User talk:TAKASUGI Shinji

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


Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to one of the discussion rooms or ask me on my Talk page.

Did you know that Wiktionary can be adapted to fit your style? Go have a look at your personal preference page (nicknamed “PREFS”)! In particular, you can choose the option to show hidden categories, which will be of great help if you are looking for work to do.

Again, welcome!

RuakhTALK 06:10, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


Formatting of quotations and example sentences.[edit]

Moved to Talk:don't#Formatting of quotations and example sentences. - TAKASUGI Shinji 08:23, 2 January 2009 (UTC).


Hi there. An online Italian dictionary defines bu as a Japanese unit of length or area. I can't find this definition in any English form. Can you confirm it? SemperBlotto 09:08, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

See the following pages on Japanese Wikipedia:
  • Length: = 6 = 1.818 m
  • Area: = (6 尺)2 = 3.306 m2
  • Decimal: = 1/10
The decimal 分 can be used with other units, such as 3 寸 5 分 (3 inches 5 tenths = 3.5 inches) and 3 錢 5 分 (3 cents 5 tenths = 3.5 cents). — TAKASUGI Shinji 10:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


You know you don't have to add the interwiki links, we have a bot (User:Interwicket) that does it automatically :) — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 14:27, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I’m not sure whether it adds interwiki links to redirects, and I added such links myself. — TAKASUGI Shinji 05:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)


Hello. Please do not add usage notes as if they were part of the definitions. Usage notes may be placed in a separate "Usage notes" section (always plural) nested underneath the definitions at a level higher. For example, under ===Adverb=== you would use ====Usage notes====. --EncycloPetey 04:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I didn’t know that. — TAKASUGI Shinji 07:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

interwikis and templates[edit]

Please do not add interwiki links to templates. This goes against Wiktionary practice, in part because it severely hurts server performance to have these. --EncycloPetey 02:08, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

OK. — TAKASUGI Shinji 02:22, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Texas hold 'em[edit]

Names of games are usually closer to being proper nouns than common nouns. They do not have plural forms, are not countable, and are a name of a thing. It's in a fuzzy area, but for our purposes, I think it fits better under Proper noun. --EncycloPetey 04:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I just followed poker and hold'em. It is inconsistent to treat Texas hold 'em as a proper noun and the rest as nouns. — TAKASUGI Shinji 05:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
It's been a point of debate, and I've been actively researching the philosophy and linguistics behind the difference between proper and common nouns. I'm of the opinion that all names of games ought to be proper nouns, However, I haven't finished writing down my ideas (soon, I hope to finish), and there isn't community consensus one way or the other at the moment. You are correct to notice the inconsistency, but for the moment, games are in the grey area between the two types of nouns until the community agrees one way or the other on how to classify them. --EncycloPetey 05:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I know there is no clear boundary. I’ll wait for the community decision. I think, however, names of games are more like abstract nouns, just like baseball and basketball. — TAKASUGI Shinji 05:16, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
That's the other viewpoint. However, it gets fuzzy if one thinks of games as abstract common nouns, but languages as proper nouns. --EncycloPetey 05:23, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Is "Postposition" really a part of speech?[edit]

Hello TAKASUGI Shinji -- In this Tea Room discussion, I have questioned your treatment of "Postposition" as a separate part of speech with its own header. Respectfully -- WikiPedant 18:53, 25 September 2009 (UTC)


See my reply to your question about times on its talk page.--Brett 11:36, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

that's it in Japanese[edit]

Hi, I have some doubts about your edit. You replaced my translation: それで終わり with 以上. Do you have some reference? --Anatoli 03:42, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

それで終わり is too context-dependent. You must not be a native Japanese speaker, considering you don't find it strange. It can be used only when that means your story. It's okay as a translation in So, that's it? I thought there would be some more. 以上 is not a very good translation, though… - TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 11:32, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


Hello. Can you please check the Japanese translation of あたる at hit, please --Mat200 14:54, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

X-ray vision[edit]

Regarding your recent move of "x-ray vision" ro "X-ray vision," the term does sometimes appear with a lower-case "x." [1] 03:38, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I know. Check the article of x-ray vision. - TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 15:40, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

grammar question[edit]

Hi Shinji, sorry to bother you but I was wondering if I could ask a question about grammar: The category Category:Japanese adnominals claims that adnominals (連体詞) are often formed by adding -的 to another word, but I don't think so. I think -的 is really -的な, it only forms -な adjectives, and it is not an adnominal. For example, 最終的な is a -な adjective but 最終的 is just an abbreviated form of the same word, not a 連体詞 like あの, いわゆる or たいした. Do you agree? Thanks Haplology 11:11, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

You are right. I believe they are talking about words with -的 directly put before another noun, such as 根本的解決 (fundamental solution). However, grammatically speaking, they are rather nouns combined with another noun than adnominals, because you can't insert anything between them; you can't say *根本的すばらしい解決. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 13:02, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletions[edit]

You really do need to give a reason for these nominations. You're a native speaker so I suspect you're right, but it would be irresponsible for an admin to delete an entry without knowing why. --Mglovesfun (talk) 09:44, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I wrote it in Talk:超~神な, but I’m sorry I didn’t mention it when I put {{delete}} in those entries. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 10:19, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

one-night stand[edit]


Thanks for removing my previous Japanese translation but I'd appreciate a bit more active editing, it doesn't have to be fully idiomatic but a very close description would also do, IMHO (there could be cultural and usage differences). When I added やり逃げ originally, the meaning used in a manga was very close to "one-night stand" but I know it normally means "having sex with a woman and then going away". Since I am not a native speaker, I sometimes have to do some analysis and checking before adding a Japanese translation, I could use some guidance. You could also use the template {{qualifier}} to clarify the meaning or usage if a translation is only an approximation and there is no 100% equivalent. --Anatoli 05:35, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to mention. I added two Japanese translations, which seem to match closer the English meaning, although not used so frequently and not so idiomatic. --Anatoli 05:37, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
The two phrases you have added are correct. I didn’t add them myself when I edited the article, as they are not so idiomatic. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 05:44, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I might create English entries that match やり逃げ - wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, fuck and chuck. We already have hit it and quit it. :) --Anatoli 06:01, 22 August 2011 (UTC)


