Template talk:ja-kanjitab

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Shinjitai vs Kyujitai etc[edit]

Why is it that this template does not handle both kyūjitai and shinjitai forms in the same way that the equivalent Chinese template handles both simplified and traditional forms?

The "etc" in the subject/headline refers to the process by which characters not in the Toyo kanji are more or less systematically replaced by similar looking or sounding Toyo characters. My favourite example being old 濠洲 vs new 豪州. — hippietrail 15:37, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

There is one profound difference: in (e.g.) Mandarin, both the simplified and traditional forms are in current use; current being say the last 1/2 century. In Japanese, the kyūjitai are of historical interest (as you note, sometimes quite interesting), but are not used in ordinary Japanese since ~1947. Certainly we'd eventually like to have entries for words that can be attested before then, and the hold-overs, but that is not the majority of the entries describing the current language. (Unlike Mandarin etc.) Robert Ullmann 16:33, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
But this is not true. I find them in use all the time. is particularly common and is the second choice offered by my IME for りゅう. Also it is very recent history. Only after world war II was shinjitai put in place. War era Japanese is of great interest in the west and without good coverage of kyujitai we are doing a disservice to people in need of a dictionary to help investigate writing of this era. Any we do already have some support for kyujitai, I have included kyujitai spellings myself in the past few years. I'm merely wondering why ja-kanjitab is not one of the places that takes kyujitai into account. — hippietrail 00:03, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I knew you would whine: I tried to make it clear: YES WE WANT TO COVER KYUJITAI. This is ONLY ABOUT WHY IT ISN'T IN KANJITAB for all entries to show both. Clear yet? In Mandarin one wants to be able to switch back and forth easily because they are both current (and not-"current" in no way means "ancient", it just means an effing half an effing century!) For example, the zh.wp has variant tabs to switch back and forth. The ja.wp does not, because it would be nonsense. (w:jp:濠洲 is redirected.)
{{zh-forms}} is set up to be helpful in showing both forms presently useful in Mandarin (et al) entries. kanjitab is set up to show the one form. (And not id'd as such, it is useful for kyūjitai entries too.) (and cf. {{ko-hanjatab}}, where of course there is only one form shown.)
I added the form reference into the entry. 濠洲 See? (:-) Robert Ullmann 11:59, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Heh I don't want to force anyone else to work on it. I'm working on it myself and want to do it right. Sorry but I had to revert your change to 濠洲 because that's not a case of kyujitai vs shinjjitai but another spelling reform phenomenon which I mentioned in my second paragraph. — hippietrail 13:16, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Don't waste time trying to "improve" this template: if you want to show the forms use {{ja-forms}}. And if your example wasn't what you were complaining about, then what were you complaining about? Or what is a proper example? There isn't anything to "fix" here. Robert Ullmann 12:00, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for being opinionated and stubborn and telling people what to do. Don't waste your time "helping" next time. JUST POINT TO THE OTHER TEMPLATE. Now I have to wonder when on earth simplified Chinese became a "ja-form" but that's a question for another talk page. — hippietrail 15:30, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I didn't realize that you were completely unaware of the other, which is part of the reason I couldn't figure out what you were complaining about. It is odd that {{ja-forms}} which shows all the forms is documented in WT:AC and not in WT:AJ, but then most of the uses are for the individual characters. Sorry. Robert Ullmann 16:05, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I coudn't figure out why you seemed to be being mean when I was trying to be friendly. — hippietrail 01:36, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


Since this is a Japanese template, wouldn't it make sense to automatically redirect to the Japanese section of each entry, similar to the way Template:term works? --Hikui87 20:26, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Links to Translingual[edit]

Most of our kanji are definitionless pages, instead having a def in the Translingual section. However, kanjitab specifies #Japanese, so generally a mouseover with popups over this template is completely unhelpful. What do you think about changing the link so that it doesn't specify any section? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 12:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Automatic detection[edit]

