stroke order differences

[mkengel]

I know that there differences between the stroke order of identical Kanji/Hanzi in Japanese and Chinese.

1) Does anybody know an URL with some explanations or rules ?

2) Are there also differences between the writing of Hanzi in Taiwan/Hongkong/Mainland China ? If yes, please give some examples or an URL.

Thank you

Michael

[skylee]

Here is the Taiwan standard for traditional characters (follow it and I have no problem inputting to my handset using stroke order method) -> http://www.edu.tw/EDU_WEB/EDU_MGT/MANDR/EDU6300001/allbook/bishuen/bs1.htm?open

[JVGruat]

I know that there differences between the stroke order of identical Kanji/Hanzi in Japanese and Chinese. Does anybody know an URL with some explanations or rules ?

I have been followinf for a few years both the Chinese and the Japanese language French speaking discussion groups on usenet - Japanese because of the kanji, of course - and noticed in a few instances reference made to differences between Japanese and Chinese stroke orders for selected characters - without further specifying whether this indeed resulted from different basic rules.

So thanks to your question I tried to understand it a bit better - which resulted in

http://www.jvgruat.com/Chine/strokes.pdf.

According to my sources, nine "rules" were identified for Japanese stroke order, 8 for Chinese. Seven rules can be considered as common to Japanese and Chinese. This means however that one Chinese rule is not formalized in Japanese theory "Minor stroke usually comes last", and two Japanese rules have no formal Chinese equivalent - "vertical strokes drawn through the center are written last"; "strokes which cut through the middle are written last".

This may explain some discrepancies. Another important point maybe the requirement, in Chinese, that "usually each component (of a character) is written in its entirety before another component is written" since the identification of components might differ from one language to the other.

So, a lot of uncertainties remain - at least for me !

[mkengel]

First of all - thank you for the two replies.

Just an example of a simple difference of the Kanji/Hanzi stroke order (see attachment):

Japanese write 1-2-3 while Chinese write 1-3-2

There is some handwriting software which stumbles over such differences, e.g. not finding a Hanzi character if you write it the Japanese way.

Thanks for any help - I will collect the info and release it to the list later.

Michael

[volga_volga]

I have similar problem (stroke order differences) but between two hanzi sources.

Sometimes the book I am using (Most Common Chinese Radicals) by Zhang Pengpeng, Sinolingua, shows slightly different stroke order from that used in ZDT (Zhongwen Development Tool).

I wonder why, and I wonder which one is the right one?

[HashiriKata]

I wonder why, and I wonder which one is the right one?

Just like in everything else, there are sometimes variations and the variations are all "correct". Take the example given by mkengel above, there are two established ways of writing the first part of the character. One is the stroke order you would use to approach 土 and the other is the order you would use for 王, and these two orders are both well established and both leading to the same end-result, so both of them are fine (It's worth noting that the ways we write complicated characters are all derived from the ways we write simple ones). Our personal preference is based mainly on which variation we happen to be taught or familiar with first, and it'd therefore be narrow-minded to insist that one is more "correct" than the other.

[volga_volga]

thanks! I am definitely not narrow-minded as far as stroke order is concerned. it's just that after having read in many places that there is a certain stroke order in writing Chinese I saw to different ones and was puzzled... it's more clear now that does not have to be 100%by the (same) book.

[HashiriKata]

Sorry Volga, I don't mean any of us here is narrow-minded about this. When I was writing the post, it occurred to me that some "teachers" do insist on one way at the expense of others; and I was only noting down the thought, but rather clumsily

[Jose]

Here are some discrepancies I have come across as a student of Chinese over the last few years when comparing textbooks from the Mainland and Taiwan as well as watching people write by hand.

1. 戈 I originally learned to write this character, either isolated or as a side component, with the dot on the top-right corner last. However, Skylee's link shows a different order, starting as 弋 and finishing with the stroke at the bottom. This is apparently the standard stroke order in Taiwan, whereas the one I use is probably (I think) the standard one on the Mainland.

2. 里 is written by most Chinese people as 甲 followed by the two bottom horizontal strokes. Some textbooks show a different stroke order, beginning with 旦and then crossing with the vertical stroke before doing the last horizontal stroke at the bottom. I am not sure if this may be a Mainland vs. Taiwan/HK difference, or just a case of people writing differently from what the books say.

3. There are also a number of characters that have ended up standardised in slightly different ways in simplified and in traditional characters. In these cases, the differences in the stroke order manifest themselves in a subtly different printed form. Typical cases are 別, 屆, 角, and (sometimes) 周.

4. In traditional characters like 學, 興, 彎 or 樂 I always write the middle part before the sides when doing the top (e.g. 樂 = 白 + 幺 + 幺 + 木). That's the way they taught me to write these characters a long time ago, and seems to be the prescribed order, according to Skylee's link. However, some Taiwan/HK/Mc people prefer to do the top of these characters from left to right (樂 = 幺 + 白 + 幺 + 木).

