<ol>
<li><p>Proper name marks have largely fallen into disuse. That is because typesetting is difficult (as evidenced by your question) and that the text marked is usually understood by context.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>我們有時看見一些書籍、文章中，已不使用專名號。這是因為印刷時比較困難，在約定俗成的情況下，現在已多不使用，並非錯誤所致。(<a href="https://www.chiculture.net/0609/html/a01/0609a01_16.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">古今標點趣聞</a>)</p>
</blockquote>
</li>
<li><p>Your concern for clarity is valid. But using proper name marks may cause further confusion in the case of <em>eponyms</em>. A Golgi apparatus does not carry any material attribute of its discoverer. Logically, it is just an organelle that just so happens to be discovered by Golgi. We all have Golgi apparatuses – what does Golgi (the person) have to do materially with <em>our</em> Golgi apparatuses? That is also probably why certain eponyms are no longer capitalised in English: e.g., abelian, newtonian, quixotic etc. Therefore, if you indiscriminately underline <code>高爾基</code>, it may appear to some people that you are implying the apparatus <em>belongs</em> to Golgi (linguistically, attributive instead of genitive), much like <code>高爾基的帽子</code> (Golgi's hat).</p>
</li>
<li><p>I believe using parentheses also achieves clarity and is much more convenient (and commonplace) than using proper name marks.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>大多數真核細胞有高爾基體（Golgi apparatus）。</p>
<p>范德華力（van der Waals force）是一種電性引力，但它比化學鍵或共價鍵弱得多。</p>
</blockquote>
</li>
<li><p>I however agree that proper name marks may be useful in the context of classical Chinese, especially when annotating names of people and states. We <em>may</em> not have enough historical knowledge to parse the sentence correctly. For example, you need to be very familiar with the given name of Confucius (丘) to parse the following without the help of proper name marks:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>孔子曰：「大道之行也，與三代之英，<strong>丘</strong>未之逮也，而有志焉。」《禮記》</p>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-13T03:28:09.707Z
2021-04-13T03:42:01.407Z
2021-04-13T03:42:01.407Z
L Parker
<p><strong>Because more structural particles appeared, 专名号 is almost useless in current Chinese, but it is really useful in old Chinese as known as 文言文 because it is of help to 断句.</strong></p>
<p>In modern Chinese, there are much more structural particles (such as&quot;的&quot;&quot;地&quot;&quot;得&quot;)  than those in old Chinese. It made 专名号 almost useless. For example:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>（谢道韫）即公（谢安）大兄无奕（谢奕）女，左将军王凝之妻也。
<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/N8xMD.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/N8xMD.png" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
<p>——《世说新语·言语》</p>
</blockquote>
<p>(This sentence means Xie Daoyun is the daughter of Xie An's eldest brother Xie Yi and the wife of General Wang Ningzhi.)</p>
<p>If we do not put 专名号 under 王凝之, the readers may think this sentence means Xie Daoyun is Wang Ning's wife(王凝/之妻, wrong 断句), not Wang Ningzhi's wife(王凝之/妻), because &quot;之&quot; also means &quot;的&quot;.</p>
<p>But if we translate it into current Chinese, it will become:</p>
<p>谢道韫是谢安<strong>的</strong>长兄谢奕<strong>的</strong>女儿，左将军王凝之<strong>的</strong>妻子。</p>
<p>Since there are more &quot;的&quot;, its meaning is clearer. Everybody can understand it.</p>
<hr />
<p>In your example, &quot;高尔基&quot; is a foreign word. 译名用字 are very special in Mandarin. These words like &quot;尔&quot;&quot;斯&quot;&quot;基&quot;&quot;特&quot; are not common in today's Chinese and when they are together, they can only form proper nouns. There is not &quot;基体&quot; in everyday Chinese, and students studying biology will not misunderstand it because they can 断句 correctly.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-05-15T17:45:33.937Z
Thanks for the answer! "基体" actually makes sense in biology; see https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%9F%BA%E4%BD%93.
Zuriel
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-05-15T18:56:53.843Z
When I started to learn Chinese some 60 years ago, I remember the 專屬名詞,- personal, location and book names required to be identified with the vertical line to the right of the letters. I don't recall if it was called "引號". But the practice was ignored in the later days, except the old publications.
r13
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-05-16T07:49:05.447Z
@Zuriel Yes, I saw it so I said it doesn't exist in "everyday" Mandarin.
T-Pioneer
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-05-16T07:52:40.680Z
@r13 I think it is just "专名号". It "用于人名、地名、朝代名等专名下面。"(from 《新华字典》（第12版）)
T-Pioneer
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-05-15T06:43:49.843Z
2021-05-15T06:43:49.843Z
T-Pioneer
<p>For example, consider the following sentence:</p>
<p>大多數真核細胞有高爾基體。</p>
<p>For those who are unfamiliar with biology, he/she may not know if 高爾基體 should be understood as (高爾)(基體) or (高爾基)(體)。Two avoid confusion, it makes perfect sense to use 專名號 and write the sentence as</p>
<p>大多數真核細胞有高爾基體。(With 高爾基 underlined, I am not sure how to type the underline here.)</p>
<p>Will this not be a good practice?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-13T04:46:36.490Z
"I am not sure how to type the underline here." That's why (at least partly). We can't input it, so we can't use it. Now people have gotten used to not using it.
Betty
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-04-13T08:09:19.817Z
其实我一直觉得，为什么英文里写书名不用个类似书名号的东西，虽然英语里可以用斜体表示书名，但是在纯文本格式的文件里（比如txt）也显示不出来斜体啊……
Zhang
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-05-13T21:06:20.500Z
@Zhang 因為有大小寫字母，通常會用大寫來表示名字，書名，地名，等
Curiosity
<punctuation>
Why don't people use 專名號 to avoid ambiguity?
# Why don't people use 專名號 to avoid ambiguity?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-04-13)

