Wiktionary talk:About Japanese/Draft
形容動詞: what to call these in English?[edit]
I confess I'm unhappy with the current policy to list 形容動詞 under an === Adjective === header, in no small part since these are also adverbs, and having to either include a separate === Adverb === header, or just include the adverb sense under the === Adjective === header, both strike me as clumsy and inelegant ways of going about it.
Using a header like === Quasi-adjective === also seems clumsy, just because the term itself seems half-baked and too long, and seems unprofessional in that "quasi-adjective" isn't used that much in linguistics, as far as I'm aware.
What would folks say to using a header like === Nominal ===? "Nominal" shows up with some frequency as a gloss or translation for 形容動詞, and is both short and a well-used linguistic term. The WP page for w:Adjectival noun (Japanese) mentions "nominal", for instance. I'd like to also avoid using the term "adjectival noun", in part as it's a bit of a mouthful, and in part because so many 形容動詞 just aren't nouns -- 静か, 華やか, でぶでぶ, 特別, etc. etc., can be used attributively (as adjectives or adverbs), but cannot be used as the agent or patient (i.e. the subject) of a sentence. I suppose we could use "adjectival noun" to be roughly in line with WP (see also w:Japanese adjectives and 形容動詞 for some further reference points on English usage), provided we also edit the 形容動詞 page to match.
As a side note, should we create an Appendix:Japanese adjectives page?
Any thoughts? -- Eiríkr Útlendi | Tala við mig 16:40, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
- Agree
- It occurs to me that we have to decide if we continue using ja-noun, ja-adj, and ja-pos, or create a new POS template (ja-nom?). What about using the POS header Nominal but using the pre-existing templates as desired case-by-case, like 野蛮?
- By the way, did anybody notice the category Category:Japanese quasi adjectives? Looks like it was created, used briefly, and abandoned as it was.
- I hope we can move forward with this work with some reasonable speed. It's been ten days since the Nominal proposal. If there are any other active editors--and I haven't seen any particularly active ones--they seem to be abstaining. Haplogy 05:12, 22 September 2011 (UTC)