<p>Some <em>general principles</em>:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>In early Chinese writing, there weren't enough characters to represent the range of words or <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morpheme" rel="nofollow noreferrer">morphemes</a> used across the language;</p></li>
<li><p>Many characters became used for multiple purposes, and some of these purposes are not etymologically related to the original (<em><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_character_classification#Rebus_(phonetic_loan)_characters" rel="nofollow noreferrer">phonetic loans</a></em>);</p></li>
<li><p>Since multi-use (including phonetic loan) characters can become very confusing to read, components are piled on to existing characters to distinguish between different senses;</p></li>
<li><p>This is why Chinese writing has a large inventory of characters, some of them with many components.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>The natural development of Chinese writing is therefore from:</p>

<ul>
<li>A limited number of characters with simple shapes / few components, to</li>
<li>A large number of characters with complex shapes / many components.</li>
</ul>

<p>In addition, since Chinese writing has a <strong>very well-recorded history</strong>, many words come from old literature but survive in modern expressions, and their spelling frequently become <strong>fossilised</strong>, regardless of whether the characters making up those words have changed (<em>became more complex through the addition of more components</em>).</p>

<p>With the above principles, we should be able to see that this question is in fact the same question as <a href="https://chinese.stackexchange.com/questions/10703/why-%e7%ba%b9-is-the-wrong-character-to-write-for-tattoo">Why 纹 is the wrong character to write for tattoo?</a>.</p>

<hr>

<p><kbd><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Zhou" rel="nofollow noreferrer">西周</a><br><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_bronze_inscriptions" rel="nofollow noreferrer">金</a><br><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/SC7xL.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/SC7xL.png" alt="enter image description here"></a><br>夨令方尊<br><a href="http://www.guoxuedashi.com/yzjwjc/?bh=6016&amp;jgwfl=" rel="nofollow noreferrer">集成6016</a></kbd></p>

<p>「舍」 is comprised of phonetic <a href="http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/yanbian?kaiOrder=477" rel="nofollow noreferrer">「余」</a> (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstructions_of_Old_Chinese#Baxter%E2%80%93Sagart_(2014)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Baxter-Sagart OC</a>: <strong>/*la/</strong>) and a distinguishing mark 「口」, indicating the original meaning <em>to give/donate something</em>, extended to <em>to give something up / abandon something</em>.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>《易・比》：“舍逆取順，失前禽也。”</p>
</blockquote>

<ul>
<li>The original meaning, <em>to give/donate something</em>, is now written as 「予」 (<strong>/*laʔ/</strong>), which is a phonetic loan character;</li>
<li>The extended meaning, <em>to give something up / abandon something</em>, is now written as 「捨」 (<strong>/*l̥Aʔ/</strong>), formed by piling on semantic 「手・扌」.</li>
</ul>

<hr>

<p>「舍」 itself does not mean either of those things <strong>in modern Traditional Chinese</strong>, being (almost) exclusively used as a phonetic loan character for the meaning <em>dwelling</em> (<strong>/*[l̥]Ak-s/</strong>). However, modern spelling standards are pretty arbitrary, and you're unlikely to find that most people stick to them rigidly.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-04-19T16:37:07.517Z
2020-04-20T00:48:50.220Z
2020-04-20T00:48:50.220Z
dROOOze
<p>According to dictionary owned by Ministry of Education in Taiwan, one of the meaning of <a href="http://dict.revised.moe.edu.tw/cgi-bin/cbdic/gsweb.cgi?o=dcbdic&amp;searchid=W00000008850" rel="nofollow noreferrer">舍</a> is:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>放棄、放下。通「捨」。</p>
</blockquote>

<p>(Give up, let go, the same as 捨)</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-04-19T16:04:36.410Z
2020-04-19T16:04:36.410Z
000
<p>There seems to be some confusion between traditional 舍 and 捨. Here is an idea of 舍命不舍財 vs 捨命不捨財, etc.:</p>

<ul>
<li>Two without the 扌.</li>
</ul>

<p><a href="https://www.ntdtv.com/b5/2020/02/13/a102776071.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">NTDTV</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>所以採取了「舍命不舍財」的做法</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="https://udn.com/news/story/7338/4425976" rel="nofollow noreferrer">UDN</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>除了少數舍命不舍財的腦殘之外</p>
</blockquote>

<ul>
<li>Two with 扌on both:</li>
</ul>

<p><a href="https://news.pts.org.tw/article/466364" rel="nofollow noreferrer">PTS</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>習近平這種捨命不捨財的做法</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="https://www.epochtimes.com/b5/20/2/14/n11868196.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Epoch</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>有報導表示這種「捨命不捨財」的做法凸顯了中國經濟受到了嚴重影響</p>
</blockquote>

<ul>
<li>A mix of 扌on and off:</li>
</ul>

<p><a href="http://blog.udn.com/leaderstudio/131719766" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Some blog</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>都什麼時候了，還捨命不舍財，請一個護工啊</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Looking through my digital version of《汉语大词典》there seems to be quite a lot of inconsistency with whether 舍 should have its 扌or not. Some entries are written example sentences that include: 舍命 and others with: 捨命.</p>