For example, consider the following sentence:

大多數真核細胞有高爾基體。

For those who are unfamiliar with biology, he/she may not know if 高爾基體 should be understood as (高爾)(基體) or (高爾基)(體)。Two avoid confusion, it makes perfect sense to use 專名號 and write the sentence as

大多數真核細胞有高爾基體。(With 高爾基 underlined, I am not sure how to type the underline here.)

Will this not be a good practice?

**Tags:** punctuation
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: "I am not sure how to type the underline here." That's why (at least partly). We can't input it, so we can't use it. Now people have gotten used to not using it.  
> **username_2**: 其实我一直觉得，为什么英文里写书名不用个类似书名号的东西，虽然英语里可以用斜体表示书名，但是在纯文本格式的文件里（比如txt）也显示不出来斜体啊……  
> **username_3**: @Zhang 因為有大小寫字母，通常會用大寫來表示名字，書名，地名，等  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_4 on 2021-04-13. Score: 3

1. Proper name marks have largely fallen into disuse. That is because typesetting is difficult (as evidenced by your question) and that the text marked is usually understood by context.

   > 我們有時看見一些書籍、文章中，已不使用專名號。這是因為印刷時比較困難，在約定俗成的情況下，現在已多不使用，並非錯誤所致。([古今標點趣聞](https://www.chiculture.net/0609/html/a01/0609a01_16.html))
2. Your concern for clarity is valid. But using proper name marks may cause further confusion in the case of *eponyms*. A Golgi apparatus does not carry any material attribute of its discoverer. Logically, it is just an organelle that just so happens to be discovered by Golgi. We all have Golgi apparatuses – what does Golgi (the person) have to do materially with *our* Golgi apparatuses? That is also probably why certain eponyms are no longer capitalised in English: e.g., abelian, newtonian, quixotic etc. Therefore, if you indiscriminately underline `高爾基`, it may appear to some people that you are implying the apparatus *belongs* to Golgi (linguistically, attributive instead of genitive), much like `高爾基的帽子` (Golgi's hat).
3. I believe using parentheses also achieves clarity and is much more convenient (and commonplace) than using proper name marks.

   > 大多數真核細胞有高爾基體（Golgi apparatus）。
   >
   > 范德華力（van der Waals force）是一種電性引力，但它比化學鍵或共價鍵弱得多。
4. I however agree that proper name marks may be useful in the context of classical Chinese, especially when annotating names of people and states. We *may* not have enough historical knowledge to parse the sentence correctly. For example, you need to be very familiar with the given name of Confucius (丘) to parse the following without the help of proper name marks:

   > 孔子曰：「大道之行也，與三代之英，**丘**未之逮也，而有志焉。」《禮記》


---

### Answer by username_5 on 2021-05-15. Score: 1

**Because more structural particles appeared, 专名号 is almost useless in current Chinese, but it is really useful in old Chinese as known as 文言文 because it is of help to 断句.**

In modern Chinese, there are much more structural particles (such as"的""地""得") than those in old Chinese. It made 专名号 almost useless. For example:

> （谢道韫）即公（谢安）大兄无奕（谢奕）女，左将军王凝之妻也。
> [![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/N8xMD.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/N8xMD.png)
>
> ——《世说新语·言语》

(This sentence means Xie Daoyun is the daughter of Xie An's eldest brother Xie Yi and the wife of General Wang Ningzhi.)

If we do not put 专名号 under 王凝之, the readers may think this sentence means Xie Daoyun is Wang Ning's wife(王凝/之妻, wrong 断句), not Wang Ningzhi's wife(王凝之/妻), because "之" also means "的".

But if we translate it into current Chinese, it will become:

谢道韫是谢安**的**长兄谢奕**的**女儿，左将军王凝之**的**妻子。

Since there are more "的", its meaning is clearer. Everybody can understand it.

---

In your example, "高尔基" is a foreign word. 译名用字 are very special in Mandarin. These words like "尔""斯""基""特" are not common in today's Chinese and when they are together, they can only form proper nouns. There is not "基体" in everyday Chinese, and students studying biology will not misunderstand it because they can 断句 correctly.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thanks for the answer! "基体" actually makes sense in biology; see https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%9F%BA%E4%BD%93.  
> **username_6**: When I started to learn Chinese some 60 years ago, I remember the 專屬名詞,- personal, location and book names required to be identified with the vertical line to the right of the letters. I don't recall if it was called "引號". But the practice was ignored in the later days, except the old publications.  
> **username_5**: @Zuriel Yes, I saw it so I said it doesn't exist in "everyday" Mandarin.  
> **username_5**: @r13 I think it is just "专名号". It "用于人名、地名、朝代名等专名下面。"(from 《新华字典》（第12版）)  

---

