Re: [tlug] radicals and graphemes

["David J Iannucci" <jlinux@example.com>]

> a radical IS a (typographic) grapheme!
> Am I misunderstanding something here ?

My intuition (not authoritative) would be that a radical is a grapheme,
but not every grapheme is a radical.  The radicals, after all, are
strictly only the classically-defined 215 (or so?) that you can find by
looking in Nelson or any other good kanji dictionary. On this
understanding, there are many recognizable chunks that one may find
appearing in multiple kanji, which one could call graphemes, but not
necessarily radicals.

Dave