«
01038
01039
01040
»
01039
40.0 宀
𮕜
SC=7, FS=1 TS=10

UK-20396
IRGN2678WS2021v7.0Unified&Withdrawn
Unified to 𡧾 U+219FE, UK source to be horizontally extended to 𡧾 U+219FE or G glyph of 𡧾 U+219FE to be updated, IRG 60.
Postponed for further investigation, IRG 57.
Similar To: 寕 (U+5BD5)
U+219FEU+219FE
U+5BD5U+5BD5
Attributes:



Review Comments

Type
Description
Submitter
Evidence
EVIDENCE
WS2021 v1.0
[ Resolved ]
It is a wrong glyph of 寧(𡨴,U+21A34), we should reject it on this evidence. This shows the importance of checking the context and other vertions, and not just relying on the glyph.
Xieyang WANG
Individual
2021-06-09 17:21:26 UTC
Evidence
NEW_EVIDENCE
WS2021 v4.0
[ Resolved ]
This is not a "wrong" glyph, but a deliberate variant of 寧 as shown by the MOE variants dictionary:



As this variant is not unifiable with any encoded version of 寧, we therefore request to move this character back to the Main set.
Andrew WEST
UK
2023-01-22 14:24:42 UTC
Unification
UNIFICATION
WS2021 v4.0
[ Resolved ]
U+219FE
Similar to U+219FE
L F CHENG
Individual
2023-01-31 09:42:21 UTC
Unification
UNIFICATION
WS2021 v4.0
[ Resolved ]
U+219FE
Agree to unify to 𡧾 (U+219FE) as both are variants of "寧".
Andrew WEST
UK
2023-01-31 13:27:46 UTC
Evidence
NEW_EVIDENCE
WS2021 v4.0
[ Resolved ]

▲ 朱駿聲: 《説文通訓定聲》, 臨嘯閣藏本, 履部弟十二


▲ 汪烜: 《詩韻析》, 光緒刻本, 卷末


▲ 何其泰, 吴新德: 《岳池縣志》, 光緒刻本, 卷十八


▲ 《增訂武城縣誌續編》, 民國元年刻本, 續卷之十四


▲ 《玉詮》, 重刊道藏輯要, 卷二
Eiso CHAN
Individual
2023-01-31 15:23:23 UTC
Unification
UNIFICATION
WS2021 v4.0
[ Resolved ]
As Andrew’s comment on #9874, this is really not a “wrong” character, and it is very common in the ancient books as #10647.

I don’t oppose to unify with 𡧾 (U+219FE), but I don’t know why 《汉语大字典》 include ⿳宀乛皿 form not this one, that is so strange.

I strongly request UK for consideration to do the horizontal extension later, if this one been unified.
Eiso CHAN
Individual
2023-01-31 15:31:53 UTC
Unification
UNIFICATION
WS2021 v4.0
[ Resolved ]
U+219FE
I agree with Eiso that UK should consider HE for 𡧾.

The 𡧾 in GHZ is quoted from 四聲篇海:



However, both 泰和四聲篇海 and 成化四聲篇海 give the shape ⿱宀𮕜.



泰和五音新改併類聚四聲篇(金元遞修本) 7:4b



成化丁亥重刊改併五音類聚四聲篇(明成化刊本)7:6b

And the remaining stroke count of this character is 7 in 四聲篇, consistent with the shape 𮕜, but not ⿱乛皿 given in the GHZ as it has only 6 strokes.
HUANG Junliang
Individual
2023-02-07 01:42:57 UTC
Evidence
NEW_EVIDENCE
WS2021 v4.0
[ Resolved ]
In the appendix of the 《漢語大字典》, it provides the exact version of 改併四聲篇海


▲ 漢語大字典(1986)《汉语大字典主要引用书目表》 pp.4872

So I checked the 明崇禎 version, which still gives ⿱宀𮕜:


萬曆己丑重刊改併五音類聚四聲篇(明崇禎己巳年金陵園覺庵釋新仁重刊萬曆己丑本)卷7 folio 6b

Hence we can conclude that 《汉语大字典》 miscopied the shape. I suggest China to update the glyph according to historical evidences. Otherwise UK should consider HE.
HUANG Junliang
Individual
2023-03-21 16:18:02 UTC

Meeting Minutes

DateDescription
IRG #60
2023-03-21 (Tue)
10:28 am +0800
Recorded by CHEN Zhuang
Unified to 𡧾 U+219FE, UK h extension or G glyph update requested.
IRG #57
2021-09-17 (Fri)
10:44 am +0800
Recorded by CHEN Zhuang
Postponed for further investigation

Attribute Changes

VersionDescription
2.0
For 01039, change Status to Postponed
2.0
For 01039, add Discussion Record "Postponed for further investigation, IRG 57."
5.0
For 01039, change Status to Unified
5.0
For 01039, add Discussion Record "Unified to 𡧾 U+219FE, UK source to be horizontally extended to 𡧾 U+219FE or G glyph of 𡧾 U+219FE to be updated, IRG 60."

Glyph Changes

Source ReferenceGlyph
UK-20396
1.0

Raw Info
groupUK
a) Source referenceUK-20396
b) PUA Code of TTFF4E5
c) KangXi Radical Code (Primary)40.0
d) Stroke Count (Primary)7
e) First Stroke (Primary)1
f) Secondary KX Radical CodeN/A
f) a. Secondary Stroke CountN/A
f) b. Secondary First StrokeN/A
g) Total Stroke Count10
i) IDS⿱宀𮕜
j) Similar/ Variants U+5BD5
k1) References to evidence documents《天聞閣琴譜》(清光緒二年)卷7
k2) Images FilenamesUK-20396-001.jpg
l) Other InformationN/A
m1) Previous IRG WSN/A
m2) Sequence No.N/A