Wiktionary:Requests for verification/CJK

Latest comment: 1 day ago by Justinrleung in topic


Wiktionary Request pages (edit) see also: discussions
Requests for cleanup
add new request | history | archives

Cleanup requests, questions and discussions.

Requests for verification

Requests for verification in the form of durably-archived attestations conveying the meaning of the term in question.

Requests for deletion

Requests for deletion of pages in the main and Reconstruction namespace due to policy violations; also for undeletion requests.

Requests for deletion/Others
add new request | history

Requests for deletion and undeletion of pages in other (not the main) namespaces, such as categories, appendices and templates.

Requests for moves, mergers and splits
add new request | history | archives

Moves, mergers and splits; requests listings, questions and discussions.

Language treatment requests
add new request | history

Requests for changes to Wiktionary's language treatment practices, including renames, merges and splits.

{{attention}} • {{rfap}} • {{rfdate}} • {{rfquote}} • {{rfdef}} • {{rfeq}} • {{rfe}} • {{rfex}} • {{rfi}} • {{rfp}}

All Wiktionary: namespace discussions 1 2 3 4 5 - All discussion pages 1 2 3 4 5

This page is for entries in Chinese, Japanese, Korean or any other language using an East Asian script. For English entries, see Wiktionary:Requests for verification/English. For entries in other non-English languages, see Wiktionary:Requests for verification/Non-English.

Scope of this request page:

  • In-scope: terms to be attested by providing quotations of their use
  • Out-of-scope: terms suspected to be multi-word sums of their parts such as “green leaf”

Templates:

Shortcut:

See also:

Overview: This page is for disputing the existence of terms or senses. It is for requests for attestation of a term or a sense, leading to deletion of the term or a sense unless an editor proves that the disputed term or sense meets the attestation criterion as specified in Criteria for inclusion, usually by providing citations from three durably archived sources. Requests for deletion based on the claim that the term or sense is nonidiomatic or “sum of parts” should be posted to Wiktionary:Requests for deletion. Requests to confirm that a certain etymology is correct should go in the Etymology scriptorium, and requests to confirm pronunciation is correct should go in the Tea Room.

Adding a request: To add a request for verification (attestation), add the template {{rfv}} or {{rfv-sense}} to the questioned entry, and then make a new section here. Those who would seek attestation after the term or sense is nominated will appreciate your doing at least a cursory check for such attestation before nominating it: Google Books is a good place to check, others are listed here (WT:SEA).

Answering a request by providing an attestation: To attest a disputed term, i.e. prove that the term is actually used and satisfies the requirement of attestation as specified in inclusion criteria, do one of the following:

  • Assert that the term is in clearly widespread use. (If this assertion is not obviously correct, or is challenged by multiple editors, it will likely be ignored, necessitating the following step.)
  • Cite, on the article page, usage of the word in permanently recorded media, conveying meaning, in at least three independent instances spanning at least a year. (Many languages are subject to other requirements; see WT:CFI.)

In any case, advise on this page that you have placed the citations on the entry page.

Recording negative findings: Editors who make a fair effort to find citations but fail to do so should state their negative result on this page (even if it only repeats another editor's negative result).

Closing a request: After a discussion has sat for more than a month without being “cited”, or after a discussion has been “cited” for more than a week without challenge, the discussion may be closed. Closing a discussion normally consists of the following actions:

  • Deleting or removing the entry or sense (if it failed), or de-tagging it (if it passed). In either case, the edit summary or deletion summary should indicate what is happening.
  • Adding a comment to the discussion here with either RFV-failed or RFV-passed (emboldened), indicating what action was taken. This makes automatic archiving possible. Some editors strike out the discussion header at this time.
    In some cases, the disposition is more complicated than simply “RFV-failed” or “RFV-passed”; for example, two senses may have been nominated, of which only one was cited (in which case indicate which one passed and which one failed), or the sense initially RFVed may have been replaced with something else (some editors use RFV-resolved for such situations).

Archiving a request: At least a week after a request has been closed, if no one has objected to its disposition, the request should be archived to the entry's talk page. This is usually done using the aWa gadget, which can be enabled at WT:PREFS.

You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

Tagged RFVs


April 2020

edit

中共病毒

edit

Google News results are exclusively from Falun Gong-related sources (soundofhope, epochtimes, ntdtv). Also probably missing a context label regarding connotation? —Suzukaze-c 08:28, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

For Chinese, I've added four quotes at Citations:中共病毒. Two are from Epoch Times-related media. The earliest we have is from 陳泱潮, who does not seem to be affiliated with Falun Gong, and another is from 梁文韜, who isn't known to be affiliated with Falun Gong either. 中共病毒 should be cited. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 19:00, 19 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

中共肺炎#Chinese, #Japanese

edit

Ditto. —Suzukaze-c 08:31, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

The terms were coined, likely partly in condemnation of the Chinese Communist Party's cover-up of the epidemic in Wuhan. --Apisite (talk) 08:39, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
If all cites are coming from Falun Gong-related sources as suggested by Suzukaze-c, we probably shouldn't consider them independent sources. We need to look outside of Falun Gong sources. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 21:53, 11 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
Why? There's 40,000 to millions of Falun Gong followers out there; that's more than speakers of many languages we document here. If three leftist German newspapers used a term, we wouldn't consider them not independent sources.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:26, 23 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Prosfilaes: Maybe I was mistaken about the extent of association of these media outlets to a single organization. I'm not 100% sure how the organization of Falun Gong practitioners works. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
It seems like it can be traced back to even earlier sources that use 中共病毒 not to refer to COVID-19, but other viruses that have been associated with China, like H5N1 (I think), as in this article. But again, it comes from Epoch Times. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 20:44, 11 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
I put four instances in Japanese at Citations:中共肺炎. One is from Epoch Times, one from Nico Nico and cited to Epoch Times, but one is in Mainichi Shimbun (quoting a Japanese politician), and one on a surfing blog. They don't span more than one year, but they seem to be more or less independent (discounting the two Epoch-sourced quotes). Cnilep (talk) 08:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
I added another from this past week, so now they span nearly one year (about a week short). It's from 'G-News'; I don't know if that is Falun Gong-related, but the story certainly seems anti-PRC. I've also added "sometimes offensive" to the entry, as the usage is exclusionary and in at least one case has been called "hate speech". Cnilep (talk) 01:14, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Cnilep: are you sure the quotes you added are from durably archived sources? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 22:22, 19 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
I don't know who publishes the web pages or what their archiving policies are, but they include links. You can check them out if you have any doubt. (The exception is Mainichi Shimbun, which is a national newspaper and is durably archived in libraries and databases.) Cnilep (talk) 00:45, 21 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Cnilep: Sorry, I just saw your reply now. I don't think web pages are generally considered durably archived. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 14:43, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Justinrleung: Um, OK. It's slightly annoying that some editors suggest web pages are not acceptable while other insist that only materials available online are acceptable, but such is the nature of a large group project, I suppose. Cnilep (talk) 23:01, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
Epoch Times is archived in Lexis/Nexis, so that and Mainichi Shimbun make two. I'll look for another. Cnilep (talk) 23:09, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Cnilep: Thanks. I don't think only materials available online are acceptable, just preferred (according to how I am reading WT:ATTEST). I don't think web pages are acceptable unless they are somehow durably archived. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:15, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
Japan Business Press appears to self-archive (their members page says "more than 30,000 archived articles over the 10 years since the first issue"), but is not in Lexis/Nexis or Proquest. If that's acceptable, it's the third archived (but not easily accessible) attestation. Cnilep (talk) 03:40, 8 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
Actually, the durably archived ones currently there are only from 2020, but Epoch Times continues to use the phrase. Cnilep (talk) 03:47, 8 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
Cited for 中共肺炎#Chinese. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 16:20, 8 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
RFV passed for 中共肺炎#Chinese. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 00:59, 17 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
Japanese: "中共肺炎" "コロナ" -"大紀元時報" -"大紀元" remains barren. Perhaps online-sources (WT:ATTEST) can help at this point, but Twitter search top results being from 2020 and 2021 are not promising. —Fish bowl (talk) 21:39, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
Latest results in Twitter "live" search: Dec 2022, Sep 2022, June 2022. —Fish bowl (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest results in Twitter "live" search: Nov 2023, Aug 2021(????), Sep 2022, June 2022. —Fish bowl (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

June 2020

edit

(Chinese, Etymology 2)

edit

The reading and definition looks suspiciously like a ghost entry inherited from earlier lexicographers. The source seems to be the 《觀象玩占》, an astrology book attributed to Li Chunfeng. A passage from the book reads 辰星…一曰免星 link, where the character could have been a misprint of something including or . The 《古今圖書集成》, quoting from the passage, corrects this character as link to the page. 《集韻》 has an entry 毚兔【辰星別名,或省】 link to page, which in the Jiyun formula seems to say these two characters and were considered variants to each other without specifying the linguistic context or referring to attestable literature. Overall the textual quality of these appearances has been subpar, and the reading, especially the tonal value in modern Mandarin, is not well-supported.

--Frigoris (talk) 15:46, 10 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Frigoris: I just got around to reply. Hanyu Da Zidian quotes Shiji for this: 《史記·天官書》:“兔過太白。”司馬貞索隱:“《廣雅》云:‘辰星謂之兔星。’則辰星之別名兔。或作毚也。”張守節正義:“《漢書》云:‘辰星過太白,閒可械劍。’明《廣雅》是也。” — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 17:07, 29 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
The Shiji passage should be enough for verification. However, it seems that the 欽定四庫全書, 摛藻堂四庫全書薈要, 益雅堂叢書 and 古今逸史 versions of 廣雅 all read "辰星謂之...免星", which is different from what 司馬貞 quotes. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 17:29, 29 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
Just checked the different versions of Shiji, and it seems like the 欽定四庫全書, 汲古閣毛氏, 古香齋袖珍十種, 北京大學圖書館, 摛藻堂四庫全書薈要, 乾隆御覽四庫全書薈要, 哈佛燕京圖書館 (1), 哈佛燕京圖書館 (2) and 武英殿二十四史 editions all have 免. I wonder why modern editions of Shiji have 兔. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 18:38, 29 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Justinrleung, thank you very much for the research. If you ask me, I can only say "textual corruption", which is a huge problem with the Shiji in general. I checked the (Semi-)Critical Edition by Gu Jiegang et al. which reads in the passage quoting the lost text of Huangfu Mi, and in the main text. OTOH, the 《廣雅》 passage as quoted in the Shiji CE reads , but the 《廣雅》 was a secondary source considerably later than the Shiji, and its own textual history may just be as bewildering. For example, this passage from the purported Ming-era edition (i.e. same as the 古今逸史 edition you quoted above) clearly reads . I haven't got the time to dig into the critical edition of 《廣雅疏義》, which you can read here. --Frigoris (talk) 19:35, 29 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

August 2020

edit

edit

Rfv-sense: grammatical particle for perfective aspect (in Wu language). The quotation does not seem to match the sense: the translation given there is an imperative sentence. --Frigoris (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Frigoris: 蘇州方言詞典 defines it as “句末助詞,表示變化或新情况,相當于北京話句末助詞‘了’” and lists these examples: “吾吃仔飯~|大家來吧,吃飯~|落雨~|天要好~|再等等,俚馬上來~|吾一走,屋裏嘸不人燒飯~|俚葛閑話好相信,太陽要從西天出來~!”. 上海方言詞典 is a little more vague and defines it as “語氣詞,表時態,用於句子末尾,相當於北京話的‘了’” and lists these examples: “落雨~|好~,𧟰吵~|我明朝就要回屋裏去~|儂再稍爲等一歇,我已經辣着鞋子~,就要好快~”. 上海话大词典 divides it into several definitions:
  • (旧)表示过去叙事情况下的语气:过一歇,伊又出去~|后来我去睏~。
  • (旧)表示事件的现在状态:生病~|钟停~|苹果熟~|三点钟~|天晴~。
  • 与进行体助词“辣辣/辣海”一起,表示现在进行时态:伊辣辣读书~|大楼辣海造~|伊辣来~。
  • 与存继承助词“辣海/辣辣”一起表示现在完成时态:奶妈请辣海~|我家生买辣辣~。
  • 与表示即行的“快”一起用时,表示现在即行时态:水开快~|苹果熟快~。
The only definition that seems to fit "perfective aspect" is the 4th sense in 上海话大词典, but it seems to not be contributing to that meaning without 辣海/辣辣. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 19:12, 30 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
Justinrleung: thank you for checking the rfsense. So indeed the quotation was misleading by not matching the definition it appears under. This really can use some cleanup. --Frigoris (talk) 09:16, 31 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
仔 in 吾吃飯哉 is grammatical particle for perfective aspect. If you want to find 哉 as grammatical particle for perfective aspect, see [1]. EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 16:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

