue, 09 Mar 2010 19:42:07 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: Adam J. Schokora http://56minus1.com/2009/05/a-red-guards-documents/comment-page-1/#comment-6539 Adam J. Schokora Mon, 01 Jun 2009 12:16:25 +0000 http://56minus1.com/?p=5103#comment-6539 @ John, thanks for your response. Yes indeed, it is interesting. I didn't take notice of the mixed usages at first. I sometimes have a hard time differentiating traditional and simplified characters because I was forced to learn them together. In fact, my handwritten Chinese (what's left of it) is riddled with random traditional characters. Appreciate you pointing it out. // AjS @ John, thanks for your response. Yes indeed, it is interesting. I didn’t take notice of the mixed usages at first. I sometimes have a hard time differentiating traditional and simplified characters because I was forced to learn them together. In fact, my handwritten Chinese (what’s left of it) is riddled with random traditional characters. Appreciate you pointing it out.

// AjS

]]> By: John Biesnecker http://56minus1.com/2009/05/a-red-guards-documents/comment-page-1/#comment-6538 John Biesnecker Mon, 01 Jun 2009 08:45:23 +0000 http://56minus1.com/?p=5103#comment-6538 I know it's (very) tangental to the topic, but the mixture of (what would now be considered) simplified and traditional characters in documents from that era is fascinating. One often thinks of the switchover as more or less instantaneous, but it was indeed a process. The last one is particularly strange -- 'che1' is seen as both 车 and 車 on the same document, and where it is in traditional, two other characters on the same line, 体 and 证 (體/證), aren't. Fascinating stuff. I know it’s (very) tangental to the topic, but the mixture of (what would now be considered) simplified and traditional characters in documents from that era is fascinating. One often thinks of the switchover as more or less instantaneous, but it was indeed a process.

The last one is particularly strange — ‘che1′ is seen as both 车 and 車 on the same document, and where it is in traditional, two other characters on the same line, 体 and 证 (體/證), aren’t.

Fascinating stuff.

]]>