<p>The reason for why 汹 and 踪 being not listed in the <code>简化字总表</code> is: </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>They have been already used in the old times as variant characters with the same meaning, so they were listed in <a href="http://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/%E7%AC%AC%E4%B8%80%E6%89%B9%E5%BC%82%E4%BD%93%E5%AD%97%E6%95%B4%E7%90%86%E8%A1%A8" rel="nofollow noreferrer">异体字整理表 (Chart of Variant Characters)</a>. Although they are usually considered as simplified characters (even by native speakers sometimes), they are actually traditional characters.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>For example, you can find <a href="http://www.zdic.net/z/1c/kx/6C79.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><code>汹</code></a> in <code>康熙字典</code></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>【汹】《集韻》與洶同。 <em>Jiyun</em>: the same as 洶.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>And you can find 踪 in <code>彙音寶鑑</code></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>【踪】仝蹤，踪迹。 The same as 蹤, means 踪迹 (trace).</p>
</blockquote>

<p>So for your question:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"How consistent is the method of simplification, why publish those lists if they are not used consistently, are there any other characters which have a simplified form not derived from chart 1 and 2?"</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I would say if you want to distinguish variant characters between mainland China and Taiwan / Hong Kong, it is better to learn <a href="http://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/%E7%AC%AC%E4%B8%80%E6%89%B9%E5%BC%82%E4%BD%93%E5%AD%97%E6%95%B4%E7%90%86%E8%A1%A8" rel="nofollow noreferrer">异体字整理表 (Chart of Variant Characters)</a> as well.</p>

<p>BTW, good guess for <code>從-&gt;从 =&gt; 蹤-&gt;</code><a href="http://www.zdic.net/z/a4/kx/27FDB.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><code></code></a>.</p>

<p><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/kR7CY.gif" alt="enter image description here"> is also a variant of 蹤, though it is not usually used today.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-10-20T09:14:06.573Z
Thanks for this clear and precise answer! I will now study the variant list.
Boki
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-10-20T09:35:03.087Z
You're welcome. But if you are a beginner, maybe it is not necessary to stick on such a minor problem :)
Stan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-10-20T02:46:02.300Z
2013-10-20T02:46:02.300Z
Stan
<p>I just came across 汹 which is the simplified version of 洶. I was quite surprised as 汹 is not mentioned in neither <a href="http://zh.wikisource.org/zh/%E7%AE%80%E5%8C%96%E5%AD%97%E6%80%BB%E8%A1%A8#.E7.AC.AC.E4.B8.80.E8.A1.A8" rel="nofollow">Chart 1</a> and <a href="http://zh.wikisource.org/zh/%E7%AE%80%E5%8C%96%E5%AD%97%E6%80%BB%E8%A1%A8#.E7.AC.AC.E4.BA.8C.E8.A1.A8" rel="nofollow">Chart 2</a> of the structural simplification of characters. Another example is 蹤 which is derived in 踪 -, although not being part of chart 1- and despite the simplification from chart 2 從->从.
I thought learning all characters from both chart 1 and 2 would be sufficient to be able to find the simplified version of any traditional character. </p>

<p>How consistent is the method of simplification, why publish those lists if they are not used consistently, are there any other characters which have a simplified form not derived from chart 1 and 2?</p>

<characters>
simplified characters not derived from chart 1 and chart 2 of 简化字总表
# simplified characters not derived from chart 1 and chart 2 of 简化字总表

(Asked by: username_0 on 2013-10-19)

I just came across 汹 which is the simplified version of 洶. I was quite surprised as 汹 is not mentioned in neither [Chart 1](http://zh.wikisource.org/zh/%E7%AE%80%E5%8C%96%E5%AD%97%E6%80%BB%E8%A1%A8#.E7.AC.AC.E4.B8.80.E8.A1.A8) and [Chart 2](http://zh.wikisource.org/zh/%E7%AE%80%E5%8C%96%E5%AD%97%E6%80%BB%E8%A1%A8#.E7.AC.AC.E4.BA.8C.E8.A1.A8) of the structural simplification of characters. Another example is 蹤 which is derived in 踪 -, although not being part of chart 1- and despite the simplification from chart 2 從->从.
I thought learning all characters from both chart 1 and 2 would be sufficient to be able to find the simplified version of any traditional character.

How consistent is the method of simplification, why publish those lists if they are not used consistently, are there any other characters which have a simplified form not derived from chart 1 and 2?

**Tags:** characters


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2013-10-20. Score: 4 | Accepted answer

The reason for why 汹 and 踪 being not listed in the `简化字总表` is:

> They have been already used in the old times as variant characters with the same meaning, so they were listed in [异体字整理表 (Chart of Variant Characters)](http://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/%E7%AC%AC%E4%B8%80%E6%89%B9%E5%BC%82%E4%BD%93%E5%AD%97%E6%95%B4%E7%90%86%E8%A1%A8). Although they are usually considered as simplified characters (even by native speakers sometimes), they are actually traditional characters.

For example, you can find [`汹`](http://www.zdic.net/z/1c/kx/6C79.htm) in `康熙字典`

> 【汹】《集韻》與洶同。 *Jiyun*: the same as 洶.

And you can find 踪 in `彙音寶鑑`

> 【踪】仝蹤，踪迹。 The same as 蹤, means 踪迹 (trace).

So for your question:

> "How consistent is the method of simplification, why publish those lists if they are not used consistently, are there any other characters which have a simplified form not derived from chart 1 and 2?"

I would say if you want to distinguish variant characters between mainland China and Taiwan / Hong Kong, it is better to learn [异体字整理表 (Chart of Variant Characters)](http://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/%E7%AC%AC%E4%B8%80%E6%89%B9%E5%BC%82%E4%BD%93%E5%AD%97%E6%95%B4%E7%90%86%E8%A1%A8) as well.

BTW, good guess for `從->从 => 蹤->`.

![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/kR7CY.gif) is also a variant of 蹤, though it is not usually used today.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thanks for this clear and precise answer! I will now study the variant list.  
> **username_1**: You're welcome. But if you are a beginner, maybe it is not necessary to stick on such a minor problem :)  

---