September 2020

edit

edit

Is Central Bai written in Chinese characters, and if so, is this the actual character used for /ɕy³³/? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 02:41, 12 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Bai was written in chinese characters in a system called 僰文, using the characters to represent Bai words and written in a Bai syntax. As for the character itself, it appears in 山花碑/词记山花·咏苍洱境碑, which is written in 僰文, in the line:煴煊茶水(口㱔)𪢂呼 (translation into Chinese:热煮茶水相对饮)[2],due to the fact that it is written in a Bai syntax, it would be fair to assume it was probably composed in Bai, therefore be pronounced in Bai --Henry Wonh (talk) 01:59, 14 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
Henry Wonh: Thanks! This looks like good evidence. I'll try to incorporate this into the entry. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:08, 14 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
I've checked 赵橹's book and it seems like the text is slightly different from the blog post, and it's translated slightly differently as well. Either way, I've incorporated it into the entry, so this should be cited. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:35, 14 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
Henry Wonh: Actually, one more question. Is it actually Central Bai we're dealing with, or some other variety of Bai? The poem was written many centuries ago, but I'm not sure how much we actually know about the Bai languages at that time. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:41, 14 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
Justinrleung: Well, even though the stella was found in Dali city, it southern Bai territory, most sources claim central and southern Bai are mutually intelligible and are essentially dialects of each other, so I wouldn’t think it would pose a big problem, maybe merge the multiple Bai subsections?—-Henry Wonh (talk) 07:49, 14 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
Henry Wonh: If it's in Southern Bai territory, one way we could go about this is to assume that it's Southern Bai, which would mean it's not cited for Central Bai. However, since this was written long ago, I wonder how much the Bai varieties have diverged then. Are there 僰文 texts from elsewhere? Merging Bai varieties is a bigger discussion to be had since it'll affect all other Bai entries we have. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 14:39, 14 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Lama Bai

edit

Southern Bai

edit

Also in these Bai varieties. Given the cited text above, we need to determine which variety the text belongs to. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:22, 19 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

@幻光尘Suzukaze-c (talk) 03:22, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
(Added in diff, by the user pinged above.) - -sche (discuss) 16:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

ニット

edit

Rfv-sense "knit".

Rfv-sense "nit".

Suzukaze-c (talk) 08:27, 20 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Checking knit#Noun (which I probably should have done beforehand: I actually wasn't aware that knit was usable as a noun, and believed the entry to be a suspicious mess created by equating etymology with definition, "ニット is from English knit and therefore means knit"), I see that it means (1 of 2 definitions) "knitter garment".
I also added a sense "knitwear" to ニット, so I suppose the RFV for this sense is essentially pointless, and I've removed the sense (maintaining that knit as a noun is not an intelligible definition) and the tag from ニット.
Suzukaze-c (talk) 23:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
Regarding ニット (nitto, nit): I found several mentions of a product called ニットピッカー (nit-picker), either on shopping sites (which tend not to be durably archived) or mommy blogs such as this. I wonder if that is just transliteration of a product name originally in English, though. I also found a 2019 translation of Victorian Lady's Guide etc., which uses ruby in a way that suggests readers would not recognize the katakana word.
ニットピッキング(シラミの卵とり)
I associate that style of ruby in film subtitles, where they want to include the (transliterated) non-Japanese word and also a translation. Cnilep (talk) 05:01, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

ニット as “[nit]” is pretty common: [3], although specialists always write it as nit. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:38, 17 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

著落

edit

Rfv-senses: "solution" and "result; outcome". Tagged by @Tooironic but not listed. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 22:58, 22 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic Seems like you added these in this diff. Dr. Eye Chinese English Bilingual Dictionary gives "the solution to a problem" as one of the definitions. "Solution" is also given in mdbg (not that this is necessarily right). "Result; outcome" might be mergeable with "place to settle", I think, which seems to be a little bit inaccurate without something like "result" since Guoyu Cidian and Liang'an Cidian define that sense with 歸宿 and 結果/結局. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 16:00, 17 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

February 2021

edit

edit

Rfv-sense: "order". Tagged by @Frigoris but not listed. RcAlex36 (talk) 16:20, 19 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

The sense "chapter" may come from "rule" or "order, arrangement", but I can't find "order, arrangement" at the first 500 of zhwikisource. Any evidence before Han dynasty? EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 04:32, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
I found: "《孔子家语·曲礼子贡问》:“孔子曰:‘季氏之妇可谓知礼矣,爱而无私,上下有章。’”", "交章论列" EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 04:39, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
@EdwardAlexanderCrowley, it seems the gloss "order" in the Definitions on that page refers to the usage as in 雜亂無章. Although the 孔子家語 almost certainly belongs to the pseudepigrapha, we can use other examples to illustrate the sense. --Frigoris (talk) 07:45, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
It's hard to say 章≠rule in 雜亂無章. w:zh:孔子家语 says "1973年河北定州八角廊出土了汉墓竹简中有《儒家者言》,内容与《家语》相近。", you know, many ancient books suffers slanders. EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 08:11, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
Isn't the RFV about the definition item "order"? In particular what order means here, since the word can mean quite different things in English. Currently the sense 3 refers to "rules", which the usex suggests reference to the formal regulations, constitutions, charters, etc. It seems to me that whoever first put the definition "order" here refers to the more abstract and possibly more informal sense of "the quality of being organized", which I think matches the usex I just added (雜亂無章).
The 孔子家語 can match as many Han-era epigraphical texts as it may and is still considered pseudepigraphy, not because the text is "fake", but because the authorship very likely doesn't match how it has been claimed to be in the literary tradition. In fact there's little agreement about the true "authorship" if it has one. The text includes many passages that are paralleled in other classical works. If we can find them, it's preferable to use those more certain texts than the secondary literature. --Frigoris (talk) 08:22, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Frigoris Let's read 送孟東野序, which is the origin of 雜亂無章. “其为言也,乱杂而无章” means 不講文法(no clear sense/logic of literature), do you agree? EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 09:31, 17 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Frigoris, Crowley666 Yes this sense should refer to being orderly, not to rules or distinctions, as this is how other dictionaries describe it (eg. as 條理); Kroll's Student's Dictionary writes "clearly and properly displayed, well-ordered". Other dictionaries all seem to reference 雜亂無章, but I think it is reasonable to say 章 has extended beyond "rule" here, for example Hanyu Da Cidian gives 無章 as 没有次序.
In some words, 章 seems close to meaning order, tied together with the sense "composition; structure". For example 章法 relates to the organization/arrangement of text, and 成章 relates to a text being well-presented/composed.
Also, here's a line from Chinese characters on Wikipedia: 'Some believe that the name [章草], based on 章 meaning "orderly", arose because the script was a more orderly form of cursive'. It cites Qiu Xigui Chinese writing (文字學概要). Indeed that says '[章] means "orderliness, regulation"' (「章」字有條理,法則等意義) towards the end of section 5.4. Actually the author goes further than Wikipedia suggests, saying that most people agree this explanation is likely correct, in which case 章草 would serve as another example of the sense "orderly". ChromeGames (talk) 10:47, 5 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

語言

edit

Rfv-sense: "written language". Tagged by @Tooironic but not listed. RcAlex36 (talk) 16:26, 19 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

This sense seems to be added by @Zcreator alt (who I don't think is active anymore) in this diff. It may correspond to "指書面語;詩文的句子。" in Hanyu Da Cidian, though the definition would need some rewording if it is so. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:36, 28 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

先行

edit

Rfv-sense: in advance; beforehand. Tagged by @Tooironic but not listed. This sense is common and is found in Pleco. Xiandai Hanyu Cidian and Xiandai Hanyu Guifan Cidian seem to treat it as a verb, though. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:25, 20 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

September 2021

edit

規範字

edit

# [[Simplified Chinese]] character(s); [[Simplified Chinese]]

Entry presumably written because of the lede of the ja.wp article.

One usage found, from Google Books and Scholar searches for 〜と 〜を 〜は: 「通用規範漢字表」 について.

Suzukaze-c (talk) 10:55, 7 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

From my limited searching, this spelling only seems to be used in Japanese works that quote Chinese texts.
Since this kind of usage does indeed happen, and since Japanese readers would indeed read this string with the expected Japanese pronunciation, I think it merits a Japanese entry. However, such an entry definitely needs to be clear about context and usage -- in Japanese writing, the term 簡体字 (kantaiji) is much more commonly used to mean "Simplified Chinese".
FWIW, I find more than one hit at Google Books: google books:"規範字" "は" nets me 223 ostensible hits, collapsing to 80 when paging through. Many of these have no preview and the relevant string is not apparent in the snippets shown, but there are enough that do show the string in context to meet CFI. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:00, 7 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
Are we sure that they are referring to China's "規範字", and not to generic "規範" + "字"? —Suzukaze-c (talk) 22:02, 7 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
For some of the hits, possibly. I only scanned the results briefly. I do note that many of them explicitly mention 中国の, or 台湾, or use phrasing like 「簡体字」または「規範字」, etc. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 06:07, 8 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
@H2NCH2COOHFish bowl (talk) 00:16, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
規範字 is mentioned in: 中国の常用漢字表『通用規範漢字表』が公開 計8105字に増加in a document title 『規範字と繁体字、異体字の対照表』; This paper by 辻田正雄; This design and printing glossary, etc.. Plus, 規範字 can hardly be understood separately as "規範" + "字", because this term is used only used in mainland China due to differences in terminologies. In Taiwan, it is called 正體字正体字 (zhèngtǐzì) or 國字標準字體国字标准字体 instead; in Japan, its counterpart is 常用漢字字体 (in-table) and 印刷標準字体 (chiefly off-table); no such mandatory standard exists in Hong Kong. --H2NCH2COOH (Talk) 02:28, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

User 112.197.72.179

edit

He was on an editing spree today. I didn't think much of it but this edit ([4]) looked weird to me. Could somebody maybe check this edit (and maybe some others) to make sure, this user isn't vandalizing? --Fytcha (talk) 19:07, 13 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Fytcha: This is probably not the right venue for this, but thanks for reporting this. I think maybe WT:TR would be a better place to discuss this. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 19:45, 13 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
it's User:Fumiko Take. meh. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 20:51, 13 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
Ya, apparently she's working through some kind of medical reference and hitting a lot of anatomy terms in Japanese. And, unfortunately, making a bit of a hash of it, as at 鎖骨 or 鎖骨下筋.
She's wrong often enough, and she's bull-headed enough, that I'd be tempted to block her to spare us the work of vetting and cleaning up after her -- but she jumps around IP addresses so much that I don't think this would be at all effective. <sigh.../> ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:45, 24 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
(pinging IP address master @Chuck EntzSuzukaze-c (talk) 02:37, 25 September 2021 (UTC))Reply
@Suzukaze-c: I don't know if I can contribute much: although I did save some data when they were blocked and there was a reason to run checkuser on them, this IP range has no connection to anything in that data and I have no grounds for using the checkuser tool now to compare browser data- no one is blocked, and no one is using their anonymity to get away with anything.
The abuse filters we used to stop the Sky UK, Thai and Pays de Loire IPs won't work very well here, because there are lots of entries with both Vietnamese and Japanese sections, so there would be lots of collateral damage- we would be blocking Vietnamese IPs from editing their own language. It would require a more sophisticated regex to verify which language section they were editing, and I'm not exactly a regex master. Coming up with a list of IP ranges to trigger the regex checks is another challenge (fetching wikitext is very expensive as abuse filter operations go, so I don't want to do it for every single IP edit). Chuck Entz (talk) 00:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

しんど

edit

Sense: tire, languor

Although 深度, 進度, 震度, 心土, 伸度 and Sindh can all be read しんど, I'm not aware of this sense of the word. I wonder if the person who added it (an IP address apparently at Peking University) confused it with しんどい (maybe しんどさ)? Speaking of which, the same IP address edited the latter page one minute after they created this one, suggesting that しんどい comes from しんど. I don't think that is the case, either. Am I mistaken? Cnilep (talk) 06:50, 14 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

See also Kotobank, which lists this specific sense. My local copy of Daijirin also notes that adjective しんどい (shindoi) comes from しんど (shindo), which the KDJ explains is in turn apparently a shift from 心労 (shinrō). ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:07, 24 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I saw the entry in KDJ only after I had posted this. I've never seen the word used (as far as I can recall), though. So to my question, "Am I mistaken?" apparently the answer is "yes". It's not the first time, and probably won't be the last. Cnilep (talk) 23:46, 24 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
maybe a usage: https://wave.pref.wakayama.lg.jp/bunka-archive/minyou/02-202.html : つづら折りなる 細道を/しんどしんどと 人々はヨイヤサ
a usage, identical to the Digital Daijisen's usage example: https://www.city.osaka.lg.jp/kodomo/page/0000038769.html : ついつい「あーしんど!」と
Fish bowl (talk) 21:52, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

味気ない

edit

Contemporary senses of Etymology 1, あじきない (contra Etymology 2, あじけない, with the same kanji and essentially the same meaning)

I added three quotations before I stopped to think that, based on the writing system, there may no reasonable way to argue whether these are the first or second Etymology.

