POKéTalker's talk page archive:

Phonetic shifts listed at しいEdit

Curious if you've run across any academic texts that postulate voicing as part of the mechanism for /-k-/ deletion, as exhibited in the shift from the -i adjective attributive ending /-ki/ to /-i/? That's a new one to me.

Although I haven't researched this phenomenon specifically, I'm pretty sure that voicing can't be the progression, since voiced /-ɡi/ in the イ音便 exhibited in verbs resulted in a moraic nasal and caused explicit voicing of the following consonant, where ぎて became んで, whereas the イ音便 in verbs for unvoiced /-ki/ left the following consonant unvoiced. That points to some other mechanism. I suspect it's something closer to aspiration proceeding to debuccalization and then deletion. By way of examples elsewhere in Japonic, see the descendants at Proto-Japonic *kaku, *kusa, and *kura where the initial /k-/ has shifted to various things, sometimes becoming subsumed into the following consonant, with certain descendants demonstrating debuccalization. See also *monki for an (albeit limited) example of a voiced obstruent that collapses to just /ɴ/. I think part of the shift might be because the morae with the vanishing consonant are low tone, which roughly parallels cases in English where unstressed syllables contract or collapse, with consonants sometimes shifting around. C.f. I am going toI'm gonnaI'm'a.

Curious as to your thoughts, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:30, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

@Eirikr: take a look at @Erminwin's revision of 白い (shiroi). Just assumed that the development from rentaikei -shiki/-ki into adjectives -shii/-i were related, so feel free to correct me. ~ POKéTalker) 17:53, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
@Eirikr:: Hello, the paper I cited for the chains of sound changes which yielded 白い (shiroi) is Hamano (2000). Admittedly, it's somewhat old.Erminwin (talk) 18:01, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you both.
@Poketalker, I'd be very surprised if ~しき → ~しい had different mechanics than ~き → ~い. :)   Though I suppose that anything is possible!
@Erminwin, very interesting. I'd love to read that through. We have direct historical evidence that ハ行 consonants were pronounced as something similar to /f/ in the 1603 Nippo Jisho, so the claim in the abstract that OJP /p/ progressed as *b > *β > w strikes me as unrealistic. And if that's the basis for the theory that the medial /-k-/ in the attributive ending for adjectives underwent voicing on the way to lenition and deletion, I can't say that I follow their argument.
For example, while standard Tokyo-based Japanese did not lose the medial /-k-/ in the adverbial, giving us はやく and おそく, Kansai still has the no-"k" adverbial forms はよう and おそう (albeit with vowel flattening for /au//ou/ or just /oː/). Considering the evidence we see in verbs with voiced medial /-ɡ-/, such as およぐ or さわぐ, adding the conjunctive ~て form should result in the voiced obstruent either collapsing to ん or shifting to い, depending on local phonology, and the following consonant undergoing voicing to で, as in およんで or さわいで. As such, if voicing were the mechanism of lenition for the medial /-k-/ in adjectives, we would expect the conjunctive ~て forms of adjectives to manifest as はよんで and おそんで in Kansai, but I believe these are instead unvoiced はようて and おそうて.
I'd love to see if Hamano addresses these issues in the paper. Any chance you have a non-paywalled link? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:35, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Greetings, @Eirikr. So far I've been unsuccessful in finding a non-paywalled version of Hamano (2000). However, I possess a copy downloaded from JSTOR. As of now, I know not how to share on the Internet without getting myself into legal trouble for unwittingly violating intellectual properly laws. If you'd tell me how, I'll gladly share the paper. Erminwin (talk) 01:42, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
  • @Erminwin: Thank you for the JSTOR lead! Unfortunately, they do not have that particular paper available for free, only for an exorbitant fee of $43.95. Ah, well. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:26, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

OJP /o1/Edit

Curious about your edit comment here. The w:Man'yōgana article states that there was no /o1//o2/ distinction for the bare vowel. Have you encountered any authors stating otherwise? I'd be very interested in reading anything along those lines. I'm slowly cobbling together the resources and scripting knowledge needed to do an exhaustive catalog of the characters used in the MYS, and I'm interested in reading what others have found. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:06, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

@Eirikr: I admit for the brief fix on the gave you any confusion. After your edit, there was a formatting error and I fixed it. In that time period, I skimmed through the Kotobank entry; the KDJ usage example from the Nihon Shoki had the ruby of ヲニ, so it was my quick judgement that the Kitano annotation already knew there was an /o1/. Please disregard the comment. ~ POKéTalker) 19:38, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Query about etym note at 私#JapaneseEdit

Heya, you'd added a note stating:

This spelling was already prevalent in early modern times, possibly around the mid-late Muromachi to early-Edo period.