<p>I can't see how, technically, it wouldn't be anything other than 捨命 and 捨財, in traditional.</p>

<p>Ideas?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-04-19T16:27:36.310Z
Well, there's three situations where something like this can happen: (1) The phrase is from old literature, from before 舍 was complexified into 捨. (2) Both spellings were tolerated up till the modern era, so people forget which one should be used as both are seen all over the place. (3) Someone accustomed to reading Simplified Chinese was tasked to write Traditional Chinese, and they can't tell the difference. (4) multiple of the above (this is my wager).
dROOOze
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-04-19T17:34:03.153Z
歪个题，今天来看岛媒二月份所谓“舍命不舍财”的说道真是讽刺万端(ﾉ_ _)ﾉ
Toosky Hierot
<traditional-characters>
Traditional: 舍命 vs. 捨命?
# Traditional: 舍命 vs. 捨命?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-04-19)

There seems to be some confusion between traditional 舍 and 捨. Here is an idea of 舍命不舍財 vs 捨命不捨財, etc.:

* Two without the 扌.

[NTDTV](https://www.ntdtv.com/b5/2020/02/13/a102776071.html)

> 所以採取了「舍命不舍財」的做法

[UDN](https://udn.com/news/story/7338/4425976)

> 除了少數舍命不舍財的腦殘之外

* Two with 扌on both:

[PTS](https://news.pts.org.tw/article/466364)

> 習近平這種捨命不捨財的做法

[Epoch](https://www.epochtimes.com/b5/20/2/14/n11868196.htm)

> 有報導表示這種「捨命不捨財」的做法凸顯了中國經濟受到了嚴重影響

* A mix of 扌on and off:

[Some blog](http://blog.udn.com/leaderstudio/131719766)

> 都什麼時候了，還捨命不舍財，請一個護工啊

Looking through my digital version of《汉语大词典》there seems to be quite a lot of inconsistency with whether 舍 should have its 扌or not. Some entries are written example sentences that include: 舍命 and others with: 捨命.

I can't see how, technically, it wouldn't be anything other than 捨命 and 捨財, in traditional.

Ideas?

**Tags:** traditional-characters

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Well, there's three situations where something like this can happen: (1) The phrase is from old literature, from before 舍 was complexified into 捨. (2) Both spellings were tolerated up till the modern era, so people forget which one should be used as both are seen all over the place. (3) Someone accustomed to reading Simplified Chinese was tasked to write Traditional Chinese, and they can't tell the difference. (4) multiple of the above (this is my wager).  
> **username_2**: 歪个题，今天来看岛媒二月份所谓“舍命不舍财”的说道真是讽刺万端(ﾉ_ _)ﾉ  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2020-04-19. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

Some *general principles*:

1. In early Chinese writing, there weren't enough characters to represent the range of words or [morphemes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morpheme) used across the language;
2. Many characters became used for multiple purposes, and some of these purposes are not etymologically related to the original (*[phonetic loans](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_character_classification#Rebus_(phonetic_loan)_characters)*);
3. Since multi-use (including phonetic loan) characters can become very confusing to read, components are piled on to existing characters to distinguish between different senses;
4. This is why Chinese writing has a large inventory of characters, some of them with many components.

The natural development of Chinese writing is therefore from:

* A limited number of characters with simple shapes / few components, to
* A large number of characters with complex shapes / many components.

In addition, since Chinese writing has a **very well-recorded history**, many words come from old literature but survive in modern expressions, and their spelling frequently become **fossilised**, regardless of whether the characters making up those words have changed (*became more complex through the addition of more components*).

With the above principles, we should be able to see that this question is in fact the same question as [Why 纹 is the wrong character to write for tattoo?](https://chinese.stackexchange.com/questions/10703/why-%e7%ba%b9-is-the-wrong-character-to-write-for-tattoo).

---

`西周  
金  
![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/SC7xL.png)  
夨令方尊  
集成6016`

「舍」 is comprised of phonetic [「余」](http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/yanbian?kaiOrder=477) ([Baxter-Sagart OC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstructions_of_Old_Chinese#Baxter%E2%80%93Sagart_(2014)): **/\*la/**) and a distinguishing mark 「口」, indicating the original meaning *to give/donate something*, extended to *to give something up / abandon something*.

> 《易・比》：“舍逆取順，失前禽也。”

* The original meaning, *to give/donate something*, is now written as 「予」 (**/\*laʔ/**), which is a phonetic loan character;
* The extended meaning, *to give something up / abandon something*, is now written as 「捨」 (**/\*l̥Aʔ/**), formed by piling on semantic 「手・扌」.

---

「舍」 itself does not mean either of those things **in modern Traditional Chinese**, being (almost) exclusively used as a phonetic loan character for the meaning *dwelling* (**/\*[l̥]Ak-s/**). However, modern spelling standards are pretty arbitrary, and you're unlikely to find that most people stick to them rigidly.


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2020-04-19. Score: 0

According to dictionary owned by Ministry of Education in Taiwan, one of the meaning of [舍](http://dict.revised.moe.edu.tw/cgi-bin/cbdic/gsweb.cgi?o=dcbdic&searchid=W00000008850) is:

> 放棄、放下。通「捨」。

(Give up, let go, the same as 捨)


---

