Date | Description |
---|---|
IRG #59 2022-10-19 (Wed) 10:57 am +0800 Recorded by CHEN Zhuang | Withdraw. |
Version | Description |
---|---|
4.0 | For 03319, change Status to Withdrawn |
4.0 | For 03319, add Discussion Record "Withdrawn, IRG 59." |
Source Reference | Glyph |
---|---|
UTC-00738 | ![]() |
group | UTC |
a) Source Reference | UTC-00738 |
b) PUA Code Point | U+EAE1 |
c) Kangxi Radical Code | 139 |
d) Stroke Count | 12 |
e) First Stroke | 2 |
g) Total Strokes | 18 |
i) IDS | ⿰𣊔色 |
j) Similar Ideographs | U+4490 䒐 |
k) References for Evidence Images | The Representation of Cantonese with Chinese Characters, Journal of Chinese Linguistics, Monograph Series Number 18, 2002: p455, pos09 |
Review Comments
Cf. WS2021-01385 which writes the same word as {⿰忄盟}𢛵.
I suggest to postpone pending additional evidence.
unify to 䒐 (U+4490)
Agree with Lee and Andrew, but there is no need to add any new UCV rule.
BTW, I do not think 䒐䒏 is a proper word form for the Cantonese word mang2zang2, but so many people and scholars use this form.