It is possible to automatically detect the characters with Lua probably without subtle difference in speed. It would be particularly useful when the user is auto-creating entries with a client-side code, e.g. a JavaScript tool, which affects the speed. --Z 06:23, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

See also[edit]

Template:kanji readings tab should also be under the “See also” section. 〜britannic124 (talk) 20:20, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

changes to kanjitab etc[edit]

@Eirikr, Wyang, Atitarev, Jamesjiao, TAKASUGI Shinji in no particular order, apologies if I left anyone out: some features I wrote into this template's module (Module:ja-kanjitab) may not have been brilliant ideas in the end, so feel free to remove or revise any of them. I won't be offended. I put a lot of thought into all of the changes I made but hindsight is clearer than foresight or nowsight or whatever. I did the grade 1,2../hyogaiji/jinmeiyo labels in imitation of other Japanese dictionaries that have little crosses or triangles next to the non-joyo kanji. Maybe it should be revised to look more like that. In the same vein, feel free to revise or remove any of the other code I've written. That's already the rule of wikis anyway, but I'm saying that on a personal level I won't be offended or upset. Haplogy () 01:55, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Sokuon parameter and category?[edit]

Could we create a parameter and category for sokuoned words that are similar to those for rendaku words? Any questions? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 05:01, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I support the creation of a category but I think that inclusions should be determined automatically. Nibiko (talk) 05:38, 31 October 2016 (UTC)


There is unaddressed confusion regarding the okurigana parameter: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Talk:%E5%B0%96%E9%BC%A0#kanjitab_readings Nibiko (talk) 03:32, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I guess that one benefit of this could be generating the correct sort key, but this wouldn't apply to terms that have non-okurigana kana. Nibiko (talk) 04:54, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Feature request: jukujikun readings[edit]

Something has been bothering me for a long time now, and it's the lack of ability to mark jukujikun, which are kun'yomi that are applied to multiple characters. See how the jukujikun are marked here in this entry in this dictionary: http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E5%A4%A7%E5%92%8C%E8%A8%80%E8%91%89 The current workaround that is generally being used is leaving the readings blank e.g. at 大和言葉. I think that we should at least mark them, instead of leaving them blank. As far as ideas go, one idea that I had was that a flag like "-" could be accepted as a mark that until a non-"-" argument is provided, all the kanji are a part of a jukujikun reading. Nibiko (talk) 16:22, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

I recall Eirikr wanting each reading to be marked as goon/kan'on/etc. Nibiko (talk) 15:09, 3 December 2016 (UTC)


I have seen r=y used in many words, but it's not described in the documentation. --Zalmoksis (talk) 14:35, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

It's explained just before the "Categorization" header. With the current state of the category including terms with ancestral rendaku and no instruction being given for discrimination hereupon, it might as well be determined just from the current data fed into ja-kanjitab, but restricting it to terms with rendaku in the immediate etymology would require a breakdown of the immediate etymology. Nibiko (talk) 04:12, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Kanjitab and listing words by kanji characters[edit]

I edited the kanjitab for 奪う according to the guidelines and now the word disappeared form the Category:Japanese terms spelled with 奪. Is it an error or have I missed some crucial point? Zalmoksis (talk) 21:23, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