Hi. Can I nominate you for adminship? You'd be another useful one to have around. --Rockpilot 09:32, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much. So what I should do now is just waiting for Wiktionary:Administrators#Requests for administrator rights? — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 09:43, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
I thought you were an admin already. Rockpilot probably knows how to do it, you will just need to formally accept it on the vote page and make sure you accept emails in user preferences. --Anatoli 11:04, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi, TAKASUGI Shinji. Your vote has passed, you are an Admin. Please add your name to WT:Admin. Also, see Help:Sysop tools. —Stephen (Talk) 00:45, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you guys for the entire process of nomination. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 10:33, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

start button[edit]

start button, I made some edits which you may be interested in seeing.Lucifer 11:51, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Negrophobia, Afrophobia[edit]


Your Japanese translations on English entries you edit would be highly appreciated. :)

よろしくお願いします! --Anatoli (обсудить) 03:35, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Revised Hepburn transliteration[edit]


Please join the discussion if you can. --Anatoli (обсудить) 21:30, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


Just saw your edit under the Pronoun heading -- is sense 5 really distinct from sense 3, "内, 中: (Kansai) (informal) I, me (used by women and girls)"? -- Curious, Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 01:26, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Among the five senses, senses 1, 2, 4, 5 have no accent: /ɯ˩.tɕi˥/ while sense 3 (Kansai) has an accent on the first syllable: /ɯ˥.tɕi˩/. I don’t know from which sense sense 5 is derived, sense 1 or 3. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 02:09, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, that's interesting. I know very little about pitch accent and how it affects etymologies -- for instance, do pitches differ by region with any regularity, do they undergo any patterns of change over time, are they affected by euphony, etc. etc. Thank you also for reminding me to pay attention to pitch accent; I shall add this to entry pronunciations where I can. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 05:51, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
  • I've broken out the senses at by pronunciation as an experiment. Do you think this approach is acceptable? WT:AJA doesn't say anything about pitch accent or how to account for it. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 06:17, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
English entries may have several pronunciations, as our dictionary is spelling-dependant and not IPA-dependant. Just like them, having two pronunciations is not strong enough to separate the entry of うち. The pronoun うち of the Kansai dialect clearly shares the same etymology. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 07:41, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Apologies, I was unclear -- would you object to grouping under Pronunciation 1, Pronunciation 2, etc. within the same etyl? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 08:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, I wanted to say that we shouldn’t separate them. I prefer the previous version. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 15:40, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Okay. The main differences from the older version you linked to are: 1) I put the Kanji header at the top, which is where it belongs on single-kanji entries; 2) I formatted some of the compounds and the derived terms; 3) I added the etyl "From OJP"; and 4) I added the pronunciations -- one above the Noun header, one above the Pronoun header, based on WT:ELE and WT:AJA. So to make sure I fully understand you, do you mean you prefer not having the pronunciations at all? Or not marking the pitch, so both have the same pitch-less IPA? The current format at 内#Japanese has the noun and pronoun under the same etyl. We could put pronunciations all in one place, but that makes it harder to tell which pitch goes with which sense... -- Cheers, Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 20:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Your addition is all right. I just don’t want to separate two senses. I have added pronunciations to うち. What do you think about that? — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 23:47, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Your edit looks good to me too, at least for small pages like うち where everything fits on one screen. I don't know if it would work so well on longer pages, where the user would have to scroll up to see the pronunciation, then scroll back down to find the sense that matched the pronunciation.
Incidentally, our talk here prompted me to ask a question over in the Grease Pit, and that prompted a bit of a discussion, now at Wiktionary:Grease_pit#Handling_sense-specific_pronunciations_under_a_single_etyl. -- Cheers, Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 00:01, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Q about entry とも[edit]

This looks like SOP to me; what's your perspective? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 23:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

That is a single word. See (goo dictionary). — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 01:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I'd missed that this was pointing to a single-kanji entry. I'll reformat accordingly. -- Cheers, Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 02:51, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Q about entry 我が[edit]

This one too. SOP in your view? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 23:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