Did you mean this spelling, as in the kanji, or did you mean this reading, as in わたし instead of わたくし?

If you meant the kanji spelling, I think a wording tweak might be good, and possibly also an example of how this might have been spelled prior to the spread of the kanji.

Cheers, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


Heya, various queries / concerns re: diff.

  • No argument that opoki existed as a lexical item in OJP. My concern is that we don't have textual evidence for おほき as a kana spelling in the context of the compound term おおいまつりことのつかさ. Re: the Daijisen entry, that provides no evidence for any OJP form that includes opoki. The KDJ entry cites the term to the Nihon Shoki of 720, but only with the kanji spelling 太政官, without any phonetic information to go on.
  • Re: sortkeys, although the MW backend currently has problems with this functionality, best practice is to include sortkeys under all etyms. Using just |sort=| is not recommended anywhere, and goes against editing conventions. In addition, labels should get sortkeys as well as etym templates. Also, removal of dakuten only applies to the first kana.
  • Re: readings, etym 2 now mistakenly shows だい in the kanjitab, but the first kanji is read as だ in this reading. We also still provide readings in {{ja-kanjitab}} even for irregulars, so I'm confused by your removal of the おお reading in etym 3. Also, まつりごと is not juku, but rather a kun'yomi for 政, at least according to our entry, the ja:政 entry, Unihan, and the MS IME.
  • Re: 大, this was also used as a prefix おほ in OJP. Without textual evidence of readings, we really can't say with any certainty if おおいまつりごとのつかさ or おおまつりごとのつかさ came first.
  • Re: the Wamyōshō terms 大納言 and 少納言, while interesting, they don't necessarily tell us how this term 太政官 was pronounced. There are also differences in compounding, where the Wamyōshō terms are [ADJ] + [COMPOUND NOUN], while this 太政官 term's kun'yomi is instead [ADJ? PREFIX?] + [NOUN] + の + [NOUN].
If it's a prefix, we have the tsukasa of the ōmatsurigoto. If it's an adjective, we have either the tsukasa of (the ōi kind of matsurigoto), or we have the ōi kind of (matsurigoto's tsukasa), depending on how we parse the whole title. If the former, we'd find other kinds of ō[i]matsurigoto. If the latter, we'd find other kinds of matsurigoto no tsukasa. The KDJ suggests the former, which is also consistent with an interpretation of the first element as prefix おお instead of adjective おおい.
  • I note that my local copy of the KDJ has only おおまつりごと for 太政, with this then compounding to form various other words. The only compound of おおまつりごと I'm finding that has that additional い after the おお is 太政官. But again, I'm not finding any clear textual evidence that this came from OJP おほきまつりごと. The interpretation of that first element as an adjective may have happened later, which would result in the addition of adjectival suffix い (or き if old enough).
  • You've also removed the references and pronunciations I added. This seems unnecessarily lossy.

Can you find any ancient sources that have this term in either man'yōgana or kana, and that indicate a reading of おほき? If not, we have no evidence that this came directly from OJP Opoki1 maturigo2to2 no2 Tukasa. This may instead have come from Opomaturigo2to2 no2 Tukasa. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 08:02, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

