<p>条's radical is 木. That's an established fact. Just consult any Chinese dictionary. It's derived from 条's old form (旧字形), which lacks the tick.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-07T20:11:05.533Z
I'm not sure what you mean by "the tick" when you say the traditional form would not have the tick. Could you include a form of the character with and without the tick? I found the simplified version, 条, and the traditional version, 條, but the traditional form has more strokes, not fewer.
Don Kirkby
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-21T12:33:55.013Z
He said old = 旧字形, not traditional = 繁体字. Here's a [link](http://chineseetymology.org/CharacterEtymology.aspx?submitButton1=Etymology&characterInput=%E6%9D%A1) with some older forms and a character analysis. [This](http://chineseetymology.org/CharacterImages/Lst/L30000/l32100/L32146.gif) one is particularly clear.
Stumpy Joe Pete
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-21T20:40:29.460Z
I was partially wrong. I removed the part about the tick not being present in texts from regions outside mainland China. My memory played a trick on me there.
deutschZuid
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-22T03:06:59.663Z
Looks like it's not present in Japanese use of the character (same Unicode code point, different fonts, so I can only give a [link](http://jisho.org/kanji/details/%E6%9D%A1) )
Stumpy Joe Pete
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-22T04:20:35.287Z
Hmm... I just looked it up on Wiktionary http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%9D%A1 and it seems that my original speculation was correct. It might also have to do with the font used. I will have to confirm with someone who uses the Traditional Chinese script natively.
deutschZuid
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-24T15:06:25.607Z
Maybe you could edit in some pictures or something?
Stumpy Joe Pete
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-09-25T05:52:09.280Z
The government of mainland China is now considering changing the 木 with tick to that without tick as the standard writing. Seems that the public is unhappy with this change...
user58955
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-09-26T02:49:51.467Z
@user58955 Do you have sources for that? That would be interesting.
deutschZuid
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-09-26T02:54:02.370Z
for instance, see http://www.china.com.cn/culture/txt/2009-08/26/content_18402109.htm and http://culture.people.com.cn/GB/22219/9902864.html
user58955
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-05T23:32:37.417Z
2012-06-21T20:39:02.490Z
2012-06-21T20:39:02.490Z
deutschZuid
<p>That decomposition is incorrect.</p>

<p>「条」is shorthand for「條」(Pinyin: <strong>tiáo</strong>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstructions_of_Old_Chinese#Baxter%E2%80%93Sagart_(2014)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Baxter-Sagart</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Chinese" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Old Chinese</a>: <strong>/*[l]ˤiw/</strong>, <strong>/*lˤiw/</strong>), which is composed of phonetic「攸」(Pinyin: <strong>yōu</strong>, Baxter-Sagart Old Chinese: <strong>/*liw/</strong>) and semantic「木」(<em>wood</em>).「木」sometimes looks like「ホ」when written on the bottom of characters; exact shapes vary between the standards of different regions.</p>

<p>The appearance of「夂」is a writing convention;「夂」doesn't contribute any semantic or phonetic function in「条」. At most, it can be seen as an abbreviation of「攸」.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-10-07T00:16:25.130Z
2018-10-07T00:55:18.087Z
2018-10-07T00:55:18.087Z
dROOOze
<p>It has to be 木, 条 means 'twig' originally </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-05T21:53:47.627Z
2012-06-05T21:53:47.627Z
Fivesheep
<p>During studying 条 character in one of the dictionaries I have found decomposition of this character to two components:</p>

<ul>
<li>夂 zhǐ: to go </li>
<li>木 mù: tree; wood (Kangxi radical 75) </li>
</ul>

<p>I see the 夂 component but I am not sure of 木. Should it not be 小 or something similar instead to 木? When I've enlarged the font it resembles 小 without the horizontal stroke.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-06T04:45:38.293Z
Even after the form changing process, it still resembles 小 *with* a horizontal stroke. Why do you say it's without a horizontal stroke?
Betty
<simplified-characters><character-identification>
Is the description for components of 条 correct?
# Is the description for components of 条 correct?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2012-06-05)

During studying 条 character in one of the dictionaries I have found decomposition of this character to two components:

* 夂 zhǐ: to go
* 木 mù: tree; wood (Kangxi radical 75)

I see the 夂 component but I am not sure of 木. Should it not be 小 or something similar instead to 木? When I've enlarged the font it resembles 小 without the horizontal stroke.

**Tags:** simplified-characters, character-identification

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Even after the form changing process, it still resembles 小 *with* a horizontal stroke. Why do you say it's without a horizontal stroke?  

---

## 3 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2012-06-05. Score: 0 | Accepted answer

条's radical is 木. That's an established fact. Just consult any Chinese dictionary. It's derived from 条's old form (旧字形), which lacks the tick.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: I'm not sure what you mean by "the tick" when you say the traditional form would not have the tick. Could you include a form of the character with and without the tick? I found the simplified version, 条, and the traditional version, 條, but the traditional form has more strokes, not fewer.  
> **username_4**: He said old = 旧字形, not traditional = 繁体字. Here's a [link](http://chineseetymology.org/CharacterEtymology.aspx?submitButton1=Etymology&characterInput=%E6%9D%A1) with some older forms and a character analysis. [This](http://chineseetymology.org/CharacterImages/Lst/L30000/l32100/L32146.gif) one is particularly clear.  
> **username_2**: I was partially wrong. I removed the part about the tick not being present in texts from regions outside mainland China. My memory played a trick on me there.  
> **username_4**: Looks like it's not present in Japanese use of the character (same Unicode code point, different fonts, so I can only give a [link](http://jisho.org/kanji/details/%E6%9D%A1) )  
> **username_2**: Hmm... I just looked it up on Wiktionary http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%9D%A1 and it seems that my original speculation was correct. It might also have to do with the font used. I will have to confirm with someone who uses the Traditional Chinese script natively.  
> **username_4**: Maybe you could edit in some pictures or something?  
> **username_5**: The government of mainland China is now considering changing the 木 with tick to that without tick as the standard writing. Seems that the public is unhappy with this change...  
> **username_2**: @username_5 Do you have sources for that? That would be interesting.  
> **username_5**: for instance, see http://www.china.com.cn/culture/txt/2009-08/26/content_18402109.htm and http://culture.people.com.cn/GB/22219/9902864.html  

---

### Answer by username_6 on 2018-10-07. Score: 1

That decomposition is incorrect.

「条」is shorthand for「條」(Pinyin: **tiáo**, [Baxter-Sagart](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstructions_of_Old_Chinese#Baxter%E2%80%93Sagart_(2014)) [Old Chinese](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Chinese): **/\*[l]ˤiw/**, **/\*lˤiw/**), which is composed of phonetic「攸」(Pinyin: **yōu**, Baxter-Sagart Old Chinese: **/\*liw/**) and semantic「木」(*wood*).「木」sometimes looks like「ホ」when written on the bottom of characters; exact shapes vary between the standards of different regions.

The appearance of「夂」is a writing convention;「夂」doesn't contribute any semantic or phonetic function in「条」. At most, it can be seen as an abbreviation of「攸」.


---

### Answer by username_7 on 2012-06-05. Score: 0

It has to be 木, 条 means 'twig' originally


---