That is also a single word in modern Japanese. You can’t use wa alone. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 01:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm not sure I agree with your reasoning, as wa ga is clearly wa + particle ga, and one cannot use ga alone, yet it's still treated as a separate word with its own etymology and usage. That said, I do now see this listed as a 連語 in the two JA-JA dictionaries I have to hand. I'll add the etymology and a usage note. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 02:49, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
The alternative spelling of 我が is , which is also pronounced わが - also 吾が and . I don't know if 我が can be broken up into parts, I think it's one word and is not a particle here but part of the word but I don't have a source to confirm it. is another reading of and but they mean something else. --Anatoli (обсудить) 03:12, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
The presence of a reading for a kanji does not necessarily say anything definitive, given the flexibility of Japanese spelling; for instance, 散り (chiri) can be spelled , but the unwritten in the latter spelling is still the conjugated verbal ending. I'm looking at Shogakukan and Daijirin right now; Shogakukan states that the in 我が is the particle (Daijirin doesn't say anything either way, but then Daijirin tends not to give any etymologies at all), and both give both 我が and 吾が as alternative spellings (i.e., identical in meaning). If you have a source stating otherwise, I'm all ears.  :)
That said, I'm happy for the entry to stand as a single-term lemma. (wa) appears to have been a productive term in old Japanese that has become fossilized in modern Japanese, existing solely on conjunction with particle . I have reworked the entry to say as much, explaining the derivation in the etymology section. Please have a look and make any edits as you see fit. -- Cheers, Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 03:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Etymologically speaking, it is clearly wa + ga, but as I said, it is a single word in modern Japanese. You cannot replace wa or ga with another word. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 03:55, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I have a suspicion, suspicion only, that is not the usual Japanese "ga" particle but a borrowing from the Middle Chinese with the "sense" of (possession). sounds strikingly similar to Cantonese (ge3) - a possessive marker and Japanese 我が家 may be derived from a version of Chinese, which gacve rise to Cantonese 我嘅家. Worth exploring this option? Character is not used in standard Mandarin and the original possessive character may not be the same in the Middle Chinese. --Anatoli (обсудить) 04:46, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
The particle was originally a possessive marker, as in 君代. I don’t know whether it is from Cantonese, but I think that is very unlikely. Cantonese must not have had an influence to Japanese then, as both languages were equally peripheral, the northern Chinese being central. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:03, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I only made a Cantonese example as it is too related to Middle Chinese, like Mandarin. Some features are preserved in Cantonese better than others from Classical or Middle Chinese and verbs like 走 and 食 are used the same way as Japanese 走る or 食べる, whereas modern Mandarin uses 跑 and 吃 instead. Phonetically it's easier to link Cantonese to Japanese, than Mandarin to Japanese since Cantonese has preserved final consonants. As for possessive marker, Mandarin uses 的 or classical 之, which can't be linked to Japanese "が" at all but with 嘅, it is a remote possibility but not direct, since it is a modern, not a Classical particle. --Anatoli (обсудить) 06:28, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I know Cantonese preserves Classical Chinese words better than Mandarin. That is a typical center/periphery distribution. And it is possible が came from Chinese, because 我家 seems redundant compared to Korean, in which you say 우리 집, without a possessive marker. But 嘅 is a complicated character with the radical 口, which means it is pretty new and dialectical. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:47, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

A few things:

  1. Takasugi-san, I realize now that I had misunderstood your first reply to me. I apologize for my confusion.
    Thank you for fixing the romanizations for 我が家 (wagaya) on the 我が page. Are the わがえ and わがいえ readings similarly set phrases? Should these be romanized as wagae and wagaie? Or, as waga e and waga ie?
  2. Anatoli, interesting theory. However, given the very stark typological differences between the Japonic and Sinic language groupings, that borrowing strikes me as perhaps unlikely -- borrowing a word for a noun or verb is not that unusual, but borrowing a word that serves a purely grammatical function seems to be much less common, at least in what I've read so far. As Takasugi-san notes, が was a possessive marker between two nouns in OJP, so any such borrowing would have had to have occurred quite some time ago, and considering how being on the Japanese islands would have isolated speakers of OJP and even earlier forms of Japanese from speakers of Chinese, the borrowing would presumably have to be even earlier than the Yayoi migration from the mainland. However, my impression from historical reading is that Chinese speakers had less contact with the northern ethnic groups the further back in time you go. Still, it's certainly worth looking into.  :)
  3. Takasugi-san, the 우리 (uri) entry also gives the abbreviated form (ul). I'm not as familiar with Korean as I'd like to be, but I wonder if the full 우리 (uri) form is not in fact a compound of (ul) + (i), the subject particle similar to Japanese が, as given at 이#Etymology_5. (Incidentally, Korean also has (ga) as a subject particle for use after vowels, but I do recall reading that this appeared in Middle Korean and may have been adopted by influence from Japanese, or possibly from a different Korean dialect.) If 우리 (uri) is a compound of (ul) + (i), then we have a parallel construction in both languages, and also an explanation for the apparent lack of a particle after the 우리 (uri) in modern KO 우리 (uri) (jip) -- i.e., there actually is a particle, (i), only it's being used as a genitive / possessive marker between two nouns, much like OJP . This potential archaic use of (i) is something I'm currently looking into.
Moreover, there is a demonstrable common sound shift between KO and JA, as seen in hanja / kanji, where hanja readings ending in ("L") have kanji readings ending in (tsu) or (chi); if this sound correspondence extends to older borrowings / cognates, then KO (ul) may in fact be cognate with JA うち (uchi).

Anyway, fun discussion, many thanks to you both. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 19:34, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

As for 我が家, わがや is a single word in modern Japanese because it has a single-word accent (HLL+L) and you cannot insert a pause, while わがいえ is a combination of わが and いえ because it has a two-word accent (HL+LH+L) and you can insert a pause. I have never heard わがえ as it is archaic and I think we can’t judge in modern Japanese.
As for the Japanese influence on Korean, I also think 가 may have been borrowed from Japanese. It appeared in Korean really late, perhaps after the Japanese invasions of Korea (1592–1598), and the paradigm 가/이 is unusual compared to 를/을, 로/으로, 와/과, etc., and Korean needed a new nominative marker at the moment as 이 after a vowel disappeared by assimilation or contraction (나이 → 내, 너이 → 네, etc.). — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 01:18, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Category:Korean terms derived from Proto-Altaic[edit]

From what I heard, the "Altaic theory" or whatever has lost support right? Perhaps there is something you could do with these etymologies? User: PalkiaX50 talk to meh 12:57, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Interesting. Do you have any authors I could follow up on? I'm currently working through Ho-Min Sohn's The Korean Language, in which Sohn describes the Altaic theory as the most likely of several alternatives. But then again, the book was published in 1999, and later research no doubt has something more to say. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 21:24, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
The Altaic theory may be most likely but is not proven yet. The problem is that the current entry of explains its etymology as if that were proven. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 09:04, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Aha, thank you for the explanation. The etymology at could certainly use some qualifying words. I'll edit the etym shortly; have a look and make any changes as you all see fit. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:19, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

IPA dots and Japanese "syllables"[edit]

Hello Takasugi-san --

I just saw your edit here on the セックス page, and have a question. I had understood that the IPA dots were used in Japanese phonemics to mark morae. Given that Japanese is not syllabic but rather moraic, this made sense. But perhaps what I learned was in error? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 08:44, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