@Eirikr: I will make this quick:
  • I was in a rush that day and forgot you actually added the pronunciations. Restored them.
  • When I said “多き was attested in OJP, see Daijisen”, again I was in a rush and it should've been corrected to see KDJ with the heading おお・い おほい【多】. Sorry for the misunderstanding. At that time, I was thinking you said “where is the OJP attestation for the rentaikei form of a certain adjective” instead of “where is the phonetic/kana spelling of opoki1... of 太政官”.
  • The だい in the {{ja-kanjitab}} below Etymology 2 was my mistake since the creation of that entry.
  • Using sortkeys is a personal preference, I would not mind others putting them after my edit(s). But my usual is: for the categories of Category:Japanese terms with archaic senses and rare senses (latter for the “chancellor” sense), 太政官 is to be below お since it's the archaic reading. For Category:ja:Government and Category:Japanese terms with historical senses, below た since Daijō-kan and Dajō-kan are the official names. Feel free restore them if you, but please understand the way I use and place them.
  • The KDJ in Kotobank uses 大政 (without the small fourth stroke on the former) for the ōmatsurigoto entry.
  • Remember that @TAKASUGI Shinji said in one of the talk pages that the readings of ancient texts had been orally transmitted and scholars are making sure such readings are correct? That likely explains why the office was called opoki1... for so long.
I admit after checking the old dictionaries in NDL there are no ancient spelling(s) of the Great Imperial Council of State in any OJP literature. Reply if I forgot to tackle any of your statements above. ~ POKéTalker) 03:54, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I thought you might have been moving quickly, but I wasn't quite sure. :)
Re: ōmatsurigoto, interesting re: the online KDJ. My local copy uses the 太 kanji for the おお portion, same as in 太政官. Odd that there's a difference.
Interesting approach to sortkeys. That was not at all clear before your explanation above. Glad to know you're taking a considered approach. Note that, with no sortkey, I believe the MW back-end will sort under the headword spelling.
Re: opoki1..., without textual evidence, we don't actually know for sure if that was the oral reading -- it might just as well have started out as opo... with the prefix, with the adjectival appearing later as a re-interpretation, as opoki or owoi or whatever it was at that time. Without textual evidence, we can hypothesize and conjecture, but we must be clear to our readers about what's definite and what is an educated guess.
Anyway, thanks again. I must log off for now. I'll check in again later. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 05:01, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Recent edits by YumetoriEdit

Heya, noticed over at おとど that you'd re-added the glyph form for the single-kanji entry. Since this is a new addition to Unicode, and I don't think any fonts exist yet that support this glyph, I'd previously reverted Yumetori's similar change, restoring the existing image-based link. Non-rendering glyphs appear to be poor usability. Do you have any thoughts on that? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:49, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@Eirikr: unlike {{ja-def}}, {{ja-see}} does not have a parameter for image links. You could ask @Dine2016 to create one. ~ POKéTalker) 20:52, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Post-nasalization at 奈良#JapaneseEdit

I'm intrigued by your addition of in the ancient reconstructed phonetics for 奈良. What is that based on? I've never encountered anything about man'yōgana 良 having post-nasalization -- it's always just (ra) in the resources I've seen. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:57, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@Eirikr: it's based on the Middle Chinese borrowing (MC lɨɐŋ), but it's doubtful because the ᵑ is negligible being the second element in Nara (unless it's 奈良坂, Narazaka in some cases). If was the first element, would have been like the word 公家 (kuge), the second element being voiced from the first's ᵑ. What do you think? ~ POKéTalker) 20:52, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Hmm, hmm, that's a really interesting angle, considering the final nasal in the Middle Chinese origin in an analysis of what looks like rendaku but is found in the middle of on'yomi terms. I hadn't been aware of that before, thank you for calling my attention to it.
  • Re: 公家, would the theory be that the nasalization was only present in the older goon? Otherwise the こうか reading would be こうが instead, no?
This could be a useful direction for further research. I'm in the (extremely slow) process of cross-cataloging JA on, KO eum, LTC, and OCH readings based on the data we have here (many thanks due to Wyang and the other Chinese editors for compiling so much in the Chinese entries), and from there, indexing the MYS to see how man'yōgana usage lines up with LTC / OCH / KO readings.
  • Re: なら, the alternative spellings clearly indicate an unvoiced -ki or -ku ending, which would appear to rule out any nazalized ending for the initial nara portion. Unlike くげ, borrowed in toto from Chinese, the term ならざか is a clear case of compounding within Japanese, where normal rendaku processes would be expected. Also, considering the likely etymology of the place name なら as from a root nar- ("flat"), and the derivatives that lack any such nasal, we don't have any clear rationale for what a final nasal would be doing in the place name. It may be better to leave out mention of the possible nasal until / unless someone in academia (someone respectable, that is :) ) brings this up in the context of the derivation of the place name なら.
Thanks again for this, good stuff! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 01:30, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

asa, ashita, and related rootsEdit

I suspect that 浅い (asai) is also related -- one of the senses is "still early, not much time has passed". KDJ entry for reference. Specifically:

⑥ 始まりから、それほど日時がたっていない。

(イ) その季節になってからまもない。また、そのために季節(特に春)らしさの現われが、十分でない。


Although this specific sense is only cited to the late 1100s, I suspect that there may still be an earlier semantic connection between "shallow; of lesser degree" and "early in the day".