@Poketalker, Suzukaze-c, Do you have ideas about how this should be handled?

Cnilep (talk) 00:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

https://furigana.info/w/味気 :) —Suzukaze-c (talk) 01:58, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
PS: Thinking more specifically about the challenge that Cnilep brings up about identifying etym and sense, I see that the KDJ entry specifically indicates that the あじけない (ajikenai) reading correlates to sense ③ for the あじきない (ajikinai) reading. So presumably any quote that looks more clearly to be senses ① or ② for あじきない (ajikinai) thus cannot fit for あじけない (ajikenai), ruling out that reading. Likewise, the DDJS entry ties sense ① for あじきない (ajikinai) with あじけない (ajikenai), while the other senses for あじきない (ajikinai) appear to be specific to that reading. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:05, 24 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

November 2021

edit

人家

edit

Rfv-sense: "dwelling". Tagged by @Tooironic. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 02:32, 11 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung, Tooironic: This sense ("dwelling" = "house" but more formal) exist in Japanese and Korean and also CC-CEDICT (along with "somebody else's house"). I have just created a Japanese and Korean (hanja) entry. I couldn't find anything solid to confirm this sense in Chinese but this search may give interesting matches. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:57, 11 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
Welcome back Anatoli! It may be a matter of translation. Probably, "household" and "dwelling" can be combined. In Chinese the sense is just 住户. ---> Tooironic (talk) 03:14, 11 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Tooironic: Thanks, Carl! If the sense "dwelling" is invalid, do you want to remove it? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:56, 11 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
Sure, but what about the RfV process? ---> Tooironic (talk) 22:59, 11 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Tooironic: Ah, OK, if you just want it to take its course. Since you added, I thought you might want to cite it. Otherwise, it will be removed eventually. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:20, 12 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
Attested in 现代汉语词典. Also, "東南形勝,三吳都會,錢塘自古繁華。煙柳畫橋,風簾翠幕,參差十萬人家。" by 柳永, etc.. --H2NCH2COOH (Talk) 03:37, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
@H2NCH2COOH: Thanks for the quote. We'd need two more for this to pass RFV. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 08:04, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
@H2NCH2COOH: Also, I wanted to clarify which sense in 现代汉语词典 are you translating as "dwelling"? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 08:07, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Justinrleung: 住户. The example given in the dictionary is "这个村子有百十户~". And also, "遠上寒山石徑斜,白雲深處有人家" by 杜牧, "高秋水村路,隔㟁見人家" by 李中, "三藏道:「悟空,前面人家,可以借宿,明早再行。」" and "只奔山南坡下,忽見山凹之間有一座草舍人家。" in 西遊記, etc. --H2NCH2COOH (Talk) 08:29, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
@H2NCH2COOH: 现代汉语词典 defines 住户 as 定居在某处的家庭或有单独户口的人 - isn't this referring to the occupants of a house rather than the dwelling place itself? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 08:36, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
Perhaps it is a bad explanation then. See https://dict.revised.moe.edu.tw/dictView.jsp?ID=135766&q=1&word=%E4%BA%BA%E5%AE%B6#order1 for definition explicitly mentioning the house itself. --H2NCH2COOH (Talk) 08:46, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

December 2021

edit

edit

Rfv-senses 17-21: "thing; to exploit, to accept; currency; tomb" (moved to the end of the entry for now)

These senses were all added in one edit along with many other senses that I can account for. However I'm having trouble verifying these couple of senses. Any ideas where they come from or where they are used? Perhaps as alternative forms?

Speaking of alternative forms, the page currently has a lot of them. But I'm reluctant to call 采 an alternative form of other characters like and , because they seem like they might be alternative forms of each other rather than having one character be the main character (although certainly one is more specialized). Perhaps there's a better way to organize things? ChromeGames (talk) 02:03, 6 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

@ChromeGames: These senses seem to be in Hanyu Da Cidian (at least).
@Justinrleung: Thanks for confirming their presence, I wonder if I have a different edition/version of Hanyu Da Cidian though since I don't see all of those definitions that you mention? Although I do find:
  • to exploit; to gain = 摘取 (?)
  • to accept = 采纳,采用
ChromeGames (talk) 04:39, 7 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
@ChromeGames: Sorry, my mistake. I meant Hanyu Da Zidian. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:04, 7 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Justinrleung: Gotcha, I should definitely try to get my hands on that one. Thanks, ChromeGames (talk) 21:44, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

January 2022

edit

ブス

edit

# [[busbar]]Fish bowl (talk) 05:18, 3 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

The hits at google:"ブス" "電源" suggest that this is a domain-specific jargon term, shortening of ブスバー (busubā), in turn apparently an alternative for バスバー (basubā). If we have any appropriate labels or categories for "spelling pronunciation" to describe the shift from /a/ in バス (basu) to /u/ in ブス (busu), that would apply here. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:50, 11 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

February 2022

edit

では

edit

Japanese. Rfv-senses: Alternative form of ては (Etymology 3); and short for ではないか (Etymology 4)

Of Etymology 3, Eirikr says, “How so? Examples? Unclear that this etym even warrants inclusion.” and “Etym 3 is just a usage of the particle combo in Etym 1, whereas ては would presumably be from って (tte) + (wa)”. [Etymology 1 is ‘Compound of で and は’, ‘at, in’.]

It is similarly not clear to me that this is a separate lexical item.

Of Etymology 4, Eirikr says, “Etym 4 is not a verb, but a different use of the particle combo in Etym 1, eliding the negative coupula ない (nai) and question particle (ka).”

Note that I changed the POS from verb-form to particle. Even so, I do not think that this is a lexical item as such. It is just a use of the Etymology 1 sense.

(Note, too, that I tried to rectify a separate issue noted by Eirikr: “No appropriate sense to cover the では in それでは, so the Etym 2 section is effectively broken (user goes to それでは, gets no explanation)”. That is not related to this RfV, but others might want to see if you disagree with what I did.)

@Eirikr, Fish bowl, Nardog, 荒巻モロゾフ, Shen233

Cnilep (talk) 00:29, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Etymology 3 seems to be the verb conjugation, as in 噛んではいた.
As for Etymology 4: I considered ではないか to be formed from である, and では to be a shortening (or ellipsis?) of that, hence "verb form". —Fish bowl (talk) 02:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
agreed, etym 3 and 4 looks redundant to me. Shen233 (talk) 03:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
I spoke to some people I regard as experts, people who teach and/or write about Japanese grammar. We agree that forms such as 嚙んではいない consist of Verb + + いる. No one I asked thought that ては / では in this construction is a suffix. Cnilep (talk) 23:35, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
@荒巻モロゾフFish bowl (talk) 00:53, 10 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • Oh, is that what etym 3 was supposed to be about! Completely unclear as currently written.
But ya, that is simply the conjunctive ~て・~で form of a verb + particle (wa). You could also have particle (mo), or (ya), or (to), or no particle at all. This is not a lexical item. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 05:39, 10 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
Well, it points to ては, which is itself fairly straightforward... —Fish bowl (talk) 04:33, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
As for etym 4, being a very new usage, so it's not in common dictionaries, and at least not a verb since it's not a conjugated word. The word which has been elided can be not only ないか, but also polite forms ないですか and ありませんか, honorific form ございませんか and etc. If there were an improvement, it might be to explain it as "negative copula + か".
Etym 3 occurs when the verb root is ended in nasal (-g-, -n-, -m-). で in etym 3 is originated from classical verb (tsu), while で in etym 1 is from particle にて (nite), so they are different things.--荒巻モロゾフ (talk) 18:43, 10 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
@荒巻モロゾフ: But those are not lexical items. Those are grammatical constructions. The ~て or ~で is part of the verb (adjective, etc.) conjugation, while は, as well as ない, ございません, or what have you are separate lexical items. Similarly, whether one of those items is elided is a matter of grammar and/or usage, not a part of the lexicon.
As such they are likely to be found in grammars, and not in dictionaries. See for example Nihongo Bunkei Jiten (1998):
【ては】
[N/Na では]
[A-くては]
[V-ては]
述語のテ形と「は」の組合さったもの。
(“ては. noun では, adj-くては, verb-ては. Combination of the te-form of the predicate with ‘wa’.”)
Cnilep (talk) 01:51, 13 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

RFV failed Cnilep (talk) 02:38, 24 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hm, that it exists is not really disputed. The appropriate treatment IMO would be RFD or RFC. では and ては (verb suffix) should be kept or deleted together as a set. —Fish bowl (talk) 00:48, 25 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
Then let's delete. The verb suffix portion is only the (te) or (de), exclusive of the (wa), which is clearly the particle and not part of the suffix. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 01:33, 25 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
Weak keep ては・では (verb suffix); or else move its content to ;
keep では (ではないか). —Fish bowl (talk) 01:29, 1 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

edit

Japanese. Rfv-sense: In Man'yōshū I, 2, the first verse 山常庭 (Yamato ni wa) proves the historical use of the Man'yōgana 庭 used phonographically to represent the particle には (ni wa) introducing the place where an action is done. — This unsigned comment was added by 2.36.88.4808:49 (talkcontribs).

User:Poketalker added two rfv-sense requests on 26 February 2017.
  1. (historical) place where something is done
  2. (regional) at the entrance of a house, a dirt floor
Per 2.36.88.48's comment, the first of these seems to be ateji for the particles には. If that is the case, that would make it archaic (and perhaps uncommon, or obsolete) rather than historical. It would also be a postposition or particle rather than a noun. Cnilep (talk) 23:50, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • For the current sense 2 ("place where something is done"), if we view this as as man'yōgana, this is arguably not entry-worthy, as that is a spelling convention and not a lexical item -- as the anon correctly notes, this is simply locative particle (ni) + topic / contrastive particle (wa). And as @Cnilep notes, this is a particle combination, not a noun. Moreover, this usage Old Japanese, not Japanese.
That said, there is a noun (niwa) with the sense of "place where something is done". The lack of any usex obscured this. My local copy of Daijirin gives examples like 「学びの―」「裁きの―」, where the preceding genitive (no) means that, grammatically, this niwa must be a noun. The entry also includes a quote from the Nihon Shoki: 「すなわち霊畤(マツリノニワ)を鳥見の山の中に立てて/日本書紀(神武訓)」 (clearly showing use in a compound noun), and one from the Man'yōshū: 「武庫の海の―良くあらし漁(イサリ)する/万葉 3609」 (here coming again after a (no), marking this as a noun).
I am not sure if the noun sense for "place where something is done" is still current, however -- the quotes are OJP and not JA.
  • The current sense 3 ("at the entrance of a house, a dirt floor") is included in Daijirin as well, with a quote from a 浄瑠璃 (jōruri, street theater, storytelling with musical accompaniment, ballad or chant) play dating to 1720: 「そろばん追取―へくわらりと投げ捨たり/浄瑠璃・天の網島(中)」.
Again, I'm unsure if this sense is still in current use, and if it is regional (as currently labeled), I don't know what regions. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:33, 15 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
I put three citations of 'place where something is done' on Citations:庭. I also removed 'historical' from the sense, as these are contemporary. Cnilep (talk) 00:35, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
No offense directed at you personally. But I am really frustrated at seeing inline citations being removed. I use dictionaries to find "how" and "when" a word and sense have been in use. It supports the given sense as well as etymology. I am most interested in the older citations, but any are better than none. Without any supporting citations, why should I believe any of the definitions given?
While I was not involved in this entry, I have spent many pain staking hours searching and adding citations to find them gone several years later. When there are dozens or even hundreds of citations, moving some to the citation page may make sense, while prioritizing older and relevant citations. But very few entries in this entire project have that many citations. Most entries and senses are missing them completely, which really hurts this dictionary. Bendono (talk) 11:41, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

RFV passed for sense "place where something is done". No citations yet for "dirt floor", but it is in other dictionaries. Cnilep (talk) 00:51, 28 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

March 2022

edit

したれ

edit

Japanese. (dialect) imperative of する

Added by User:0.02s, who included the label dialect and asked "what dialect?"

