[Wikipedia-l] Re: Request for classical Chinese

[abc_root]

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 at 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 at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

__________________________________
Let's Celebrate Together!
Yahoo! JAPAN
http://pr.mail.yahoo.co.jp/so2005/