There may be some linguists who use dots to separate morae. As you know, syllables are not so important as morae in Japanese. In IPA, however, dots are used to separate syllables, and because we are making a multilingual dictionary, we should follow the international convention. We sometimes see /n̩/ with the syllabic diacritic (U+0329) for ん, but it is also incorrect as ん forms not a syllable but a mora. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:41, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
I understand your concerns about multilinguality, but I also note that the goal is to present each language's entries accurately. Since Japanese is not syllabic, then marking syllables is misleading. I also note variant usage on the w:Japanese_phonology page, with dot notation used to mark syllables in phonetic transcriptions in the w:Japanese_phonology#Moraic_obstruent section, but also some instances of morae marking in phonemic transcription in the w:Japanese_phonology#Vowels section, and in the w:Japanese_phonology#Phonotactics section. I'll check my resources again. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 09:40, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
Syllables do exist in Japanese; they are just less important than morae. In addition, separating syllables by dots is clear enough to know morae, because a short vowel forms a mora, a long vowel forms two morae, and a coda forms a mora. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 04:19, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Itrenok, Neiser, Numak, Ash Core[edit]

Hi, TAKASUGI Shinji,

On Wiktionary:Translation requests, User:Lo Ximiendo would like to have the English tranlation of these 4 items (if you have time to do it).

진룡 이트레녹:
바칼님의 말씀과는 다르게 완전 풋내기들인데?
흑룡 네이저:
고요한 암흑 속에 평안이 깃들지니, 그대들도 이곳에서. 영원한 안식을 구할 수 있도록 세심하게 도와드리지요.
금룡 느마우그:
여기까지 오신 당신들의 능력을 인정하는 바, 다소 예의에 어긋난 대접을 해드림을 용서바랍니다.
화룡 애쉬코어:
으하하하! 기고만장들 하시군!! 싸울 맛이 좀 나겠는데!

I think it is dialog from a video game. If it is too much trouble, please do not worry about it. —Stephen (Talk) 14:52, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

아버진 and 아줌만[edit]

Could you take a look at these? It seems to me that these should be "form of" entries — or maybe that they shouldn't even exist.

Thanks in advance,
RuakhTALK 15:19, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

We haven’t had an article of , a colloquial topic marker used after a vowel in place of the standard . See the Korean version or the French version. ㄴ is a particle and is not a part of a word. I’d like to speedy-delete them if you think it is okay. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 02:45, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
I disagree. (n) is not very productive, as far as I know, and entries like (nae) and (nan) are useful. They demonstrate how words can be merged with particles in Korean. Cf. the French du (=de + le). --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:55, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
They are productive in casual speech, like 엔 (← 에는), 에선 (← 에서는), 보단 (← 보다는). — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 02:59, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
If there were too many of these, perhaps a redirect to the entry without the particle? I don't expect a flood of such entries, anyway. The entry explains what it is and how it's formed, so I don't see any problem even if they are kept as are. One important argument is that the word is merged with the particle. You can't simply remove it to get to the lemma form. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:12, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
It may be useful to have combinations of function words and ㄴ: 난 (← 나는), 넌 (← 너는), 전 (← 저는), 건 (← 거는), 엔 (← 에는), 에선 (← 에서는), 보단 (← 보다는), -긴 (-기는), etc, but not this case, I think. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 03:36, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
We do have gonna, gotta, helluva, must've, we're, etc. They are colloquial merged forms. You don't have to create those forms NOW but why delete what is there already? People with low or no knowledge of Korean will have trouble finding 아버진 (abeojin) or 아줌만 (ajumman) in any dictionary. We should help, not make their studies/work harder. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:47, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
We have gonna, gotta, etc. because they are fused enough and their number is limited, while we have decided not to have forms with ’s except one’s, for the exactly opposite reasons. The article of 아버진 will in fact help readers understand its construction, but it is still a sum of parts. I am reluctant to continue creating pages like 아빤 (아빠 + ), 엄만 (엄마 + ), etc. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 07:14, 30 August 2012 (UTC)



You might be interested in this discussion. Wiktionary:Requests_for_verification#の#Mandarin. Although I find it interesting that Japanese characters and symbols are popular in some Chinese speaking areas, I think the symbol can't be qualified as Mandarin or any Chinese dialect, even non-standard. Please join if you have anything to say about it. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:37, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

竜涎香 vs 龍涎香[edit]


What is the preferred title for an article on ambergris in Japanese? Is there still preference to use kyūjitai in some cases in Japan? What are they? I see even the Chinese Heilongjiang (in Chinese: 黑龍江 / 黑龙江) province is called 黒竜江 in Japanese where the first two characters are Japanese-specific. I'm asking because I tried to rename and global replace 龍涎香 for 竜涎香 on the Japanese Wikipedia and the change got reverted. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:45, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

They are interchangeable, and according to Google 龍涎香 is more common. Although 竜 is the simplified character, there are many cases where 龍 is used instead. As for the renaming, Japanese Wikipedia usually requests a discussion before renaming. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 05:28, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. It seems that simplification is not strictly and always followed in Japan. I also noticed that is probably more common than . As for the Google hits, 龍涎香 is also the Chinese spelling, no wonder there's more (I don't think you can restrict the search by language any more, unless you add a Japanese character into the search). I have searched using "龍涎香" and still got more. So, you're right, thanks again. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:36, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
I surely added a Japanese character when I searched them. The simplification is almost always followed; exceptions include , 欠缺, 證券, and family names. 篭 is an unofficial character and 籠 is recommended. ([2], [3]) — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 00:23, 4 October 2012 (UTC)


Could you take a quick look at Special:Contributions/Mrefsnes, and make sure they're on the up-and-up? (I don't think you need to look at every single one; just at three or four or so, to get an idea.)