@Zalmoksis: -- The {{ja-kanjitab}} character adds kanji with Jōyō readings to characters like Category:Japanese terms spelled with 奪 read as うば. Once created with the proper templates (I've just done so), that category page in turn adds the contained entries to more generic categories, such as Category:Japanese terms spelled with 奪.
HTH, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:29, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for help. However, I still seem to be missing some important knowledge: I saw the category page: Category:Japanese terms spelled with 蒙, so I created the page Category:Japanese terms spelled with 蒙 read as もう using the appropriate template. But although all the entries seem to have correct ja-kanjitab templates they still appear on the main page instead of the newly created page with particular pronunciation. Zalmoksis (talk) 14:45, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
@Zalmoksis: -- Aha, I think I see what you're running into. A given kanji will only be added to a category like Category:Japanese terms spelled with 蒙 read as もう if that reading is a Jōyō ("standard-use") reading. If it is a Hyōgai ("off-the-chart") reading (i.e. not a reading included in the table of readings used in the standard Japanese curriculum), the {{ja-kanjitab}} template will not add the character to that category.
To check the categorization for a given kanji-spelled entry, have a look a the bottom of the page. On the page, for instance, there is no listing for Category:Japanese terms spelled with 蒙 read as もう, since the reading is a Hyōgai reading. On the page, by contrast, there is a listing for Category:Japanese terms spelled with 奪 read as うば, since the uba- reading is part of the Jōyō standard. Kanji terms with Hyōgai readings are instead added to categories like Category:Japanese kanji with kan'yōon reading もう, as at the page.
Ultimately, since the reading for is Hyōgai, the Category:Japanese terms spelled with 蒙 read as もう page will never list anything, under our current implementation.
If you'd like to propose that Hyōgai readings are also considered for purposes of categorization, I'd suggest bringing up the topic at WT:BP, and pinging at least Wyang, as I think he's been the most involved in creating the data module framework used by these templates. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:46, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure it works exactly as you say. The following kanji is entirely hyōgai: Category:Japanese terms spelled with 姦, so it has not a single jōyō reading, but it has the reading subcategory working correctly. Isn't it rather, say, the fact the reading もう of 蒙 is kan’yōon that prevents from inclusion? Zalmoksis (talk) 20:58, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Walking through the code a bit, I found the relevant section. Have a look at Module:ja-kanjitab, and search the page for -- the basic flow is to only apply categories like Category:Japanese terms spelled with 蒙 read as もう for Jōyō, but for some reason, there's a list of exceptions to apply such categories to specific Hyōgai characters, and 姦 is one of them. It looks like @Erutuon and @suzukaze-c have worked on it most recently. Perhaps they can help elucidate what's going on? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:46, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
The list of hyougaiji for which "read as" categories will be added was started in this edit by @Haplology. I don't know the rationale for it. — Eru·tuon 22:59, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
^ this. —suzukaze (tc) 04:55, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Categorization mistakes caused by hyphens to show presence / lack of okurigana[edit]

I just noticed at (ume) that the template is incorrectly categorizing into Category:Japanese kanji with kun reading うめ-. Meanwhile, the expected Category:Japanese kanji with kun reading うめ (without the hyphen) doesn't exist, and doesn't have anything in it. Similarly, (hikari) is incorrectly added to Category:Japanese kanji with kun reading ひかり-, which sits alongside the orthogonal older and correctly named Category:Japanese kanji with kun reading ひかり.

Could someone have a look at this and fix things? The general expectation is that the category name should not include hyphens if the reading is for a single kanji without okurigana, like (hikari) or (sakura), etc. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:16, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@Eirikr: That is the work of {{ja-readings}}, not {{ja-kanjitab}}. —suzukaze (tc) 03:55, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Derp. Thank you. Moving. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:30, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

original reading of いっ[edit]

Is there any way to know if an  (いっ) (i') was いち or いつ before sound change? --Dine2016 (talk) 03:32, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Not that I'm aware of. @Shinji, are you aware of any such means? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 04:38, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
@Dine2016, Eirikr: I’d say it is always いち, because いつ is a reading used almost exclusively at the end of a word. The only exception is  (いつ) (itsuni) and I have confirmed that it is the only word on Daijisen that begins with 一 as いつ. The rest are いち or いっ.
There are several kanji whose kan'on is not used at the beginning of a word. is always にち and is always りき at the beginning of a word. (There may be exceptions though.) — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 05:06, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

kanji reading[edit]

