(Simplified Chinese learners only) Do you guys learn 214 radicals or 201 indexing components? By the way, read the body before voting.

[u/nhatquangdinh]

As a Traditional Chinese learner, I obviously learn 214 radicals because that's the official system used in Taiwan.

Meanwhile, the Chinese government officially prescribes 201 indexing components instead. However, it seems like most Simplified Chinese learners use the former system instead of this one. I hope this poll can prove me wrong though.

By the way, "radical" and "indexing component" are two English translations for the exact same Chinese word: 部首. They're just different English translations used by different governments.

14 votes, 6d left

214 radicals

201 indexing components

[u/papakudulupa]

neither...

[u/Pwffin]

neither

[u/tentyb6d56ns4d57yse5]

i cannot count that high.

[u/Zagrycha]

There is nothing wrong with learning all 214 Kangxi radicals but even most traditional learners don't, unless studying classical Chinese. They just learn the radical attached to the character as they learn the character. Quite a few of the Kangxi radicals have zero regular words attached to them in the modern day so they are a bit useless. I wouldn't be suprised if the 201 dictionary system also had some not too useful ones too but not familiar with it.

[u/nhatquangdinh → u/Zagrycha]

Quite a few of the Kangxi radicals have zero regular words attached to them in the modern day so they are a bit useless.

Actually the only radical left out in common usage is 龠. So 213 out of 214 are definitely used in daily life.

[u/Zagrycha → u/nhatquangdinh]

There is also 鬯, 舛, 无, and 丨 off the top of my head. Again nothing wrong with studying the Kangxi radicals directly but if you had learned them solely through vocab you would know these were rare, or maybe not know them at all.

[u/Kafatat]

I didn't know the 201. 乙 not being one component is strange.

[u/nhatquangdinh → u/Kafatat]

乙 isn't one component, which is strange.

Oh yes you're right

[u/triggerfish1 → u/nhatquangdinh]

Isn't it this one now: 乛

[u/nhatquangdinh → u/triggerfish1]

Seems like it

Btw I already posted both systems in the comments, take a look

[u/nhatquangdinh]

214 radicals:

一丨丶丿乙亅二亠人儿入八冂冖冫几凵刀力勹匕匚匸十卜卩厂厶又口囗土士夂夊夕大女子宀寸小尢尸屮山巛工己巾干幺广廴廾弋弓彐彡彳心戈戶手支攴文斗斤方无日曰月木欠止歹殳毋比毛氏气水火爪父爻爿片牙牛犬玄玉瓜瓦甘生用田疋疒癶白皮皿目矛矢石示禸禾穴立竹米糸缶网羊羽老而耒耳聿肉臣自至臼舌舛舟艮色艸虍虫血行衣襾見角言谷豆豕豸貝赤走足身車辛辰辵邑酉釆里金長門阜隶隹雨靑非面革韋韭音頁風飛食首香馬骨高髟鬥鬯鬲鬼魚鳥鹵鹿麥麻黃黍黑黹黽鼎鼓鼠鼻齊齒龍龜龠

201 indexing components:

一丨丶丿乛十厂匚卜冂八人勹儿匕几亠冫冖凵卩刀力又厶廴干工土艹寸廾大尢弋小口囗山巾彳彡夕夂丬广门宀辶彐尸己弓子屮女飞马么巛王无韦木支犬歹车牙戈比瓦止攴日贝水见牛手气毛长片斤爪父月氏欠风殳文方火斗户心毋示甘石龙业目田罒皿生矢禾白瓜鸟疒立穴疋皮癶矛耒老耳臣覀而页至虍虫肉缶舌竹臼自血舟色齐衣羊米聿艮羽糸麦走赤豆酉辰豕卤里足邑身釆谷豸龟角言辛青龺雨非齿黾隹阜金鱼隶革面韭骨香鬼食音首髟鬲鬥高黄麻鹿鼎黑黍鼓鼠鼻龠

[u/sickofthisshit]

Neither. The indexing radicals are useful only for paper dictionaries and similar highly academic activities. 

For people who are studying modern Mandarin, at the basic HSK levels, neither of those is necessary or even useful: a paper Chinese language dictionary is not something I can use, and learning dictionaries support pinyin lookup.

If I find an unfamiliar character, I write it into my phone and get the character I can copy and paste into an online dictionary which matches it by Unicode. The dictionary app on my phone gives me the pronunciation in pinyin and an English definition. 

I never need to identify the dictionary radical. 

I can use https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%A5%BD to investigate alternate character forms, etc., and it also tells me the Kangxi radical, but I don't care.

[u/FaithlessnessIcy8437]

I am native Chinese and at school we did learn radicals and indexing components. And actually we distinguish 偏旁 and 部首 at school, where a single character can have multiple 偏旁s but only one 部首, which is used when you look up a dictionary.

But I do have no idea how many radicals or indexing components there are. And while we all learnt those I personally actually don't use these concepts quite often.

[u/Inevitable-Self-2702]

I voted 201 because it's what I use in the dictionary I have. Only occasionally have I used some of the traditional radicals to look up a character, but they are lumped in as if they are sub-radicals of the others.