Nihon Hōgen Daijiten includes したれば (alternate form of したら, which in turn is a Tohoku conjunction meaning そうすると, それなら (if that is the case)), as well as したれる (form of the verb 湿(しと) (shitoru, be damp)) and ごしたれる (form of the Tohoku/Hokuriku verb ごしむく (goshimuku, die)). Nihon Kokugo Daijiten includes したれ‐ど and したれ‐ども, which it derives respectively as する +‎ たり +‎ and する +‎ たり +‎ ども (both roughly “doing in spite of”, if I understand correctly), but doesn't mark them as dialect. Both Digital Daijisen and Shin Wa-Ei Chūjiten have してやる, variously glossed as “do for (someone)”, “trick (someone)”, or “do as one pleases”. I can't find したれ as such, though, and don't know whether it might be a form of Tohoku したら or some other (regional? class?) variant of してやる (or maybe just して?). Cnilep (talk) 02:32, 24 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

I see a hit over at Nihon Jiten. Their entry for したれ (shitare) indicates that this is 阿波弁 (Awa-ben), the dialect used in Tokushima prefecture on Shikoku. Apparently it's a contraction of してやれ (shite yare). There's also a separate entry for the Kansai dialect phrase どないかしたれや (donai ka shitare ya, loosely, something like “just do whatever already”), where this したれ (shitare) appears to be again a contraction of してやれ (shite yare).
HTH, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 01:30, 25 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
So, should it be したれ, or したる? The current Digital Daijisen in Kotobank has 為て遣ったり but (oddly) not 為て遣る. (It does, however, gloss 為て遣ったり as 「してやる」 + 「たり」.) I can't tell if this is some kind of defective paradigm, or just "dialect" enough that the editors neglect it a bit. Cnilep (talk) 02:44, 5 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

ポワ

edit

Japanese.

===Noun===
{{ja-noun}}

# [https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Phowa phowa]

nothing in google scholar/books —Fish bowl (talk) 09:50, 27 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

===Noun===
{{ja-noun}}

# [[phowa]]

04:57, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

  • FWIW, just in preliminary poking, I found that the JA WP has a hint of this at ja:w:ポア, a disambig page -- but the mentioned article about this particular aspect of Tibetan Buddhism, at ja:w:ポア (チベット仏教), is a redlink.
There's some background material about this subject in English at w:Phowa. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 10:28, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

if these entries are about w:ja:ポア (オウム真理教), that should be made very clear, and the "Tibetan Buddhism" tag now currently on ポワ should be removed pending cites about Tibetan Buddhism. —Fish bowl (talk) 00:32, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

I've rewritten ポア, but ポワ still needs to be examined, and the claim I made about ポワ there (based on the Japanese Wikipedia page) should be verified. —Fish bowl (talk) 21:34, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

April 2022

edit

わらわ

edit

Japanese. Rfv-sense: (modern fiction, women's speech) I; me (used by haughty women of the highest classes of society)

The entry was previously tagged for cleanup as "Very confusing entry, requires clarification and formatting; expansion also needed". I've done my best to clean it up, but I don't know why there are two senses both glossed, essentially, as "I". (The other is: "(archaic, women's speech, humble) I; me".) I guess that if the word is used in contemporary fiction with a different connotation, this might make sense, but I haven't seen such use myself. I should note, though, that Japanese sources say the the pronoun came to be associated with samurai women in early Modern Japanese, so that may be a clue. Cnilep (talk) 06:28, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Widespread use: see w:ja:日本語の一人称代名詞#妾(わらわ) (as already written in the entry as a comment), as well as the list of fictional characters using this pronoun at https://dic.pixiv.net/a/わらわ#h2_1 well exceeding 3 independent works. —Fish bowl (talk) 06:32, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
The Wikipedia article on pronouns includes commentary, but no usage examples. If the usage is easy to find, then could you please add some? Thanks, Cnilep (talk) 07:05, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
There's also w:ja:わらわ, which mentions humble usage, but says nothing about haughtiness... ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 10:41, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
Probably not immediately due to a lack of direct access to these works, and I still think it is widespread use. —Fish bowl (talk) 03:30, 20 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Fish bowl You suggested this is widespread, but so far no one has added attestation. Any update? Cnilep (talk) 05:59, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

May 2022

edit

edit

Chinese. Simplified form of 𬠰. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:11, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

The simplified form of 𬠰 is because 𦥯 always becomes 𰃮 in simplified Chinese.
I was not making things up. I was simply following 简化字总表. --172.58.88.250 06:13, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
類推簡化字 need to be attested. None of these are found exactly in 简化字总表. Pinging @H2NCH2COOH for opinion on these. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 22:00, 8 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
They don't require independent verrification. 简化字总表 states that any trad.-simp. pair in Table 2 is generally applicable to other characters, even if it isn't listed in Table 3. --H2NCH2COOH (Talk) 04:13, 9 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
@H2NCH2COOH Okay, so they are acceptable as 類推簡化字. However, I do think they need to be attested per WT:ATTEST for the purposes of Wiktionary. I'm wondering if other Chinese editors have any opinion on this (Notifying Atitarev, Tooironic, Fish bowl, Mar vin kaiser, RcAlex36, The dog2, Frigoris, 沈澄心, 恨国党非蠢即坏, Michael Ly): — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 18:39, 9 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
The problem with clinging to attestation in Chinese is that there are tons of variants (not just simplified Chinese, but also ancient ones), and it is simply impossible to do in practice. And since simplified Chinese is a relatively new and "artificial" thing, it is hard to find cases where the simplified forms of these rare characters being used. However, the Table 2 did tell us how they should theoretically be simplified when used (since the writing system is "artificial"). This rule has been generally applied to rare characters in classical Chinese publications, and there should not be any exception in these cases when they appear (unless you are talking about the guideline of the latest standard, which recommends traditional forms if outside 通用规范汉字表: but that would probably be even more dreadful to deal with). --H2NCH2COOH (Talk) 20:52, 9 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
Well I do think there is something questionable. Not about the simplification rule, but the existence of the supposed "traditional" forms in Chinese -- are they really used in ancient texts? Or are they just made up for names? --H2NCH2COOH (Talk) 21:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
𨍶 and 𦦗 are presented in Kangxi Dictionary and some others, so I believe they are actually used in ancient text and their simplified form can be derived accordingly. 𠙦 seems like a variant form of so they both can possibly be treated as variants. --H2NCH2COOH (Talk) 15:14, 11 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
Neutral: honestly a lot of the weirder chinese characters don't meet CFI anyway (like {{zh-historical-dict}}, which literally says citations probably don't exist). —Fish bowl (talk) 03:24, 16 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Fish bowl: True, but it should at least be verifiable by the same way as {{zh-historical-dict}} entries, i.e. listed in a published source as a variant/simplified form. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 15:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Justinrleung Is it worth formalising Chinese as a limited documentation language when dealing with (say) Middle Chinese and earlier? There might be a better cut-off point. Theknightwho (talk) 14:23, 4 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Theknightwho: Only Standard Written Chinese is well-documented, so any other form of Chinese would be considered limited documentation language. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 14:25, 4 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Justinrleung To be clear, I'm referring to ancient forms only cited in historical dictionaries, such as the ones Fish bowl mentions. If those are already covered by the LDL policy due to being pre-modern anyway then fair enough. Theknightwho (talk) 14:40, 4 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Theknightwho: Yup, that's covered. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 14:53, 4 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
I am sceptical that this one can be attested, because 𬠰 (U+2C830) is only used in Taiwanese names[5] and has the reading xué[6]. I'm quite relaxed about including simplified forms of rare characters, but the prima facie evidence suggests this is unlikely to be real. Theknightwho (talk) 16:33, 3 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Chinese. Simplified form of 𨍶. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:15, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

The simplified form of 𨍶 is because 𤇾 and always become 𫇦 and respectively in simplified Chinese. --172.58.88.250 06:13, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Chinese. Simplified form of 𦦗. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:21, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

The simplified form of 𦦗 is because 𦥯 always becomes 𰃮 in simplified Chinese. --172.58.88.250 06:13, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
The traditional form isn't in the Kangxi dictionary (Unicode says it would appear on p. 1005), but it is in 《字彙補·八》. Theknightwho (talk) 16:48, 3 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Note: 𦦗 is now created. 2607:FB91:3AE:8EA8:61BC:D373:3EC4:F7BC 00:17, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Chinese. Simplified form of 𣞁. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:23, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

The simplified form of 𣞁 is because 𤇾 always becomes 𫇦 in simplified Chinese. --172.58.88.250 06:13, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
Although neither are presented in mainstream dictionaries, it follows the simplification rule, and Unihan has 㮠 as the simp. form of 𣞁. --H2NCH2COOH (Talk) 15:22, 11 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
Again, I'm sceptical of this one, because 𣞁 (U+23781) is used in Taiwanese names[7] with the reading róng[8]. @ND381 is that how it's also used in Hong Kong? I assume so from the definition, but I just want to check that that usage applies to both. Theknightwho (talk) 16:58, 3 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Theknightwho: It's probably not an everyday character, so asking anyone about how it's used would not give you much info. I did find 𣞁 in names of people from ancient texts, which I've put in Citations:𣞁. As for whether the simplified form is found, it might be worth looking for simplified reprints of those ancient texts, but I haven't been able to find any of those. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 19:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Chinese. Simplified form of 𠙦. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:26, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

The simplified form of 𠙦 is because 𤇾 always becomes 𫇦 in simplified Chinese. --172.58.88.250 06:13, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
𠙦 (U+20666) is a variant of 茕 that is apparently in 中華字海, and also shows up in 教育部異體字字典. Apparently the source for 䒮 is Singapore, but I can't find what list it came from, and this doc submitted to Unicode in February considers it questionable. Theknightwho (talk) 19:03, 3 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Theknightwho: I checked a copy of 中华字海, and it seems like 𠙦 doesn't exist in the dictionary. It is instead 焭 (page 123, 几部 + 10 strokes). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 18:45, 4 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

July 2022

edit

煩悩

edit

Japanese. Rfv-sense:

2020 November 9, “煩悩【ぼんのう】”, in 実用日本語表現辞典[9]:
通俗的には、とりわけ「物欲」および「性欲」を指す意味で用いられることが多い。
In common usage, this commonly carries the meaning of 'worldly desires' (in particular) or 'sexual desire'.
2004, 彰宏 中谷, 今したいことを、今しよう。[10]:
「私はお酒に目がなくてね。お酒の煩悩は強いですね」[...]「自分はこんなにお酒が好きだ。これを一生の仕事にできないだろうか」と考えることができます。これが、自分の煩悩を客観的に認めるということになっていきます。
'I have a weakness for alcohol... my desire for alcohol really is strong.' [...] One can think, 'I like alcohol this much. This isn't something I can spend my life on, can it.' This is how one can start to objectively recognise one's worldly desires.

— This unsigned comment was added by Jaml0 (talkcontribs) at 02:55, 3 July 2022 (UTC).Reply

(@PoketalkerFish bowl (talk) 23:48, 3 July 2022 (UTC))Reply
@Jaml0, Fish bowl: neologism for the dictionary citation? The 2004 cite most likely refers to "the mental state of klesha" sense. ~ POKéTalker07:59, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • I would caution against relying on 実用日本語表現辞典. 実用日本語表現辞典 is an anonymously published blog. It's not even pseudonymous. It apparently tries to document terms in recently popular usage in the Japanese speaking internet. Weblio apparently includes their entries, but I would say that indicates Weblio's loose standards more than anything else. Whym (talk) 12:15, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

August 2022

edit

edit

Japanese. Not part of the Kanken. Added here. If this can't be verified then be advised that this is not a one-off; I've encountered quite a number of such spurious kanji entries (and senses). — Fytcha T | L | C 22:55, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Weblio's Kanji Jiten ("Kanji Dictionary") entry explicitly states that this isn't used in Japanese: https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E7%9D%98
‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 07:38, 7 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
睘睘(けいけい) (keikei) would be necessary for a 漢文訓読 reading of the 詩経: google:"睘睘" "けいけい", but that might be the only usage. —Fish bowl (talk) 22:17, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
google:"睘々" "けいけい"斯く開創当初より既に睘々踽々(けいけいくく)の輩を以て組織せられたるもの. Someone flexing their vocabulary. —Fish bowl (talk) 22:19, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
[11] using the variant 々 —Fish bowl (talk) 04:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
Here is 半睘錢, too. It looks like it is a mention of the term but I consider it to be a use of the character in Japanese text. Whym (talk) 07:29, 26 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Japanese. https://kanji.jitenon.jp/kanjiv/10589.html

Likewise for the alternative forms and listed at that kanji.jitenon.jp site.
My suspicion is that these characters are used in Chinese, and someone included them in the JIS standard for character encodings in Japan, despite these not really being used in Japanese. This wouldn't be the first such instance of this, either.
Unless someone can find three citations of this in use in Japanese text, as Japanese, and with a specific reading and meaning, we must delete as unconfirmed. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:52, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
Ha! I thought I had a touch of déjà vu. 😄 This is already listed above for August 2022. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:53, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

삼대체강

edit

Korean.

