Radical 95
traditional Chinese radical profound (U+2F5E), dark, gloomy, mysterious
Radical 95 or radical profound (玄部) meaning "dark" or "profound" is one of the 23 Kangxi radicals (214 radicals in total) composed of 5 strokes.
In the Kangxi Dictionary, there are only six characters (out of 49,030) to be found under this radical. In addition, the final dot stroke of the character in the Kangxi Dictionary was omitted (𤣥) to avoid using the same character in Kangxi Emperor's name 玄燁 (see naming taboo).
This radical is not used in Simplified Chinese dictionaries.
Evolution
Compound of 幺 ("thread") + 亠.
Derived characters
Variant forms
There is a design nuance in different printing typefaces for this radical character, akin to the differences found in radical 亠 and 幺. Traditionally, the first stroke is a vertical dot in printing typefaces, and the two turning strokes are broken into two respectively to adapt to the carving of movable type systems, and usually there is a gap between the third and the fourth strokes. Currently, in both Simplified Chinese and Traditional Chinese, the first stroke becomes a slant dot, and the discontinuous turning strokes are merged into one to imitate its handwriting form, though the traditional printing form is still widely used in Traditional Chinese publication. The traditional form remains standard in modern Japanese and Korean printing typefaces.
The difference of the upper part 亠 applies to both printing typefaces and handwriting forms; The difference of the lower part 幺 exists only in printing typefaces, not in any handwriting form.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Radical 95” as traditional Chinese radical profound (U+2F5E), dark, gloomy, mysterious. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as traditional Chinese radical profound (U+2F5E), dark, gloomy, mysterious. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 26, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q142984. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Radical 95”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Radical 95 primary sources, Radical 95 archive and Radical research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Radical 95”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Radical 95” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.