Talk:坉

RFV discussion: November 2013–December 2014

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

---

坉

Rfv-sense for 坉 definition "water that does not recede and cannot be diverted". Purportedly given in the Kangxi Dictionary (1716), the definition isn't in the Unihan database (which, in itself, isn't a problem) and almost seems to contradict one or more of the definitions given at zdic.net (Han Dian dictionary site). It'd be nice to have someone native or near-native in reading Chinese have a look at this definition to see if it's valid. Bumm13 (talk) 22:01, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm certainly not near-native in reading Chinese, but it looks like this definition is indeed in the Kangxi dictionary: "水不通不可别流" [1]. Mr. Granger (talk) 23:23, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

The Kangxi dictionary cites the very old Yupian dictionary, which gives the same definition. Mr. Granger (talk) 23:48, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, after working with several sources and translation tools, I finally was able to parse the "cannot be diverted" part (不可别流). The "that does not recede" definition seems a bit odd to me, as the literal translation that I'm getting for that part is "stopped" or "blocked" (不通, a compound word) rather than "recede". Bumm13 (talk) 01:29, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

That's true in modern Chinese, but in classical Chinese, words are generally monosyllabic, so my guess would be that it should be parsed as two words: 不=not, 通=pass through. (But again, I'm no expert - we need someone who can read classical Chinese.) Mr. Granger (talk) 02:43, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

[2]: KangXi ZiDian：

坉：《廣韻》《集韻》𠀤徒渾切，音屯。《玉篇》水不通不可別流。一曰草土塡水曰坉。一曰田隴。今西北莊家曰坉子。又《廣韻》徒損切，音沌。亦塡塞也。 [MSC, trad.]
坉：《广韵》《集韵》𠀤徒浑切，音屯。《玉篇》水不通不可别流。一曰草土塡水曰坉。一曰田陇。今西北庄家曰坉子。又《广韵》徒损切，音沌。亦塡塞也。 [MSC, simp.]

Tún: “Guǎngyùn” “Jíyùn” 𠀤 tú hún qiè, yīn tún. “Yùpiān” shuǐ bù tōng bù kě bié liú. Yī yuē cǎo tǔ 塡 shuǐ yuē tún. Yī yuē tián lǒng. Jīn xīběi zhuāngjiā yuē túnzǐ. Yòu “Guǎngyùn” tú sǔn qiè, yīn dùn. Yì 塡 sài yě. [Pinyin]

坉: Gwangyun and Jiyun analyze its pronunciation as "徒渾切" (See Fanqie), with the same pronunciation as the character 屯. Yupian says it means water that is blocked and that have no other way to go. Some says that it means grass and earth full of water. One says that [it means] field separator (the soil that separates two fields). Now (Qing Dynasty), the northwest dealer is called 坉子. Also, Guangyun analyzes its pronunciation as "徒損切", with the same pronunciation as the character 沌. Some also says that it means to fill.

(Balancing between literal translation and meaning translation) --kc_kennylau (talk) 10:08, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

FWIW, Wyang has commented on his talk page that "the sense is easily attested". Whether the current wording is a sufficiently fluent wording is another question... - -sche (discuss) 02:28, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

It would be helpful if someone could provide an example of how this is used.
Is a pond a "坉"? It has nowhere to recede or be diverted to, assuming it is rain-fed rather than fed by a river.
If a river floods and the water doesn't seem likely to recede for several days, and the town has to be evacuated, are the floodwaters "坉" until they do recede?
- -sche (discuss) 06:38, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

RFV failed: no citations provided here, in the entry, or at the citations page. — Keφr 21:21, 8 December 2014 (UTC)