# {{lb|ko|anatomy}} [[trisplanchnic]]

0 results at google:"삼대체강", google scholar:"삼대체강", 1 result at google books:"삼대체강" (두개강 (頭蓋座) , 흉강 (胸陸) , 복강 (腹陸) 의 삼대 체강 에는 공간 이 가득 차 있음에도 불구 하고).

@SpacestationtrustfundFish bowl (talk) 00:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

It seems that the spelling is borrowed from the Japanese "三大体腔". [12][13] --Dubukimchi (talk) 02:17, 20 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

October 2022

edit

觿

edit

Japanese. An IP claims this "Kanji [] has no known use beyond Literary Chinese writings", in which case it seems not to merit a Japanese entry. But I don't know a whole lot about the niceties of CJK, so bringing it here. This, that and the other (talk) 11:58, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Kotobank has something like that sense for Chinese (in Chu-Nichi Jiten), but elsewhere has the kanji as a variant of くじり (くじること). I added the Japanese sense and formatted the section, but haven't verified the IP user's sense or the readings. Cnilep (talk) 06:43, 9 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
This seems like a rare but valid kanji spelling. I'm having a go at this, locating the main entries at the kana spellings of くじり (kujiri) and つのぎり (tsunogiri). (Still in process, links are still red as I write this.) ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:38, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
Usage of 觿 would be necessary for a 漢文訓読 translation of 礼記 ([14]) and 史記 ([15]). —Fish bowl (talk) 21:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

January 2023

edit

𣀟

edit
Discussion moved from WT:RFVNE.

Vietnamese. Chữ Nôm character. The reading is , but I cannot connect it to any of the meanings on its page. As much as I've found is dictionaries saying it means reed, and "một và bông lau" which doesn't make much sense to me. Regireki (talk) 13:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Regireki Bông lau means "reed". Và means "and" or "several". So in this quote and context, "một và bông lau", it means "several reed plants". Compare một và to một chút (a little bit) and một ít (a little bit).
Also the character is composed of 𣀟 (⿺巴數) where 巴 is the phonetic radical and 數 is the semantic radical meaning "several". Lachy70 (talk) 04:31, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

February 2023

edit

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "Liu River". Tagged by @Tooironic — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 21:11, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps just a typo; 潭水 exists according to Wikipedia. —Fish bowl (talk) 02:21, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
It's not a typo, but it's a historical name for 柳江 according to 漢語大字典. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 04:18, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "(Cantonese) Used to point out something that one would like confirmation for.", pronunciation ho1. I believe this should be an alt form of (ho2, "(Cantonese) Sentence-final particle used in an interrogative seeking confirmation."), also commonly written as 可 and possibly 呵, but I do not think it would be pronounced ho1. – Wpi31 (talk) 10:09, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Wpi31: I think it should be ho2. Matthews and Yip (Cantonese: A Comprehensive Grammar) writes ho2 as 呵. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:46, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
Cited as an alternative form of . — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:46, 10 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

March 2023

edit

Kawanakajima shōgi

edit
Discussion moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/CJK.

川中島将棋 (redlink) appears to be rather niche, with one Google Scholar hit, two Google Books hits, and 36 Google hits under default settings.

Japanese.

Chinese.

# [[Kawanakajima]]

====Derived terms====
{{zh-der|川中島將棋}}

where 川中島將棋 is a redlink.

Fish bowl (talk) 22:50, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Fish bowl: These seem like RFV issues. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 04:02, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
OK; moved. —Fish bowl (talk) 01:56, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Fish bowl: forgot to re-ping @Apisite after the move? Also, added Japanese entry to Kawanakajima so the entry does not get deleted completely. ~ POKéTalker(==) 05:14, 13 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

All failed. —Fish bowl (talk) 01:00, 12 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

充牣

edit

Japanese.

User:馬太阿房 noted this as Gikun for () (mitsu) in the Meiji Bible, but couldn't find other Japanese usage. I can't find it in archives of Asahi Shimbun (from 1879) or Yomiuri Shimbun (from 1876), and Google Books snippets seem like probably scannos. NKD lists it as じゅう‐じん, with a note, "「仞」はみちる意" (仞/牣 means みちる "to be filled"). The site furigana.info also says the reading is じゅうじん.

I briefly changed the POS from noun to verb-suru, since the gloss suggests an accomplishment, but the one usage I found thanks to NKD (from 1869) doesn't include する, so I changed it back. Cnilep (talk) 02:43, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

(furigana.info also includes book extracts from Aozora Bunko, and they have two uses of 充牣する by 夏目漱石. —Fish bowl (talk) 23:43, 30 March 2023 (UTC))Reply
https://lab.ndl.go.jp/dl/book/770526?keyword=充牣&page=6 has 充牣 in some list probably for learning 漢語, annotated simultaneously as ジウジン and ミツ. —Fish bowl (talk) 23:43, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

April 2023

edit

フランベルジェ

edit

Japanese. No Google Scholar hits, no (meaningful) Google Books hits,[note 1] no Kotobank hits……: just lots and lots of video games. Is that acceptable? —Fish bowl (talk) 23:46, 2 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

  1. ^ 3 shitty word list epubs and 2 usages as a surname? 文學界, Volume 10 朝日新聞縮刷版

In addition, note that the title is フランベルジェ (furanberuje) and not フランベルジュ (furanberuju). —Fish bowl (talk) 23:05, 8 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

レーストラック

edit

Japanese.

I can only find a few newspaper articles about the US military's position on "レーストラック方式", which I gather is a (calque of an English) term for some kind flight path for airplanes? Granted, such mentions go back to the 1970s, but they do not seem to refer to any actual racetracks. e.g. Yomiuri Shimbun, 2011:

  • 米国防総省(べいこくぼうそうしょう)6月(ろくがつ)新型垂直離着陸輸送機(しんがたすいちょくりちゃくりくゆそうき)「MV22オスプレイ」の配備(はいび)()めたことを()け、対象航空機(たいしょうこうくうき)CH46中型輸送(CH46 ちゅうがたゆそう)ヘリからMV22オスプレイに、飛行経路(ひこうけいろ)台形(だいけい)から陸上競技場型(りくじょうきょうぎじょうかた)レーストラック(かた))に変更(へんこう)
    Beikoku Bōsōshō ga rokugatsu ni shingata suichoku richakuriku yusōki “MV22 Osupurei” no haibi o kimeta koto o uke, taishō kōkūki o CH46 chūgata yusō heri kara MV22 Osupurei ni, hikō keiro wa daikei kara rikujō kyōgijō kata (rēsutorakku kata) ni henkō.
    From June the US Department of Defense has decided to deploy new vertical take off and landing “MV22 Osprey”, switching from CH46 midsize transport helicopter to the MV22 Osprey, the flight path shifting from a trapezoid pattern to a athletic field pattern (racetrack pattern).

That is not at all what I would imagine from seeing レーストラック glossed as "racetrack". Cnilep (talk) 04:42, 6 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

(Note: entry by Special:Contributions/2601:601:4002:E260:7999:F752:5C3C:7DADFish bowl (talk) 23:02, 8 April 2023 (UTC))Reply
One use in a song: UVERworld - ace of ace; but this being the predominant Google result for google:"レーストラックに" is a bad sign. —Fish bowl (talk) 23:04, 8 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
It looks like it's used to describe a certain shape of electromagnetic coils and other similar devices, in the form of レーストラック型, レーストラック形状, etc. It might be a stretch to say レーストラック without a suffix means something like "racetrack-shaped", though. Maybe we can have a usage note about it? Whym (talk) 11:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

May 2023

edit

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "to raise; to rear (domestic animals)" and "storage; savings". Tagged by @Tooironic but not listed here. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 12:54, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

内存溢出的猫 (talk) 11:25, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: (Cantonese) to pull up (pants or socks). Removed by @Wpi out of process. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 21:39, 20 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

This sense exists; both it and 優 are pronounced as jau1, but they should be unrelated otherwise. It should be cognate to (cau1), cf (caang3) vs 𨅝 (jaang3), (caai2) vs (jaai2).
Ideally we would put this sense on under a separate etymology, but it appears to me that is a more common form than both 抽 or 優. In any case, it should be a placed under an etymology separate from the main one on any of these three characters. – Wpi (talk) 08:26, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Wpi: 優 is given in 廣州話方言詞典 and 廣州話普通話詞典. 廣州方言詞典 writes it as 摳. Words.hk has 抽, 摳, 拞 and 揄. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 18:17, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
Please see my talk page. -- Ywhy (talk) 11:16, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
Found some uses, but not durably archived. But given this and the two dictionaries, I think this is enough to be considered cited for Cantonese. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

為国

edit

Japanese.

===Noun===
{{ja-noun|いこく}}

# to [[govern]] the [[country]]

Setting aside "Noun" which seems to be a typo, I can only see usage of "為国" (為国(ためくに)?) as a personal name.

為国(いこく) appears in Kotobank, but as a part of a 漢文 dictionary.

Fish bowl (talk) 07:24, 21 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

google:"為国し" (adding the し to filter for Japanese verb constructions) generates three hits.
  • Two are from a name website and are mis-hits for the given name 為国(ためくに) (tamekuni).
  • One is a mis-hit with a comma between the two kanji characters.
google books:"為国し" generates five hits, but all only with Google's error-prone "snippet view".
  • Two are from text snippets that demonstrate other scanning artifacts (making it likely that these hits are also scannos, and both of them certainly look dubious).
  • One has a comma in between the two kanji.
  • Two might possibly be valid -- or they might be scannos as well.
At any rate, we don't have enough likely-cromulent hits to meet the three-minimum requirement for WT:CFI. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 20:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
It looks like it comes from Confucius (子曰能以禮讓爲國乎章) which is usually not translated into Japanese in a way that connects the two characters as a word. However, there are other examples that I think count. None of them suggest -suru verb usage, so it makes sense that "為国し" generates few hits.
That said, I don't think I grasp the meaning of the last two sentences well (at least without further research), and I cannot be of much help in adding quotations and their translations. Whym (talk) 12:06, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

June 2023

edit

がばっと

edit

Japanese. Apparently an adverb meaning "bam". No idea what this is supposed to be referring to. Theknightwho (talk) 21:15, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

  • それから、服も脱がずに、ベッドへがばっと倒れ伏して、やすらぎのない眠りにおちた。[16]
  • 敦夫は臥破(がば)と起上った。[17]
Whym (talk) 11:23, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Whym Thanks. Is all of a sudden a suitable gloss? "bam" is meaningless to me. Theknightwho (talk) 22:00, 21 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
I think suddenly and all of a sudden are both fine. See also https://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%8C%E3%81%B0%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A8. By way of sound-effects similarity, consider kerflop when used as an adverb. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:13, 22 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
Suddenly and all of a sudden are not wrong, but we might want to be more precise. I think we want to indicate that something like がばっと空が暗くなった would be less common. がばっと usually implies physical movement and sound made by the subject (typically a human or an animal), or a metaphor of that. There are collocations like がばっと開く (to open wide, like an open mouth) - I don't know if this can be explained together with what's discussed above, or should be explained as a separate sense. Whym (talk) 12:41, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
I'd say "suddenly and rapidly". Compare Daijisen. Nardog (talk) 14:17, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

𬖾 (⿰米頗)

edit

Wikipedia:Chữ Nôm features 𬖾 (⿰米頗) as an example of a Vietnam-created character. I would like to see the Pho sense cited to Wiktionary standard (Wiktionary:Attestation) if possible. Pinging @72trombones, a new editor interested in the subject. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 16:32, 29 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

The field of Vietnamese characters is sadly full of cruft. The Nôm writing system was never taught or tested in a formal way. People studied Chinese and Nôm was halfway there, like Franglish for people who are studying French. So making up characters as you went along was a perfectly valid thing to do back in the Nôm era, which ended around 1920. The Han-Nom Institute in Hanoi recommends several dictionaries to sort this issue out, including Tran Van Kiem (2004), Ho Le (1976), Nguyen Quang Hong (2014), Takeuchi (1989), and the Institute of Vietnamese Studies (2009).
The character above is not from any of these dictionaries, but rather from Đại Từ Điển Chữ Nôm (Great Nôm Dictionary, 1998) by Vũ Văn Kính. With numerous unsourced characters, this dictionary is not on the institute's list of approved references. However, it is easily the best-selling Nôm dictionary in Vietnam, not that many Vietnamese buy Nôm dictionaries these days.
Earlier, this character appeared in the Wikipedia article "pho." I have changed it to something better attested. Perhaps the illustration in the chu Nom article can be replaced with 𡂄 (⿰口頗). Its a similar character from Ho Le's dictionary. 72trombones (talk) 15:26, 30 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

ただ

edit

Japanese. RFV in search of any unambiguous use of this term as a noun -- as an agent or patient of a verb, such as marked by (ga, subject particle) or (o, object particle).