Thanks in advance!
RuakhTALK 18:07, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

No problem. They are all correct. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! —RuakhTALK 11:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

を vs. は[edit]

Hello. Is this sentence correct: 私は日本語を話せません? And what about these [4]? Should there be を or は? Maro 14:55, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Both are correct, but using は is better. In the sentence 私は日本語を話せません, only 私 is a topic, while in 私は日本語は話せません, both 私 and 日本語 are topics.
  1. What language do you not speak? — I don’t speak Japanese. 私は日本語を話せません。
  2. Do you speak Japanese? — No, I don’t speak Japanese. 私は日本語は話せません。
The dialog 1 is possible but weird. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 15:36, 13 October 2012 (UTC)



この議論参加しませんか。 --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 22:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

FWOTD focus week[edit]

Hi! We're just starting a focus week for the Foreign Word of the Day on terms derived from German, and I was wondering if you could help to translate some of the quotes on featured pages. Specifically, アルバイト needs a translation of a book title, and I would also appreciate it if you could check my translation of the French at vasistas (my French was never any good, now it's worse than my other Romance languages). Thank you! —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 08:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)


Hi Shinji, would you be able to have a look at the conversation on this talkpage? I am not able to find the pronunciation this user mentioned in any of the Ja-Ja dictionaries. Are you able to confirm whether it's right or the song simply used the wrong kanji characters? JamesjiaoTC 20:57, 13 January 2013 (UTC)


Is that really obsolete? Or perhaps just archaic? My understanding of the context labels here might be a bit muddled -- I thought "obsolete" means that the term isn't used, and has probably been replaced by another term. google:"バックシャン" -wiki -wiktionary -wapedia -hatena -weblio -kotobank still generates a respectable number of hits, with apparently relevant hits even from Google Images showing up. Was this term a fad word that has since gone out of vogue? If so, do you have any rough dates for when this was more 流行っている? If this term has been replaced, do you know by what? TIA, -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 17:35, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Most of the Google hits seem shop names. I don’t know when exactly, but the word was completely out of fashion in the 1980s. Today you could probably use 後ろ美人, 後姿美人, 見返りブス, etc. but none of them seems popular according to Google. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 01:54, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the detail! Okay then, I suspect this should be flagged as {{dated}} instead of {{obsolete}}, with maybe a note in the etym section or a usage note explaining that this term is, as you put it well, "out of fashion". Would that be okay with you? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 19:03, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


Moved to Talk:お父さん. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 09:02, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

これらの etc. at Template:Japanese demonstratives[edit]

I'm curious; これらの seems to decompose into これら + の in a way that この clearly doesn't (at least, not in modern JA). Moreover, I can find no other JA-JA dictionary that lists これらの (other than some medical dictionaries, which list it as alt for コレラの, i.e. choleric), and the only JA-EN dictionary I can find that lists it is Kenkyusha.

Then again, perhaps you mean only that we should have entries for これらの etc., even if they are sum-of-parts, in order to have clear translation targets for EN terms like these and those? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:01, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

They are not sums of parts. For example, この and これの are clearly different, and これらの is a plural form of the former, not of the latter.
Determiner Pronoun
this problem
the problem of this
these problems
the problem of these
* Possible but easily misunderstood.
There is no good way to say “the problem of these” in Japanese. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 02:17, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
微妙ですね。 I had never even considered "the problem of these". Understood, thank you. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 21:10, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Stripping extra info from Japanese romaji[edit]


Please join the discussion Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2013/February#Stripping_extra_info_from_Japanese_romaji, if you can. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:01, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Particles in romaji[edit]

Heya, just saw your changes to itsu mo. Particles in romaji are written separately, even for set phrases, so I re-added the spaces. C.f. tsune > tsune ni, itsu > itsu mo, kore > kore ga. It's a bit like how articles are used in English, with the space between. I know some analyses prefer a more synthetic and enclitic approach, but broadly, in almost all non-high-academia works I've seen that describe romaji use, particles are spelled with a space before the preceding term. Cheers, -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 21:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Answered at Talk:いつも. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:55, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

千乗の国#Related terms[edit]

Hello again Takasugi-san --

I can find dictionary listings for 万乗の君 (ばんじょうのきみ) and 万乗の主 (ばんじょうのあるじ, ばんじょうのしゅ), but I cannot find any dictionary listings for 万乗の国 (ばんじょうのくに) or 百乗の国 (ひゃくじょうのくに). Are these other terms classical idioms, or just derivations by extension from 千乗の国? Or are they perhaps modern idioms or set phrases? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 02:10, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

They are found in:
  • s:zh:四書章句集註/孟子集注卷一:
  • s:zh:管子/第73篇國蓄:
千乗の国 may be considered a sum of parts. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 15:41, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the citations. Do these terms have any similar uses in Japanese?
千乗の国 is SOP for the meaning "nation of a thousand chariots", but the extended meaning of "medium-sized state" is not immediately obvious from the constituent parts of the term. If the only meaning were "nation of a thosand chariots", then I think we probably wouldn't have bothered listing this as it would not be an integral term.
Cheers, -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 16:12, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Etym for 矛盾[edit]

I noticed you used a lang code of lzh over at 千乗の国. Would that be the appropriate etyl code to use at 矛盾? Or would Middle Chinese suffice? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 02:13, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Kanji pronunciations are ultimately from Middle Chinese but vocabulary and grammar are from Classical Chinese. Japanese learned Chinese primarily by reading classics. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 15:41, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

vote related to Romanization of Japanese[edit]

Hi, maybe you often check the votes page, but just to be sure you know, I just wanted to tell you about this vote Wiktionary:Votes#Japanese_Romaji_romanization_-_format_and_content starting soon. As some background, there was a discussion recently about this issue on the Beer Parlour here Wiktionary:Beer_parlour#Stripping_extra_info_from_Japanese_romaji and then there was a discussion at the Grease Pit here Wiktionary:Grease_pit/2013/March#Simplification_of_romaji_entries. Thanks --Haplology (talk) 15:29, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Removal of 形容動詞 from 妖怪#Japanese[edit]


I'm curious why you removed the ===Adjectival noun=== section from 妖怪#Japanese. Shogakukan's Kokugo Dai Jiten lists the second sense of this term with a 形容動詞 POS. Poking around google books:"妖怪な" suggests that this usage might be limited, but I do see what appear to be relevant hits, like "妖怪な表情" or "妖怪な男".

