'Use 濕 for living things, 溼 for non-living things'? Ministry of Education refutes: Both characters are interchangeable!

📜 'Two Characters That Were Once One': A Historical Look Interestingly, these two characters were originally completely different in ancient times: '濕': Originally the name of a river; '溼': Was the character we mean today for 'damp, moist'. As the two characters evolved to have the same pronunciation (in later phonetic developments), ancient scholars often used '濕' to substitute for '溼' when writing. Over time, people became accustomed to this mixed usage, and dictionaries began listing them as variant characters, no longer strictly distinguishing between them. 🧐 Debunking Online Myths: 'Use 濕 for living things, 溼 for non-living things'? There's a popular saying online that '濕' should be used for living things (e.g., a baby's wet bottom), while '溼' is for non-living things (e.g., a wet rag). This is incorrect. The Ministry of Education has clearly stated that there is no distinction based on whether something is 'living or non-living,' and both characters can be used interchangeably in terms of meaning and application. If we followed this flawed logic, the term 'wetland' (溼地) would become contradictory because it contains living organisms. In summary, '溼' is the traditional form, and '濕' is the variant form; they are interchangeable. The next time you write, you don't need to worry about whether something is living or not. Just use whichever you prefer based on your habit. I never paid attention and just used them interchangeably, but there are always people who pop up saying which 'sh' sound should be used 🤔. Now you can tell those internet grammar police that in standard Taiwanese usage, '溼' and '濕' are interchangeable. It's what the Ministry of Education says~ If you have a problem, take it up with them~