Chinesischer Pilot / Chinese pilot / 中文试点 · Werkstattfassung 0.13.0 · 21.10.2026
Werkstattstand: muttersprachlich-fachliche Prüfung noch offen. Keine vollständig freigegebene chinesische Gesamtausgabe. / Work in progress: specialist native-language review pending; not a fully approved Chinese edition. / 试验稿：母语专业审读待定，非已全面审定的中文版。
The Chinese pilot investigates shared interpretive operations and the places where similar labels cover different ground in Chinese, German and English. It is not a mechanical translation of the Atlas. This workshop edition makes the developing texts visible while retaining explicit limits on evidence and equivalence.
23 authored Chinese pilot profiles, including two distinct candidate entries, twelve German-English comparison-window groups and six trilingual reading sequences. Links to existing German or English entries do not mean that Chinese drafts have been imported into the canonical catalogue.
0.8.0 · Deutsch / English / 中文
A question mark does not identify an interpretive operation. A passage may request information, invite assent or prepare an answer of its own. These are not three mutually exclusive boxes: communicative force and the organisation of a response can overlap. Each case therefore asks two separate questions: what does the question do here, and who supplies the response?
0.9.0 · Deutsch / English / 中文
Language may explicitly say that one thing is like another. It may make one domain intelligible through another. Or it may first present an image from which a feeling or topic unfolds. These descriptions open different questions for reading. They are neither three separate linguistic worlds nor a ready-made translation table for 比 and 兴. The Chinese materials are valuable precisely because they do more than confirm familiar categories.
0.10.0 · Deutsch / English / 中文
An allusion can ask for more than understanding words. A brief signal may send us to another text and invite a return with a changed understanding. The Chinese comparison reveals both the gain from this movement and its dependence on accessible background knowledge. This reading sequence is an argued analytical proposal, not a report of observed reader responses.
0.11.0 · Deutsch / English / 中文
Irony is not an automatic instruction to reverse every sentence. We distinguish the wording, the voice it represents and the stance made recoverable by context. Literature adds a further question: must the narrator speak ironically, or does criticism emerge when the account is read against other textual signals? This sequence investigates that boundary rather than silently extending the existing entry to every form of narrative irony.
0.12.0 · Deutsch / English / 中文
A word can name one thing while providing access to another. The decisive question is not what connection could be found, but which connection this utterance requires us to use. This sequence distinguishes an available relation, its referential use and the further associations it may invite. Comparing Chinese categories can expose the boundaries of our own without making those boundaries arbitrary.
0.13.0 · Deutsch / English / 中文
An utterance can recur without its situation remaining the same. Loss, a promise or a change of speaker may intervene between identical sentences. Repeated material within a word form, by contrast, may carry a language-specific function. This sequence asks two separate questions: what returns in discourse, and what is formed within a linguistic unit? The Chinese sources offer more than additional illustrations: they sharpen the question of which level an analysis concerns.
The texts use the existing source corpus. Classical practice, present-day terminology and historical theory remain separate evidential questions. An old example is not automatically a first attestation of a modern term. Suggested routes and resonance readings are Atlas analyses, not measured reader responses.
The additional books recommended for library access are not treated as already read. Private scans, complete page images, local paths and internal audit packages are not published here. New material remains explicitly provisional pending scholarly review.