Curious, -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 15:35, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

OK, I partially reverted my edit. I checked the Goo Dictionary before my edit and I thought the adjectival noun was inexistant. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 15:55, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Okay, thank you. The adjectival use certainly seems less common.
FWIW, Shogakukan's third sense is given as 「災い危険。」 I need to get to work now, however, so I don't have time to research this use.
Cheers, -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 16:25, 14 May 2013 (UTC)


Takasugi-san, could you see if the Japanese words in the etymology of seitan are right or not? North American IPs have changed them around a couple of times in the entry's relatively short history. - -sche (discuss) 16:23, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

The last modification by Eirikr is correct according to the Japanese Wikipedia. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 02:09, 17 June 2013 (UTC)


Hi Shinji,

My small pocket Korean dictionary has two meanings for 찾다 - look for and find. They are almost opposites in English. Are you able to add some info to the entry and add the Korean translation at find, please? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I have added notes. Is it clear now? — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 12:38, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
That's better, thank you very much. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 13:47, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Appendix:Korean Swadesh list[edit]


Do yo mind checking the recent edits by a new user, please? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 13:36, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I have modified several entries. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 15:18, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I noticed that the editor used pronouns in the wrong form, which made me suspicious about the rest of their edits. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:31, 4 August 2013 (UTC)



You might be interested in this discussion: Wiktionary:Requests_for_deletion#二、三. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 07:31, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I replied there. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:29, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

eat pussy translation[edit]


I know "おまんこをなめる" sounds vulgar but I thought it would a more appropriate translation than "クンニする". Perhaps both should be there? I don't think "おまんこをなめる" is very idiomatic either. Please let me know. Is there a vulgar expression? Also, する verbs are linked to lemma and する is displayed using alt=. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:23, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

The former is not idiomatic. The latter is used also in porns, and I don’t find any problem as a translation. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 00:51, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
OK, thanks. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:56, 9 September 2013 (UTC)


At Wiktionary:Requests for verification#, you mentioned that this is an ancient name of a bright star. Would you be willing to add that sense? I don't want to close the discussion while that's left hanging.

Thanks in advance!
RuakhTALK 06:02, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

You can find 韓 in 中国の星座リスト, but I cannot find it on the star map of the site and I cannot determine which star it corresponds to today. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 16:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
According to my research, the anonymous IP editor wasn't too far off with "Zeta" after all (I was the one who added the RFV:Sense link to the article originally. It turns out that the modern name of the star is Zeta Ophiuchi. I'll add that sense with some reference citations shortly. Nice to have this mystery solved! :) Bumm13 (talk) 03:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Transliteration of [edit]


How are you? How should be transliterated according to w:Revised Romanization of Korean? I think it's "gapt", not "gaps" but "gaps-" when followed by a vowel. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 06:42, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Do you mean the transliteration and not the transcription? If so, 값 is always gabs. If you mean the latter, which is used here on Wiktionary, it’s rather phonetic.
  • gap
  • 값이 gapsi
  • 값은 gapseun
TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 12:02, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, Shinji and sorry for taking too long to get back to you. User:Kephir has enhanced and finally fixed the transliteration module: Module:ko-translit. See our test cases at Module:ko-translit/testcases (also talk page). The transliteration is based on w:Revised Romanization of Korean (not always phonetic) and uses "-" as a syllable separator. It's now added to Module:languages and all Korean translations without manual transliteration will be transliterated automatically. Korean templates could be enhanced to use this module. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:15, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
I commented at Module talk:ko-translit/testcases. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:22, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. I've answered you there. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 06:47, 24 September 2013 (UTC)



What do do you think about Wiktionary:Requests_for_deletion#足の指? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:41, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

"measure word", "counter" and "classifier" - headers[edit]


You might be interested in this topic: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2013/November#Measure_word. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:42, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Make Korean 하다-verb entries in the verbal nouns, similar to Japanese する-verbs[edit]


Do you think it's a good idea - see Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2014/January#Korean 하다-verbs? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:04, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I replied there. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 00:48, 7 January 2014 (UTC)


Hi Shinji,

I would like to continue the work on Korean transliteration but I could use your help there. Not sure why the work has stopped Kephir (talkcontribs) probably thinks we have disagreements or he has lost interest. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 22:22, 8 January 2014 (UTC)



Do you mind quality checking the conjugation table, please? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:30, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

They are all right except for the informal non-polite honorific imperative 지내셔 (jinaesyeo), which doesn’t exist. In fact no verb has such a form. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 07:24, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. That means other verbs are incorrect as well, e.g. 나타내다? I'm not familiar with all Korean verb forms yet, copied the template call from another entry. Should this be "jinaeya", by any chance? sorry can't type in Korean right now. Wyang (talkcontribs) has corrected a mistransliteration of 서 from "ya" to "seo" in Template:ko-conj-verb. Could you check the form in Template:ko-conj-verb, please? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 09:39, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
The template only non-exhaustively lists some grammatically valid constructions, some of which may be logically incorrect (eg. the example above) or weird-sounding in real life. Wyang (talk) 11:25, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
I don't know enough Korean grammar to make a good suggestion but do you guys have any? There's a piece of incorrect information there. Users who work on Template:ko-conj-verb are no longer active. What should we do? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:53, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

WT:RFD archival[edit]

Hello Takasugi Shinji. Re this greatly appreciated edit of yours, could you point me to the place where those discussions are archived, please? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 02:13, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