5. Also in traditional characters, the plant radical 艹 (three strokes in the simplified standard) is written as two crosses (i.e. four strokes). I would expect the stroke order to be like two 十 (horizontal + vertical + horizontal + vertical). However, I remember using a textbook that would show the correct order as vertical + horizontal + vertical + horizontal, which I find a bit strange. I always hesitate with this radical when I write in traditional characters.

[nipponman]

Oh, I didn't know there were any differences b/w chinese and japanese stroke order. When I learned (Japanese) stroke order rules about 7 years ago, I stuck with them even though they are just generalizations and don't apply to all characters. It doesn't really matter unless you're a caligrapher imo.

[skylee]

1. 戈 I originally learned to write this character, either isolated or as a side component, with the dot on the top-right corner last. However, Skylee's link shows a different order, starting as 弋 and finishing with the stroke at the bottom. This is apparently the standard stroke order in Taiwan, whereas the one I use is probably (I think) the standard one on the Mainland

I too write the dot last. I guess this is how I was taught to write it when I was a kid. I also agree with your observation about 樂. I used to write the upper part from left to right but then friends and other people pointed out that it was wrong (obviously they had been taught the "correct" order) so I had to change (peer pressure) and then I found that the "correct" order was in line with the order of the stroke input method.

I generally agree with nipponman's comment, especially with longhand writing. But you see if you use stroke input method (like on your handset) the stroke order does matter to some extent.

[nipponman]

4. In traditional characters like 學, 興, 彎 or 樂 I always write the middle part before the sides when doing the top (e.g. 樂 = 白 + 幺 + 幺 + 木). That's the way they taught me to write these characters a long time ago, and seems to be the prescribed order, according to Skylee's link. However, some Taiwan/HK/Mc people prefer to do the top of these characters from left to right (樂 = 幺 + 白 + 幺 + 木).

I just realized that in when I started chinese I wrote 樂 like 白 + 幺 + 幺 + 木, but now, after a little inspection, I find I write it like 幺 + 白 + 幺 + 木, which further convinces me that it doesn't really matter.

But you see if you use stroke input method (like on your handset) the stroke order does matter to some extent.

I can see your point here. Although I don't use things like that, I can see how it could be useful to know the "correct" stroke order. I'm not saying stroke order isn't important per se, just once you know the general rules, top to bottom, left to right, inside then outside, etc. its not that big a deal. What I think is more important is being able to count the strokes. I do that all the time when searching for characters by radical. I am often frustrated b/c my dictionary lists radicals in simplified and I often forget and count the strokes by traditional standards, and am sometimes several strokes off, but thats neither here nor there.

[Jose]

Out of curiosity, I have checked the stroke order for the traditional four-stroke plant radical (艹) in Skylee's link, and I have found that it is actually different from either of the two options I mentioned. It appears there as vertical + horizontal + horizontal + vertical.

[nipponman]

Out of curiosity, I have checked the stroke order for the traditional four-stroke plant radical (艹) in Skylee's link, and I have found that it is actually different from either of the two options I mentioned. It appears there as vertical + horizontal + horizontal + vertical.

Wow, Thats crazy. Does anybody write it this way? I go hor. +vert. + hor. + vert. as I suspect most people do.

[Altair]

I think part of the discrepancy in stroke order comes from whether you are stressing ease of practicing or ease of writing with good proportion.

Consider a character like 臣. If I had to write it out fifty times, I would much prefer to use the six-stroke version that draws the top and right first and ends with and "L" stroke. If I had to make it look well-proportioned, I would much prefer to use the seven-stroke version that begins with "丨"on the left, using it as the spine for the rest of the stokes (一,丨,乙,一,丨,一) from top to bottom. A year or two ago someone on this forum suggested that the official Japanese order may have followed traditional recommendations of calligraphers, which presumably would have favored esthetics over efficiency.

Also in traditional characters, the plant radical 艹 (three strokes in the simplified standard) is written as two crosses (i.e. four strokes). I would expect the stroke order to be like two 十 (horizontal + vertical + horizontal + vertical). However, I remember using a textbook that would show the correct order as vertical + horizontal + vertical + horizontal, which I find a bit strange. I always hesitate with this radical when I write in traditional characters.

From the looks of this radical, I have always assume it was writted vertical + horizontal + horizontal + vertical. The two crosses are definitely not symmetrical and do not appear to be written in the same way. I had assumed that this was to avoid monotony, which seems to be a general principal.

By the way, 隹 seems to be a component that differs between current Japanese and Chinese practice. I first learned to finish the three horizontal strokes together, which I assumed was more like cursive practice. Since I have tried to switch to Chinese practice, I end with the right vertical stroke and the bottom horizontal stroke.

Another one that drives be crazy is 田. My Japanese textbooks had the final two strokes as 二, whereas my Chinese books all have it as 土.

The only two frequent character that still drive me crazy are 飛 and 垂. 垂 is especially depressing.