I've done some preliminary digging. While certain Japanese monolingual dictionaries include "noun" as a POS for this (Kojien, Daijirin, Daijisen; FWIW, the NKD does not do this), none of the usage examples listed, nor any I've found online so far, actually show clear use as a noun -- with the term appearing as the agent or patient of a verb. Instead, all usage I've seen so far is consistent with this term being used sometimes as a so-called "no adjective".

If no one can find actual clear use of this term as a noun, I think we have to view the Japanese sources that do this as using an analysis based solely on use with the particle (no), and that this term is not actually a "noun" as we define it.

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:54, 29 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

How would you analyze ただ同然 and ただに等しい? Whym (talk) 09:05, 30 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Whym --
In both cases, ただ (tada) is immediately modifying the following adjective, and in that syntactic role, it must be an adverb.
  • ただ同然
The ただ (tada) here is clearly being used as a bare adverb modifying na adjective 同然 (dōzen, same, equivalent, identical).
→ I see a similar confusion in Japanese references for 同然 (dōzen) that I see for ただ (tada). The NKD lists this as a na adjective, Kojien and Shinmeikai give no part of speech (often implying "noun"), and Daijirin and Daijisen list as both na adjective and noun. But again, the usage examples in the references just show regular no adjective constructions, without any clear evidence of "noun-ness" -- not used as a patient or agent of a verb. Googling around (google books:"同然が") shows cases like しかも本人同然がいずれも女子であるから (shika mo honnin dōzen ga izure mo joshi de aru kara), where the 同然 (dōzen) seems to be used to mean "all of them the same" -- but this sense is not listed in the Japanese dictionaries.
Update:
I have to revise the above a bit after looking more closely at the linked page. The fuller context for this instance of ただ (tada) is:
「日用品などをただ同然で配って雰囲気を盛り上げた後、」
If we parse the 同然 (dōzen) as "all of them the same", the ただ (tada) still parses out as an adverb (basically, "just"), but in this case it's modifying the phrase 同然配って (dōzen de kubatte, distributing them all the same), or possibly the longer phrase 同然配って雰囲気盛り上げた (dōzen de kubatte fun'iki o moriageta, distributing them all the same and enlivening the mood/atmosphere). ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:54, 30 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • ただに等しい
The ただ (tada) in this one can be parsed as either a na adjective used with the (ni) adverbial particle, or simply as an adverb that takes the (ni) adverbial particle, modifying the i adjective 等しい (hitoshii, same, equivalent, identical).
‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:03, 30 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
同然 in ただ同然 is like "virtually", "practically", "almost". Just ただで would be "for free", and ただ同然で is "basically for free", "barely taking any money". At least semantically, it's 同然 that's modifying ただ(で), not vice versa. 同然 seems to almost always follow a noun or も. I don't know if that automatically means ただ there is a noun, but it's definitely not an adverb.
ただに等しい is also synonymous to ただ同然: "practically free". に is definitely not an adverbial particle. に等しい = "equivalent to", "tantamount to". It can follow a verb or adjective, as in ないに等しい, するに等しい. Again not sure if that automatically means ただ here is a noun, but your parsing is incorrect. Nardog (talk) 04:03, 1 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

July 2023

edit

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "to flip or turn over". – Wpi (talk) 09:12, 5 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

This is attested in 康熙字典 and 漢語大詞典 -- Ywhy (talk) 20:18, 8 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Objection. Premature ruling. No consensus has been reached yet.
More contexts/quotes are required to refine the gloss. Who's in? -- Ywhy (talk) 17:59, 15 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
I checked 漢語大詞典 again, and it gives the definition 變動;反覆, citing a few more quotes: 《漢書·禮樂志二》:“幡比翄回集,貳雙飛常羊。”《漢書·高帝紀下》“譬猶居高屋之上建瓴水也”顏師古注引三國魏如淳曰:“居高屋之上而幡瓴水,言其向下之勢易也。” This sense can be readded, but I think "to flip or turn over" is not a great translation and should be refined. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 04:30, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
Urgh, whoever cares may see my notes. Sorry for the hiatus. I'm out. -- Ywhy (talk) 12:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit

Korean. Does this mean "plural noun"? (If so, it needs reformatting as [[plural]] noun, and surely it needs to be under a "noun" POS.) Or is it some grammatical marker? This, that and the other (talk) 02:50, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think that Objectivesea confused and -들. --Dubukimchi (talk) 02:49, 20 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

ぎゃ

edit

Japanese. Etymoloy 2: (archaic) the nominative case; marks the subject of the verb

This is described in the etymology as being "Found in the Okinawa strata" and has the label (Northern Ryukyuan), and has one citation dating back to the 16th century from the Omoro Sōshi, which makes me think this much more likely to be a Ryukyuan language than Japanese. Theknightwho (talk) 00:16, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Agreed that that should be moved to an ===Okinawan=== entry (and/or some other Ryukyuan language as appropriate).
Looking at the history, I suspect that the entry is a leftover from before we had much coverage for the Okinawan languages. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 00:05, 22 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Eirikr It's a bit tricky to know exactly what L2 it should go under, but I suspect it would be Proto-Northern Ryukyuan (which we don't have at the moment, because the Ryukyuan languages haven't been organised up till now).
Here's a pretty conservative suggestion for how we could do things, and further refinements are certainly possible.
  • Northern Ryukyuan - Proto-Northern Ryukyuan?
    • Amami-Oshima
      • Northern Amami-Oshima (ryn)
      • Southern Amami-Oshima (ams)
    • Kikai (kzg)
    • Kunigami (xug)
    • Okinawan (ryu)
    • Oki-No-Erabu (okn)
    • Toku-No-Shima (tkn)
    • Yoron (yox)
  • Southern Ryukyuan - Proto-Southern Ryukyuan?
    • Miyako (mvi)
    • Yaeyama (rys)
    • Yonaguni (yoi)
Theknightwho (talk) 12:25, 20 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
This seems reasonable, but I'm not sure how many of those actually include reflexes of this gya particle. A quick search over at JLect finds nothing (https://www.jlect.com/search.php?r=%E3%81%8E%E3%82%83&l=ryukyu&group=words), but then again their Ryukyuan coverage is patchy. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:30, 20 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
ぎゃ palatalizes after original pR *i (never *e), as in きこゑ大きみぎや (kikowe OFOkimi gya 'the great lord who listens...').
The Ryukyuan reflexes in the dictionaries should just reflex -ga. It's actually well attested (probably both as or either a subject marker or a genitive marker) in Ryukyuan; of course JLect's Ryukyuan coverage is more than extremely patchy, so I only use the integrated Okinawa-go Data Shu in it, and even then I've been using them less, as I'm using https://okinawago.app, although you can't search by kanji. (more entry indexing by pure search; no need for special broken characters). Chuterix (talk) 01:40, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
Also this is how we can sort things phylogemy of Ryukyuan:
  • Northern Ryukyuan:
    • Amami:
      • Northern Amami-Oshima:
        • Naze:
        • Yamatohama:
        • Yuwan:
      • Kikai:
        • Aden:
        • Nakazato:
      • Southern Amami-Oshima:
        • Koniya:
        • Shodon:
      • Toku-no-Shima:
        • Asama:
        • Kametsu:
      • Oki-no-Erabu:
        • Wadomari:
        • China:
      • Yoron:
    • (Old) Okinawan:
      • Northern Okinawan::
        • Iheya:
        • Izena:
        • Nago:
        • Nakijin:
        • Iejima:
      • Southern Okinawan:
        • Kowan:
        • Shuri:
          • Naha:
        • Tonaki:
  • Southern Ryukyuan/Sakishima:
    • Miyako:
      • Hirara:
      • Uruka:
      • Minaai:
      • Ikema:
      • Irabu:
        • Nagahama:
        • Nakachi:
      • Ogami:
      • Tarama:
      • Minna:
    • Macro-Yaeyama:
      • Nuclear-Yaeyama:
        • Ishigaki:
        • Taketomi:
        • Hatoma:
        • Hateruma:
      • Yonaguni:
Chuterix (talk) 01:43, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'm a bit confused on a couple points.
  • "ぎゃ palatalizes after original pR *i (never *e), as in きこゑ大きみぎや (kikowe OFOkimi gya 'the great lord who listens...')"
A palatalized gya would presumably become ja. Yet I find no particle じゃ or じゃー at the okinawago.jp site: https://okinawago.app/search-results/%E3%81%98%E3%82%83
Did you mean instead that が (ga) would palatalize to ぎゃ (gya)? There is a topic particle が listed: https://okinawago.app/definition/oki2yamato/%E3%82%AC
  • "It's actually well attested (probably both as or either a subject marker or a genitive marker) in Ryukyuan; of course JLect's Ryukyuan coverage is more than extremely patchy, so I only use the integrated Okinawa-go Data Shu in it, and even then I've been using them less, as I'm using https://okinawago.app..."
Nor do I find any particle ぎゃ or ぎゃー: https://okinawago.app/search-results/%E3%81%8E%E3%82%83
Do you have any other sources that list a particle ぎゃ, ぎゃー, じゃ, or じゃー?
If Ryukyuan topic particle ga palatalized to gya in a regular and stable fashion, we should presumably still find examples of gya (or affricated ja) in modern Ryukyuan lects. Is there any such evidence?
If the only place we find this is in the w:Omoro Sōshi, then I suggest we rework the entry currently at ぎゃ to use "Okinawan" as the L2 heading, and clarify that this is an (archaic? obsolete?) alternative form of が#Okinawan only appearing after front vowel /i/. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:58, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Eirikr Sorry for the confusion; I said -ga is well attested in Ryukyuan; (-i)-gya is only in Old Okinawan, and the palatalization was reverted for unknown reasons (perhaps a combination of consistency and influence from Japanese?). No palatalized form of -ga is found in any Ryukyuan languages. Chuterix (talk) 23:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Chuterix, thank you for the clarification, that makes more sense. 😄 Cheers! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:27, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit

Vietnamese

我 ngã should not be labelled as archaic for the meaning "I" since in Vietnamese Nôm texts, it was mainly used to mean "to fall". It never had the sense of "I". That sense is only found in Literary Chinese texts written by Vietnamese, but is never found in any Vietnamese language texts. So labelling the term as archaic is misleading.