I think kanji readings should be full morphemes, not just the part before the “okurigana point.” For example, 再び should be categorized as Category:Japanese terms spelled with 再 read as ふたたび, not just Category:Japanese terms spelled with 再 read as ふたた, in consistency with the official jōyō kanji list. --Dine2016 (talk) 10:41, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure I can agree. One consideration is that The Jōyō list targets JA speakers / readers, i.e. people who are assumed to already understand what okurigana are and how they work. Meanwhile, our target audience is English speakers / readers, who cannot be safely assumed to have any such knowledge.
Another consideration is that the proposed approach gets super complicated with inflecting terms. It sounds like this would imply that 見 would be under Category:Japanese terms spelled with 見 read as みる. What about conjugated forms? What about 見える? Similarly, this would imply that 良 would be under Category:Japanese terms spelled with 良 read as いい What about inflected forms like 良く? What about alternative "dictionary form" よい?
I think the motivation underlying the current system was to clarify what portion of the reading is "included" in the kanji, and what portion is explicitly spelled out in kana. In modern texts, 再び always has the び explicitly spelled out, and as such, the 再 kanji itself only covers the ふたた portion of the reading. If we state that 再 is read as ふたたび, that sensibly gives rise to the question of, what is the extra び for when the term is written out as 再び? Given that our readership has no presupplied familiarity with okurigana conventions, the proposed approach entails the risk that we wind up misinforming our users. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:57, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

yutōyomi vs k,o[edit]

Discussion moved from Template talk:ja-pron

@Eirikr Hi. I noticed that you are using |yomi=k,o in edits like 滋籐. This causes the kanjitab to look differently from pages using |yomi=y (like 湯桶): the former generates two tabs “kun’yomi” and “on’yomi”, while the latter generates a single tab “yutōyomi” spanning two columns.

Is such an effect desirable? If not, I see two ways to solve it:

  • Settle on a single editorial style: use either k,o or y, but not both.
  • Make the module generate consistent output (either “kun’yomi + on’yomi” or “yutōyomi”) regardless of the input style.

(I once attempted to keep some morphological information in the yomi codes, such as giving 大和言葉 the reading juku2,k2, reflecting the structure of the term as yamato + kotoba rather than yamato + koto + (ha >) ba. But I now doubt it, and think 大和言葉 should get just juku2,k,k, because things become much simpler if kanjitab deals only with written forms and kanji, and because it can be sometimes misleading to deduce morphological information from the kanji spelling (e.g. ateji usages like  () (とう) (mattō) and  (キリ) () (タン) (kirishitan)).)

--Dine2016 (talk) 02:50, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

@Dine2016 -- You're right to bring up 滋籐, I think I got to that one during a spate of surname and given-name edits, and with the wild variance in name readings, my head was firmly in the new yomi=x,y,z mode. I just changed that to yutōyomi for the time being. However, now that you call my attention to it, I'm on the fence as to which is better -- using yutō and jūbako, or breaking things down to explicit on and kun. @TAKASUGI Shinji, Suzukaze-c, Wyang, any others, do you have opinions on this?
Incidentally, for bigger compounds like at the 湯桶読み entry itself, I noticed that yomi=y2,k errors out. But then perhaps it's better anyway to explicitly show kun and on.
Your idea of yomi=juku2,k2 for 大和言葉 sounds like a good one, FWIW. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 16:24, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Some other questions: should 消しゴム be categorized as a kun'yomi term? Should 気に入る be categorized as a jūbakoyomi term? I prefer to use “written forms” rather than “terms” in the category names. “Terms” should be categorized according to 語種, not 読み. --Dine2016 (talk) 01:17, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Re: 消しゴム and other compounds with katakana, probably not.
Re: 気に入る and other phrases, these shouldn't have any entry-wide yomi category at all (though the component parts should have the proper yomi applied in {{ja-kanjitab}}, now that that is possible).
Re: terms vs. written forms, I have no strong opinions. Your point seems like a good one, so let's go with that. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 06:07, 15 September 2018 (UTC)