In fact the sentence structure of classical Chinese is usually simpler than
modern languages e.g. written Mandarin or Japanese. The former should not
be made too complex.
--- Delirium <delirium(a)hackish.org> からのメッセージ:
Adam Bishop wrote:
On the Latin Wikipedia I think we try to be as
classical as
possible -
the style of Cicero, or Caesar, or Vergil, or
that sort of era (1st
century BC - 1st century AD). It's not
always possible; for
example
if we want to write about modern people or
places, we may have to
use
a neo-Latin construction, or ecclesiastical Latin
to write about a
religious topic. (Personally, I admit that I let a few medieval
Latin
constructions slip through once in awhile, as
horrible as that may
be
to the purest classicists :))
As compared to historical Latin works, the Latin Wikipedia seems to
use
*much* simpler sentence structures and grammatical constructions and
so
on, which to some extent also minimizes the differences between
different eras of Latin. Is that on purpose? If so, is that
something
that'd be applicable to a classical-Chinese Wikipedia?
-Mark
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l