1. chữ Hán form of ngã, ngả (“(archaic) I; me”). Lachy70 (talk) 18:51, 20 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

The easy solution is to simply remove any label, like you said, it's simply not a Vietnamese morpheme, but it's a Vietnamese reading of a Chinese morpheme using a fairly static set of literary readings and therefore does merit a mention. Vietnamese speakers or not, it seems to people just constantly mistake Written Chinese terms for Vietnamese terms, there used to be even users who straight-up added examples blatantly in Chinese in Vietnamese entries because they were in texts written by Vietnamese writers; I bet there're still dozens and dozens entries of such "Chinese terms with Vietnamese readings" that haven't been detected and delete yet and they're still sometimes made. Korean contributors sometimes use the label "Korean Classical Chinese" when they want to add a particular "Korean" usage of Chinese morphemes or term; obviously in this particular case of ngã there's no need for anything similar since it's simply a Chinese morpheme used in its function in the original language, but I do think sometimes stuff should just be added to the Chinese entries using "Vietnamese Classical Chinese" or such similar label. PhanAnh123 (talk) 19:12, 20 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
Yes, that is why I added the label "Literary Chinese" for the entry, the edit was later reverted. I would prefer it if it was common practice to label Literary Chinese terms with Vietnamese practice as something like "Vietnamese Classical Chinese" or something similar. Lachy70 (talk) 19:18, 20 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

In Buddhist literature, the word ngã is used for the atman, their concept of the ego. This sense is still missing, though. Otherwise the sense “I, me” should be deleted as not Vietnamese. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 08:46, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

September 2023

edit

𛀁

edit

Japanese. Rfv-sense: "Identical in meaning to the particle , but used only after pronunciations of , 𛀁, and .", marked as obsolete. Tagged over three years ago by User:Huhu9001 but seemingly never listed. 0DF (talk) 23:57, 4 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm honestly not even entirely sure what that sense line is supposed to mean. Extrapolating, this sounds like -- at best -- an orthographic variant in an attempt at indicating a glide to prevent hiatus between the otherwise-identical two /e/ sounds. Given the historical vagaries I've seen in spellings, I suspect this might have been part of the Meiji era penchant for pedantic hypercorrection, but without more detail, it's hard to be certain.
I just did some poking around in my references, and I can't find any mention of this use, FWIW. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 20:08, 8 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Eirikr: RFV failed? 0DF (talk) 17:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

@LittleWholeFish bowl (talk) 01:14, 12 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

截胡

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "to steal other people's delivery" and "to steal other people's work or production that is just finished or nearly finished". I think that the meaning of this word is "to do something before others can do it" or "be the early bird". These two senses are already included in my suggestion of the revised definition.--Mahogany115 (talk) 01:09, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

edit

Japanese, Chinese, Translingual. This is ostensibly a ghost character, a character which doesn't actually exist and was only encoded due to an error by the Japanese standards body: but it is asserted to have a definition in both Japanese and Chinese, and to exist Translingually. So does it exist? In which languages? - -sche (discuss) 03:45, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Weblio only has a KANJIDIC stub, and KANJIDIC / Unihan is known for being rife with errors when it comes to the rare characters.
Meanwhile, the JA Wikt entry at ja:墸 calls it a variant / mistaken form for 𣦡 or .
  • For the former, the entry notes that this appears just once in excerpts from the w:Jiyun, and is likely a scribal mistake.
  • For the former, the entry notes that this was included in the earlier JIS standards, but further research for the fourth edition in 1997 concluded that this was a ghost character.
I say this is rubbish -- KANJIDIC / Unihan appear to have gotten this wrong. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:21, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

edit

Japanese, Chinese, Translingual. As with , above. Does this exist in Chinese? Is only the Japanese section a ghost? Or is the whole character not real? - -sche (discuss) 03:47, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

It's found in 汉语大字典 p. 538, but no examples or sources are given. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 18:41, 13 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

edit

Japanese, Chinese. As with 壥: is it a real character? In which languages? - -sche (discuss) 03:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

For Chinese, it seems to be a dictionary-only variant of , found in Yupian and Jiyun. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:18, 29 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
This is generally enough for obscure characters since it's not part of Standard Chinese. RFV passed for Chinese. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 17:49, 4 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit

As with 壥 above: the Japanese standards body now claims this character doesn't exist, yet we list a meaning not only in Japanese, but also in Chinese. In which languages is it a real character? - -sche (discuss) 03:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Attested in Chinese, but there seem to be various usages, which I've started compiling at Citations:挧. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 10:29, 19 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you; RFV-withdrawn for Chinese; though any given sense currently only has two cites and not three, I trust that the character exists in Chinese. (It is plausible it has therefore also been used in Japanese, but presumably as a surname rather than a common noun.) If it has been used in Japanese, it's not a ghost kanji; if it hasn't been used in Japanese, then maybe we either delete the Japanese section, or remove the definition and explain that its inclusion by the Japanese standards body was erroneous but nonetheless correct — because it would've been included in Unicode all the same at the behest of the Chinese standards body (since it is used in Chinese) if it hadn't already been included by the Japanese (as I said in the Tea Room). - -sche (discuss) 15:36, 22 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Like . - -sche (discuss) 03:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I have removed the Translingual definition, so the entry now presents the character as a ghost character (with no meaning). (I suppose someone else might prefer to {{no entry}} it and point to the Wikipedia article on ghost kanji.) - -sche (discuss) 15:36, 22 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Like . - -sche (discuss) 03:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Cited (as a misspelling) for Chinese. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 17:46, 12 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
RFV-failed for Japanese; reduced to # {{non-gloss|A [[ghost character]].}}, but without prejudice to being reduced further to a {{no entry}} pointer to an article or appendix on ghost kanji. - -sche (discuss) 15:38, 22 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Like . - -sche (discuss) 03:52, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

The only cases I could find for this look like misprints (or a variant) of . It's unclear how "real" the zhōu reading is (as found in 全字庫). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:34, 23 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
RFV-failed for Japanese; reduced as above (see preceding section). - -sche (discuss) 15:39, 22 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit

Japanese. We claim (via category) that this is a ghost kanji, not a character that has ever really be used. It is not, however, on the JIS list, which implies it has actually been used... in which case it's not a ghost... - -sche (discuss) 06:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

As with 碵. - -sche (discuss) 06:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

As with 碵. - -sche (discuss) 06:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

edit

RFV of the ... Chinese and Vietnamese sections, I guess? We and the Japanese standards body say this is a ghost character which doesn't exist...at least not in Japanese. But our entry has a Chinese and a Vietnamese section. Does it exist in those languages? If so, it's weird that the Japanese got so concerned that it had been 'erroneously included' by them, if it would've presumably been included by the Chinese standards body for themselves if the Japanese hadn't already included it... (Cf. RFV#碵, RFV#墸, and the Tea Room discussion of ghost kanji.) - -sche (discuss) 06:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

@-sche It was used in Vietnamese,
From a poem in 國音詩集 Quốc âm thi tập,
槐 Hoè
夢冷乃乃摆槐 Mống lành nẩy nẩy bởi hoè trồng
  Lachy70 (talk) 01:56, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
Added sources to the entry, Tự Điển Chữ Nôm Dẫn Giải in particular has this and other examples of usage. MSG17 (talk) 15:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
OK. I've explained the situation in the Japanese entry. RFV-resolved I guess, though no prejudice to recasting the Japanese section in {{no entry}} terms and moving the discussion of its Unicode-inclusion history to the Vietnamese section. - -sche (discuss) 15:45, 22 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit

As with (later to be archived to Talk:槞): is this, as the Japanese say, a nonexistent character, or does it exist in Chinese and Korean as we say? - -sche (discuss) 07:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

In Chinese it is a variant of the character “閏”[18]https://homeinmists.ilotus.org/hd/hydzd3.php?st=page_no&kw=4368 103.151.172.26 19:28, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

As with 槞: is this, as the Japanese say, a nonexistent character, or does it exist in Chinese and Korean as we say? - -sche (discuss) 07:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

I've commented out the Chinese section pending attestation, and removed the Korean section, and redefined the Japanese section as a ghost kanji. RFV-failed / RFV-resolved? - -sche (discuss) 15:48, 22 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

アドラブル

edit

Japanese. "adorable"

Tagged by another user in June 2023 but not listed here. Cnilep (talk) 03:51, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

October 2023

edit

驕人

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: Added by "to try to impress people; to show off" @Mar vin kaiser. RcAlex36 (talk) 09:40, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

@RcAlex36: It comes from the "Far East Chinese-English Dictionary 遠東漢英大辭典 簡明本" published in 2005. The definition is the same word-for-word. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:18, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
@RcAlex36, Mar vin kaiser: It feels mergeable with the first verb sense "to regard someone with disdain; to turn up one's nose at someone; to show contempt for others"; it sort of aligns with 顯出驕氣 in Liang'an Cidian and 表現驕傲的態度 in Guoyu Cidian. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:48, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

November 2023

edit

白亜質

edit

Japanese.

# [[chalky]]

Koujien defines this word as a dental term (synonym of セメント質) and a noun. —Fish bowl (talk) 02:29, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Kc kennylauFish bowl (talk) 01:16, 12 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Yep, it makes sense for it to be a noun. I would also like to point out that semantically it should also be an adjective, and jisho (a secondary source, if I recall correctly) also has the definition "chalky" with the specification that の is used. --kc_kennylau (talk) 17:55, 15 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

December 2023

edit

朝鮮民族

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "Joseon ethnicity". Tagged by @TongcyDai. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:41, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Is the question whether Joseon == Korean for this sense, or if 朝鲜民族 is a valid expanded form of 朝鮮族? If it's the latter, there are definitely usages of it on governmental sites:
> 这表明,朝鲜族人已经形成为区别于朝鲜半岛朝鲜民族的心理素质 (改革开放后东北三省朝鲜族的海外移民问题初探)
> 废除朝文汉字混用,为纯洁朝鲜民族语言文字而努力
> 我国朝鲜语言文字发展的缘由
> 中国政府在建交公报中声明:尊重朝鲜民族早日实现朝鲜半岛和平统一的愿望,并支持由朝鲜民族自己来实现朝鲜半岛的和平统一。
> 外交史上的今天 Kungming2 (talk) 00:30, 22 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

韓民族

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "Hanminzu (especially South) Korean people". Tagged by @TongcyDai. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:42, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

January 2024

edit

栄螺

edit

Japanese. Rfv-sense: The KDJ2 on JapanKnowledge gives the following definitions (quotations excluded):

 

(1)リュウテンサザエ科の巻き貝。房総半島以南の暖流の影響を受ける海域に限って分布する。殻高約一〇センチメートルで殻はよくふくらむ。表面にとげが二列に並ぶが、内湾産のものは小さく、またまったく無いものもある。外面はふつう暗青色で内面は真珠色。殻の口は円形で、ふたは石灰質で厚く、渦巻き状。潮間帯から潮下帯の岩礁にすみ、海藻を食べる。古くから食用にされ、つぼ焼きは有名。春から初夏にかけてが旬(しゅん)である。缶詰にもされる。殻は貝ボタンや細工物に利用。さざい。さだえ。さたべ。さざいがい。学名はTurbo cornutus 《季・春》
(2) (1)に似た兜(かぶと)の鉢の名。
(3)七種蓋置(しちしゅふたおき)の一つ。(1)の形に作ったもの。
(4)「さざえどう(栄螺堂)」の略。
(5)紋所の名。(1)をかたどったもの。

 

— This unsigned comment was added by Chuterix (talkcontribs) at 00:17, 5 January 2024 (UTC).Reply

What is asked here exactly? To verify the "tea ceremony utensil" sense? If so, judging by #3 in the quoted list, I think we can say it's the name of a tea ceremony utensil at least. I'm not familiar with the technical term and I cannot be more precise than that, though. Whym (talk) 03:39, 19 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

コンビニエンス

edit

Japanese. Rfv-sense: convenience. Created by Praqimu, tagged by Fish bowl but not listed. This, that and the other (talk) 06:16, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

グラマラス

edit

Japanese. Created by Praqimu, tagged by Fish bowl but not listed. This, that and the other (talk) 06:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

アンコントローラブル

edit

Japanese. Created by Praqimu, tagged by Fish bowl but not listed. This, that and the other (talk) 06:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

インソムニア

edit

Japanese. Created by Praqimu, tagged by Fish bowl but not listed. This, that and the other (talk) 06:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

ᄒᆑᇰ

edit

Middle Korean. Nominated for speedy deletion with rationale "The Middle Korean word is 혀ᇰ (hyeng)". Ultimateria (talk) 03:43, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Ultimateria ᄒᆑᇰ is a Dongguk Jeongun spelling of (혀ᇰ) (HYENG) and should not be added as its own entry. Speedy is correct. 🌙🐇 ⠀talk⠀ ⠀contribs⠀ 04:32, 29 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

よもい

edit

In the NKD, appears in Yamanashi, Hida, and Aichi (never Kanto!). Imoshi in Ibaraki also appears in NKD. Sakishima senses were taken from Hirayama et al. 1992. Sanuki 'slow' is unverified, presumably same source as Hirayama et al. 1992??? Chuterix (talk) 03:54, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Just note that Macro-Yaeyama are taken from their respective dictionaries. Chuterix (talk) 03:55, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Japanese. Rfv-sense: Sanuki dialect. dull, slow. Cannot find this anywhere, not even in my dictionaries, nor online. @荒巻モロゾフ made this entry. Aramaki Morozov also disappeared on September 2023, so there's no luck unless he returns in time. If you can find a source for this sense, please update the entry. Chuterix (talk) 00:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Close as harassment of 荒巻モロゾフ. —Fish bowl (talk) 16:57, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
How does simply saying Aramaki is on an indefinite hiatus close the discussion? This is not really conclusive. Even if s/he was still active, this discussion should not be closed just for this apparent reason. Chuterix (talk) 20:02, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
RFV failed. Chuterix (talk) 19:52, 13 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Merged sections for the same entry. J3133 (talk) 17:23, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

度量

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "measure". Tagged by @Maraschino Cherry but not listed. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 15:38, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