In the discussion page of each entry, such as Talk:I don't speak Russian. I’m currently copying the discussions, so wait for several minutes. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 02:16, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Oh yes, I see. Thanks, both for the answer and for the valuable clutter-clearing work. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 02:45, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


Hi, could I ask a favor? If you delete a page, please do not also erase from Wiktionary any citations that it contained. We have a namespace where those can be kept independent of any entry. Sometimes it is possible to find additional citations later, in support of a definition. DAVilla 09:11, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Did I delete a citation? If so, it is my fault. I didn’t have an intention to do so. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 04:21, 9 February 2014 (UTC)



Could you check/fix some of the Japanese translations at prime, please, specifically the verb sections if it's OK with you? If translations are SOP, you can do like this: 下塗りをする (shitanuri o suru) (just an example) or let me know and I'll wikify those. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:36, 12 March 2014 (UTC)



Could we label it somehow as a grammatical or historical honorific? Perhaps, the same for ご飯, おにぎり, お巡り? Also pinging @Eirikr:, if he's interested. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 06:10, 8 April 2014 (UTC)


this. --kc_kennylau (talk) 14:29, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Just a click error. Canceled 18 seconds later: [5]. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 01:20, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Pitch accent on 朝鮮[edit]


I couldn't find a Japanese sound recording for 朝鮮. What's the pitch accent pattern? In the Japanese Wiktionary, there's "ちょ↗ーせ↘ん". Is it the same as {{ja-pron|ちょうせん|acc=3|y=on}} - 中高型? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:13, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Also, ソウル seems to be 頭高型 (for all senses) but is it [so̞ːɾ̠ɯᵝ] or [so̞ɯᵝɾ̠ɯᵝ]? If I use automatic IPA it would be the former but it sounds like the latter and the current IPA shows /souru/. CC: @Wyang:. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:22, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Yes, 朝鮮 has an accent fall on the third mora せ. The lowering of the first mora is not clear if the second mora is ー, ん or っ.
As for ソウル, I pronounce it as ソウル, not ソール, but the difference is hard to detect. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 10:02, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. I have updated ソウル. If it's pronounced [so̞ɯᵝɾ̠ɯᵝ], then it could be added to Category:Japanese words with nonphonetic spellings? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 06:27, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
I might be misunderstanding what you say but it is a phonetic spelling. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 13:15, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
I haven't added the category yet. By the current rules, which are also used by the transliteration module, any お row + う is transliterated as "ō", unless, they belong to different morphemes, like 小馬 (こ.うま) or it's a verb ending - as in 思う. If ソウル is pronounced "Souru", not "Sōru", then it must be an exception, unlike other borrowings with o+u, like ノウハウ, which is pronounced "nōhau". The category name is misleading, though, it should be something with "irregular pronunciations" like Category:Russian terms with irregular pronunciations. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 15:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
ノウハウ is nouhau, not nōhau. Katakana words require for a long vowel. Rather, オウ pronounced as オー is irregular, such as ボウリング, which is commonly pronounced as bōringu rather than bouringu. The following words are also interesting: ゲイ (gei) vs. ゲーム (gēmu), ペイ (pei) vs. ページ (pēji). — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 15:42, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
According to NHK 日本語発音アクセント辞典 (omitting the pitch accent here) ノウハウ is pronounced ノーハウ, same with ボウリング pronounced ボーリング, for ソウル (only gives the "soul music" sense) pronounced ソウル. The audio recordings confirm these pronunciations, they are quite clear. Even if we transliterate ノウハウ as "nouhau" and ボウリング as bouringu, the question is, what is considered a regular pronunciation (not transliteration) for katakana オウ - long "ō" or "ou"? Also pinging @Eirikr:, @Wyang: --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:08, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
I pronounce ノウハウ as nouhau. ノーハウ is something like the old-fashioned デー for D instead of the modern ディー… — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 00:18, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, we can always add multiple pronunciations, despite what NHK or other dictionaries say or prescribe. My question remains unanswered - for katakana words (loanwords), do we consider ō or ou the standard regular pronunciation of "オウ"? Are they both standard regular? If not, then, which one is irregular. Obviously "オウ" rather than "オー" is meant to render "ou" in foreign languages but it seems that it's not always working. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:05, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
I have already said that オウ pronounced as オー is irregular. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 13:32, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Some Korean words[edit]


I've got some questions about Korean. The resources I currently have only misled me.

  1. Does 바꿔하다 mean "put through" (telephone)? What are other meanings?
  2. Does 음료수 mean any beverage or only alcoholic?
  3. Does 어서 오세요 literally mean "come quickly"? Does it merit an entry or its more formal form?
  4. Does 인분 also mean "portion"? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 07:58, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  1. I’m not sure what 바꿔하다 means. Isn’t it the same as 바꾸다?
  2. 음료수 means soft drinks such as coke and soda.
  3. Shop clerks say 어서 오세요 to possible customers outside of the shop meaning "welcome, please come in."
  4. 인분 (人分) is a counter meaning a portion for one person, usually a food.
TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 14:58, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you! Sorry, I've come across 바꿔주세요 - pls. put me through (to) --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:48, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
바꿔 주세요 = 바꾸다 ("to change") + 주다 (auxiliary of beneficiary, "for me") + -세요 (honorific polite informal imperative), i.e. "please change." — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 04:45, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Two types of 'gana[edit]

Hi, if you have a chance do you think you could make entries for 合略仮名 and 住基仮名? I noticed them on a wanted list and with my current limited level of Japanese knowledge and a miserable (practically nonexistent AFAICT) amount of English google results I can't do much about them. Thanks. User: PalkiaX50 talk to meh 15:30, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Done. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 23:24, 3 August 2014 (UTC)


Takasugi-san, could you take a look at diff and clarify what "archaic part of Korea" means? (Korea during the Goryeo dynasty, perhaps?) - -sche (discuss) 21:49, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 05:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Category:Japanese renjou[edit]

