<p>The verb &quot;to know&quot; 认 (rèn) is the simplified form of 認 (言 → 讠 and 忍 → 人). I'm not very familiar with the history behind simplifying characters, but I'm aware many characters generally have a semantic and phonetic component.</p>
<p>In simplifying this character, was 人 (rén) intentionally chosen to maintain a phonetic component,* or is this just coincidence?</p>
<hr />
<sub>
<p>* as an analogue to the original phonetic meaning of 忍 (rěn)</p>
</sub>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-12-08T04:16:11.150Z
Not quite the case, the simplification actually was done to reduce the number of strokes in the traditional character, 認. During the process of the simplification, 忍 (rěn) in 認, was replaced with another same sounding component, 人 (rén) in this case, to omit the number of strokes needed to write the character. This has actually happened a few times when traditional characters get simplified. (e.g. 鍾 -> 钟, 鄰 -> 邻, 礬 -> 矾)
prismcool
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-12-08T13:11:17.167Z
@prismcool ah sorry I phrased that poorly - I'm aware the point of simplification is to make the characters simpler to write/remember, I meant was this specific simplification chosen for phonetic reasons (as opposed to any other potential simplified character). I'll edit the q to be clearer!
大胳膊雅各布
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-12-08T16:16:41.700Z
@月-- It is quite obvious the case as they didn't simplify 忍 to 刃 or 心 but chose 人 instead.
r13
<simplified-characters><glyph-origin><traditional-vs-simplified>
Is 认 related to 人?
# Is 认 related to 人?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2023-12-08)

The verb "to know" 认 (rèn) is the simplified form of 認 (言 → 讠 and 忍 → 人). I'm not very familiar with the history behind simplifying characters, but I'm aware many characters generally have a semantic and phonetic component.

In simplifying this character, was 人 (rén) intentionally chosen to maintain a phonetic component,\* or is this just coincidence?

---

\* as an analogue to the original phonetic meaning of 忍 (rěn)

**Tags:** simplified-characters, glyph-origin, traditional-vs-simplified

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Not quite the case, the simplification actually was done to reduce the number of strokes in the traditional character, 認. During the process of the simplification, 忍 (rěn) in 認, was replaced with another same sounding component, 人 (rén) in this case, to omit the number of strokes needed to write the character. This has actually happened a few times when traditional characters get simplified. (e.g. 鍾 -> 钟, 鄰 -> 邻, 礬 -> 矾)  
> **username_0**: @username_1 ah sorry I phrased that poorly - I'm aware the point of simplification is to make the characters simpler to write/remember, I meant was this specific simplification chosen for phonetic reasons (as opposed to any other potential simplified character). I'll edit the q to be clearer!  
> **username_2**: @月-- It is quite obvious the case as they didn't simplify 忍 to 刃 or 心 but chose 人 instead.  

---

## 0 answers

