Similar looking Kanji: 替 and 賛


#1

I can’t be the only one who gets those mixed up, right?


#2

The most hardcore pair I have found is 巿市 (what were they thinking?)

王𡈼壬 was also not that smart …


#3

What… is this?!..


#4

I agree those are pretty dumb, but thankfully niether case have their doppelgangers in wanikani (yet).


#5

Pretty sure that 巿 and 𡈼 are either too outdated or just found in Chinese. Cuz they are not available in any JP dictionaries. Like Jisho, Kanjipedia etc. Didn’t check in a Daijisen though


#6

This saddens me on a spiritual level. Just knowing that I’m gonna have to do this :confused:


#7

WaniKani only has one of them relief!
The first two are just crazy similar. Even on the big version it took me a moment to spot the difference =P


#8

@Toyger The middle one (𡈼) still appears in lots of compounds … 聖廷呈程庭艇


#9

Kanjipedia is made by the people who run the Kanken, so I wouldn’t be surprised if it maxes out at the number of kanji needed for Kanken level 1, which is around 6000.

That’s just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what has ever appeared in Japanese, so it doesn’t need to be ultra rare to be outside of that range.

Still could be though.


#10

But WaniKani treats them as if they are one and the same. So you only need to know the difference between them if learning how to write them properly (unless they affect reading, so telling them apart helps with reading or giving its meaning)

My (Kodansha) kanji learner’s dictionary don’t separate them either.

But they do separate tiny changes on others;

So guess I won’t put any energy in telling them apoart unless I find a reason to do so :slight_smile:


#11

They are actually all used as tone marks, so you could get some readings for free :wink:



Edit: they appear as tone marks though, not as (real) radicals, so they won’t appear in your list in the book.


#12

Well, I could find 巿
on: フツ kun:ひざかけ
Appears in ONE jukugo in my dictionary, 田巿 (でんふつ), which my IME doesn’t even know.
It’s 漢検対象外 (not part of the kanken test), as @Leebo expected.


#13

In the regular font here, those two look identical.