This category needs to be created but I have no idea what it means or under which category it should be placed. Could you create it and give it the necessary description and parent category? —CodeCat 00:27, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I have created an article: 連声. If the category is to be created, it should be named Category:Japanese renjō. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 01:45, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Ok, can you please do it? There are also other categories that need creating:
CodeCat 22:38, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
The last one is just an error and I have already cleared it. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 23:45, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Capitalisation of common nouns within proper nouns[edit]

@Tooironic, Eirikr, Wyang: Hi Shinji,

Do you think that parts of proper nouns - rivers, cities, peninsulas, etc. should be capitalised in the romanisations? I prefer "Tai ōkoku" to "Tai Ōkoku" (タイ王国), "Tài wángguó" to "Tài Wángguó" (泰王國/泰王国). Dictionaries have different conventions on this. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:15, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

They should be capitalized in Japanese. NHK always uses Nippon Hōsō Kyōkai. In Korean, if we strictly follow the standard, the common nouns should remain in small letters. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 01:18, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. Are there any exceptions? I've seen hyphens, followed by lower case words in dictionaries e.g. "Temuzu-gawa" (テムズ川) What are other rules - demonyms, language names, names of religions, -isms (e.g. Marxism) for example? Things that are capitalised in English but necessarily in other languages? I think we have an agreement to have them in lower case - nihonjin, nihongo, kirisutokyō, marukusushugi. So, Korean, Japanese and Mandarin Chinese may differ in the rules. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:27, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
In your example, -gawa is considered a suffix, and not capitalized. I don’t know why you use lower case for 日本人 and 日本語. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 01:56, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
You must have been away from what's happening here. Romanisation Language names and demonyms are lower case and that's not my invention. Do you see it as an issue? Ping: @Eirikr, Haplology, Whym:. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:44, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Not sure the "rule" on this, as it were, but I've seen both capitalised and non-capitalised. For example, China is zhōngguó in 现代汉语规范词典 and, but Zhōngguó in MDBG and Wenlin. But I do know two things 1) it is more useful for users to capitalised proper nouns as it makes the sense stand out compared to other parts of speech 2) we already do this, and we should maintain this consistency.
To answer your original question, I don't think it matters a whole lot as long as at least the main word in the term is capitalised. For example, I added Cháoxiān Bàndǎo, but I don't think adding Cháoxiān bàndǎo would have made much of a difference for users. Still, we could decide on a rule and stick with it for the sake of consistency. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:48, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Clearly languages have different rules, like French Republic and République française. We tend to judge according to English rules of capitalization. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 01:56, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
@Tooironic I'm more certain for demonyms, language names, names of religions, -isms - they should be lower case in Japanese, Korean and Vietnames - Min Nan lect often follows English conventions - Iû-thài-kàu for 猶太教犹太教. Wenlin has more inconsistencies about this. My preference is "Cháoxiān bàndǎo" (I saw your edit) but I have stopped working with pinyin - it's a bot job, including homophone data in the module. Let's follow NHK for Japanese only, besides, the transliteration is 100% automatic for Japanese, except for spacing and capitalises proper nouns automatically. Country, city, people's names should be capitalised, no prob with that.
@Shinji, I don't want to follow English, just what's best for languages in question. Russian uses lower cases much more often as well, Finnish even more. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:59, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
I’ve found the rules for Japanese: [6]. The rule 8-i seems strange, and nobody follows it. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 02:15, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll study it. Anything about language names, religions, demonyms, -isms (based on people's names)? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:44, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
I think they should be also capitalized, just like in English. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 09:17, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
@Tooironic, Wyang, Jamesjiao: I have tried to get you in Wiktionary_talk:About_Chinese#Capitalisation_of_demonyms_and_language_names_-_a_mini-vote on Mandarin romanisation but it was brushed off as not important or ignored. We can, of course, separate the discussions for specific languages. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:44, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

User translations badly formatted[edit]


Do you have time to check and fix some Japanese and Korean translations made by User:Somnipathy (Special:Contributions/Somnipathy) (sorry, nothing personal), e.g. plangent, apologetic, etc., etc.? (Chinese are not standard either). They are awful but I'm not sure if I can just revert all of them. It would probably take less time to revert and make new ones rather than fixing. @Nibiko, Whym: pls address them if you can. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:34, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Oh, those translations really need to be checked. Some of them are okay though. I will check them. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 04:12, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes, thanks. Yes, no doubt some are OK. I think Korean adjectives need to be brought to their "adjectival verb" forms - -da forms, not -(eu)n forms, like I did with [[fickle]]. BTW, it would be great if you added hiragana readings to translations. They are important, IMO, for multiple reasons. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:20, 8 January 2015 (UTC)


Hi Shinji,

Sorry, I have reverted your edit because |py= is for display. Roman letters are not transliterated. The actual pronunciation of Q is "kiùr" [kʰjɤʊɻ⁵¹]. See also 卡拉OK (expand) and some other terms that have been reformatted by User:Wyang. Do you agree? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:14, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Revert is okay, but I find only ā Qiū and ā Kiū without r as pinyin. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 02:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
That's what I heard too (kiū, not qiū, "qi" gives /t͡ɕʰ/, not /kʰ/). Not sure if there is standard for pronouncing English letters. I've added "Ā-kiū jīngshén". Generated IPA doesn't seem right, though: /ˀa̠⁵⁵ kʰjɤʊɻ⁵¹ t͡ɕiŋ⁵⁵ ʂən³⁵ ˀa̠⁵⁵ kʰi̯oʊ̯⁵⁵ t͡ɕiŋ⁵⁵ ʂən³⁵/ - shouldn't the two pronunciations be split? Asking @Wyang: to check/fix. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:38, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Fixed. Wyang (talk) 02:58, 29 January 2015 (UTC)