ご参考までに。(^^) ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:09, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

@Eirikr: the “shallow” and “early in the day” senses might have a connection. It might have been a later abstraction of the former sense: shallow in water → shallow in time.
Here are some words with an as- stem, as of this posting, relating to “early” and probably “the morning”. They could be cognates:
Any other words you might think of? Pinging @Kwékwlos, Mellohi!.
In other news, Saigyō's poem from the Sankashū (no. 967):
haru asaki suzu no magaki ni kaze saete mada yuki kienu Shigaraki no sato
In early spring, the woven fence of suzu bamboo frigid from the wind in the village of Shigaraki has its snow disappeared.
Compared with the poem from the Saigyō Hōshi Kashū (no. 6) and Fuboku Wakashō (no. 14810):
haru asami suzu no magaki ni kaze saete mada yuki kienu Shigaraki no sato
In the earliness of spring, the woven fence of suzu bamboo frigid from the wind in the village of Shigaraki has its snow disappeared.
どうも、~ POKéTalker) 03:50, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
Fun stuff.
  • 明後日 (asatte) appears to be from 明日 (asu) + 去りて (sarite)asu sariteasateasatte (gemination appearing during the Muromachi period).
  • I hadn't considered (ase) to be part of this cluster, but that's an interesting thought. Semantically, (ase) and 焦る (aseru) would make sense together from the sense of physical exertion, and 焦る (aseru) fits with the theme of early from the thought of making something happen earlier.
  • Not sure how 遊ぶ (asobu) fits in here. Interesting, worth digging further.
Cheers! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:28, 13 March 2020 (UTC)


Thanks for cleaning up my edits on 紅芋 and related pages. For my future reference, what is the purpose of this addition? Adabow (talk) 00:42, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Adabow: your welcome. Since the first kana starts with a (be), using {{DEFAULTSORT:}} followed by an unvoiced kana such as (he) and adding an apostrophe at the end for example {{DEFAULTSORT:へにいも'}} goes in line with {{poscatboiler|ja}} which has a kana table of contents which does not index voiced kana such as (ga), (za), (da), etc. so that they categorize under the respective unvoiced letter that does have an index in the table of contents. ~ POKéTalker) 00:55, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
I see! Thank you! Adabow (talk) 05:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)


Re: diff, my understanding of the okurigana params in {{ja-kanjitab}} is that they're for, well, okurigana -- kana that are added after the kanji. For the name Akira, there are no okurigana (in fact, I don't think names in kanji generally take any okurigana ever, but I'm open to being proved wrong :) ). No? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 05:46, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Eirikr: this is to prevent redlinks and (automatic) creation of probably unnecessary categories such as Category:Japanese terms spelled with 明 read as あきら unless there is a way to not create categories like this one for yomi=nanori parameter as demonstrated with the yomi=irr parameter. Or if the 信明 (Saneakira) entry is created which will make sense that such a category is necessary. ~ POKéTalker) 10:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Hmmm, once upon a time yomi=nanori suppressed category creation. I wonder when that changed, and why... Then again, perhaps someone sees value in nanori reading categories? Those are so damn variant and so damn many, I struggle to see the use myself, but whatevs. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:02, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
As long as I know, this "okurigana" also serves to construct the sort key, not always correctly however. -- Huhu9001 (talk) 06:34, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Romanization of おうEdit

Your edits agree that pronunciation of しもうた is /ɕimoːta/, not /ɕimo.uta/. However for unknown reason you added the dot (".") to template argument, resulting in changing romanization from containing "ō" to "ou" ("shimōta" -> "shimouta"). Why?

I think that "ou" romanization should be used only for situations with pronunciation with separate vowels (e.g. 迷う/まよう = "mayou", but Kansai perfective 迷うた/まようた = "mayōta"). Arfrever (talk) 21:50, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

@Arfrever: as of now, did not know any standard of romanization of the dialects especially Western Japanese ones. Have little knowledge of the Kansai dialect(s) per se, my only experience here was fixing the {{ja-pron}} regarding said accents. Do you have any helpful resources (if in Japanese, they are fine) regarding these? Pinging @Kyoww, TAKASUGI Shinji. ~ POKéTalker) 21:58, 26 March 2020 (UTC)