This sense was added by @Tooironic in this diff. Any elaborations on what this means? It might correspond to this definition from Hanyu Da Cidian: 指事物的長短、大小等特征。《文子·自然》:“老子曰:樸至大者無形狀,道至大者無度量。故天圓不中規,地方不中矩。” — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
I don't recall, but that makes sense. ---> Tooironic (talk) 03:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

February 2024

edit

克裡

edit

There seem to be some legitimate uses of 克裡, which I've put down at Citations:克裡. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 22:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

I would still treat it as a misspelling. —Fish bowl (talk) 21:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Fish bowl: Based on what? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:48, 29 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Based on the evaluations by Kethyga, Ywhy (implied), and Kungming2 that using 裡 is unusual, which presumably would also be reflected in low usage numbers compared to 里. —Fish bowl (talk) 21:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Chinese. Moved from RFD, originally requested by @Kethyga. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 16:37, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I agree, 裡 is very strange in transliteration and I'm not seeing too many examples in Chinese-language media. The main examples I can see are in Western publications with Chinese articles like the WSJ/NYT, and there I suspect it's the result of a very lazy conversion from simplified to traditional. Kungming2 (talk) 02:51, 10 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

All failed and redirected to the remade 里 entries, except for 奧利裡 (moved to 奧利里 without a redirect) —Fish bowl (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

家達

edit

Japanese. Was this name borne by anyone besides Tokugawa Iesato? —Fish bowl (talk) 00:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Same concern; Tokugawa Iemochi; Tokugawa Iesada. —Fish bowl (talk) 00:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

木下家定, 神谷家定,和田家定, 庄家定(庄忠家の四男·庄高家の甥). -- Ywhy (talk) 18:00, 21 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
藤原家定, 藤原家茂, 犬塚家茂, 宗家茂(宗金の子). More in 人名検索, 全文検索. -- Ywhy (talk) 22:06, 14 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

家茂 was originally created as a surname by @Eirikr. Is there also any example of this? —Fish bowl (talk) 01:26, 12 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

March 2024

edit

edit

Hokkien. Apparently used for Zhangzhou POJ. Pinging @Kwamikagami as the creator. Theknightwho (talk) 19:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Theknightwho: The only place I've seen this is in "The Eclectic Nature of Penang Hokkien Vocabulary, Its Historical Background and Implications for Character Writing" by Catherine Churchman. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit

Korean. Rfv-sense: is this term really used to refer to plastic bags outside of the compound 쇼핑백? Lunabunn (talk) 22:28, 17 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

中原話

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "Mandarin Chinese". RcAlex36 (talk) 06:52, 20 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

> 地处中原的山西为什么不说中原话?是五胡乱华的结果吗?(Link}, as contrasted with Jin Chinese.
Noting that ZH WP redirects 中原話 to 中原官話, which is also why I decided to put it there instead of solely the Dungan meaning. Open otherwise to just putting "the language of the Central Plains", which wouldn't necessarily mean Mandarin (historically). Kungming2 (talk) 00:01, 22 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Kungming2: Most usage of 中原話 I see seems to be actually referring to 中原官話 specifically? It would be best if we could find durably archived usage of it referring to Mandarin (in general or Standard Mandarin specifically?). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:16, 5 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

April 2024

edit

edit

Toku-No-Shima. Tagged by Chuterix but not listed. This, that and the other (talk) 22:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Kwékwlos: You added this. This form does not appear in Thorpe 1983, Hirayama 1986, nor Uwano's works (Asama dialect). Chuterix (talk) 23:08, 2 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Inogawa has sïba [sɨba], but I find no palatalized variant. @Kwékwlos Chuterix (talk) 21:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Pellard cites it (in French) here: https://theses.hal.science/tel-00444150/file/ogami-cpr.pdf at page 269 as belonging to the Kametsu dialect. Kwékwlos (talk) 22:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
If Pellard cites a Kametsu form, it's (almost) certainly from Hirayama 1986. I did a relook at Hirayama 1986, and surely enough, sïbya appears alongside sïba! I'll remove the RFV shortly.
 

〔徳之島〕シゥビャ⸣ [sï⸢bja] (名) ①舌。[...]②言葉。[...]
シゥバ⸣ [sï⸢ba] (名) シゥビャ⸣と同じ。[...]

—Hirayama 1986, 336-337
 
Cheers! Chuterix (talk) 22:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

線索

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "information; message; news; intelligence". Removed out of process by @Ivanktw, so I'm bringing it here for verification. This sense seems to correspond to 消息;情报 found in Hanyu Da Cidian. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 13:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

May 2024

edit

白苹

edit

Chinese. Originally listed as RFD by @Maraschino Cherry: "Non-standard simplified form. I just created a page with the right simplified form and bidirectionally linked it to the main entry 白蘋. Now this old page created by a bot should be able to get deleted." — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 18:00, 8 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Appreciate a lot. Not until this day when I came across the entry of 佔领 did I realise there is actually a possible option to mark it as non-standard simplified form, and now I'm wondering if it would be better to make the main entry shown and linked with this entry like what's done on the main entry of which I mentioned above. Maraschino Cherry (talk) 16:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

全国

edit

Japanese, the reading zengoku. Not present in any monolingual dictionary and was likely aped from JMDict which removed it years ago. lattermint (talk) 23:13, 15 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

I can't find much evidence of this. This NHK publication (https://www.nhk.or.jp/bunken/research/kotoba/pdf/20150130_1.pdf) lists a reading of ぜんごく (zengoku), but also notes that this was not approved as a pronunciation to use in broadcasts by a meeting of the 放送用語委員会 / Broadcasting Terminology Committee in late 1939 or early 1940 (page 29 of the PDF, right-hand bordered box, roughly halfway down; search for ぜんごく to find it quickly). I take from this that a zengoku pronunciation existed at that time, but that it was uncommon and proscribed. Unsure if there are any dialectal aspects to this, nor if this pronunciation is still current. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:37, 5 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
In some pre-WWII books, ぜんごく appears as part of ruby text of "全國に亘る所の組織連絡" [19], "全國的に力ある團体" [20], and "目下全國の農村を督勵して" [21]. Whym (talk) 11:59, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Japanese. Rfv-quote: Myogoki. Still no source. Where are you Aramaki Morozov?

June 2024

edit

天仙

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "Heavenly Immortals, Celestial Immortals". Never heard these meanings before, I suspect they are made up by a Buddhist user who creates poor-quality entries at viwikt. – Nguyên Hưng Trần (talk) 14:05, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

This sense was removed by @Justinrleung before being undone by @Maitrī-karuṇā (benevolence and compassion). According to 神仙#天仙 on zh wikipedia, the Taoist book 重陽真人金關玉鎖訣 classifies 神仙 into various categories, including 鬼仙, 地仙, 神仙, 天仙, and 劍仙. I do not know how important that book is to Taoism, but this is likely a technical Taoist term. Quotation:
神仙傳道神仙酒肉殺生鬼仙之類長命地仙戰爭劍仙打坐修行神仙孝養師長父母六度萬行方便一切眾生斷除十惡殺生酒肉偷盜出意天心正直無私曲天仙 [Classical Chinese, trad.]
神仙传道神仙酒肉杀生鬼仙之类长命地仙战争剑仙打坐修行神仙孝养师长父母六度万行方便一切众生断除十恶杀生酒肉偷盗出意天心正直无私曲天仙 [Classical Chinese, simp.]
Wèn yuē. Dà dào zhī zhōng. Lí jǐ děng shénxiān. Jiě yuē. Wén “Chuándào Jí” zhōng. Yǒu wǔ děng shénxiān. Dì-yī. Bù chí jiè. Bù duàn jiǔròu. Bù shāshēng. Bù sī shàn. Wéi guǐxiān zhīlèi. Dì-èr. Yǎng zhēn qì chángmìng zhě. Wéi dìxiān. Dì-sān. Hào zhànzhēng. Shì jiànxiān. Dì-sì. Dǎzuò xiūxíng zhě. Wéi shénxiān. Dì-wǔ. Xiàoyǎng shīzhǎng fùmǔ. Liùdùwànxíng. Fāngbiàn jiù yīqiè zhòngshēng. Duànchú Shí'è. Bù shāshēng. Bù shí jiǔròu. Xié fēi tōudào. Chūyì tóng tiānxīn. Zhèngzhíwúsīqū. Míng yuē tiānxiān. [Pinyin]
(please add an English translation of this quotation)
--kc_kennylau (talk) 01:12, 10 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit

Japanese, Touhou character Cirno. It appears that the provided quote is from fandom work and is not independent from the Touhou universe. A Google search also reveals little independent quotes. The sense likely fails WT:FICTION.廣九直通車 (talk) 09:45, 15 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

The same could be said for most of Category:en:Fictional characters. I think it's natural that X fictional work character would be mentioned among the X fandom. —Fish bowl (talk) 01:56, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
This jargon (or any other jargon) is typically used in-group - that much is clear and not contested. I think the question is: is there any non in-group use of the term that we can cite? Even one such citation is better than nothing. Whym (talk) 03:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "goblin". Tagged by an IP (@31.205.0.5) but not listed. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Japanese. A recitation of لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا ٱللَّٰهُ مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ ٱللَّٰهِ (lā ʔilāha ʔillā llāhu muḥammadun rasūlu llāhi, there is no deity but God; Muhammad is the messenger of God). It seems to be missing two words, but even the complete form seems likely to be very rare. Theknightwho (talk) 16:21, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Even though this is written in kana, this isn't Japanese, any more than lā ʔilāha ʔillā llāhu muḥammadun rasūlu llāhi is English.
I don't think this needs verification at all: this is just transcription of a foreign phrase. It's still Arabic, it's just written funny. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:11, 1 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Japanese. This time for Inna Lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji'un. Theknightwho (talk) 16:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Also delete: not Japanese, just a transcription of Arabic. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:12, 1 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

ガラパゴスケータイ

edit

Japanese. Rfv-sense: non-Japanese featurephone.

I can find such examples for ガラケー (Googleは、将来的にKaiOSを介して「検索」「マップ」「YouTube」「アシスタント」などのGoogleサービスを新興国のガラケーユーザーに向けて展開していくことを目的としています。) but not for ガラパゴスケータイ. In general, my observation is that shortened words tend to gain wider meaning than their long forms, probably because shortening makes the etymology less obvious. Whym (talk) 11:38, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

"[...] but not for ガラパゴズケータイ."
Try google:"ガラパゴス携帯". I'm seeing quite a few hits, even at google books:"ガラパゴス携帯". ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:17, 1 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Does any of those hits use the term generally, not implying Japanese devices? My question was about the second sense in ガラパゴスケータイ: "(by extension) non-smartphone mobile phone" which does not specify Japan, unlike the first sense. The examples I gave above show the short form is used for devices of non-Japanese manufacturers (because KaiOS is not particularly associated with Japan, and 新興国 suggests countries that don't include Japan), but the same cannot be said for the long form, as far I could see. Whym (talk) 23:23, 10 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

July 2024

edit

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "0.0001 dollars, yuan, etc.; 0.01 cents, fen, etc. (currency unit)". Added by @The dog2. RcAlex36 (talk) 15:06, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I don't know if this counts as a reliable source but here's one: [22]. A quick Google search will show you that 毫 in standard Chinese is 1/10 厘, and 厘 is 1/10 分. The dog2 (talk) 18:58, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@The dog2 The article in your link says "按照大到小的顺序,顺序是每百万美分" and "人民币的基本单位是分,但有时根据需要计算为厘米". I have no idea what they mean. 分, 厘, 毫, 絲 were units of length and weight, while the monetary units were 圓, 角, 分 and 釐, which were in use since the Qing dynasty. As far as I know, the smallest monetary unit defined was 釐. Are you able to provide any quotations that feature the use of 毫 as a unit of money in Mandarin? RcAlex36 (talk) 12:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
There are some posts on Chinese blog pages and Weibo such as [23], [24] and [25]. Also, this definition of 毫 was what I was taught in school. The dog2 (talk) 14:56, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@The dog2: I think the three sites you cited would count as mentions rather than uses. --kc_kennylau (talk) 00:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
For this one, it will be hard to find it in actual use to count money today because modern Chinese currency only goes down to 分. We would probably need to look up historical documents to find actual usage on this. Maybe if someone has access to a well-established dictionary, we can look it up in there. The dog2 (talk) 01:19, 10 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

知識

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "intellect; intelligence". RcAlex36 (talk) 15:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

⿰3·

edit

Zhuang. Sawndip form of aemq (to carry on one's back).

For clarity: it's the number 3 and the middle dot, as an IDS sequence. Pinging @Kai2012Lethal, the entry creator. Theknightwho (talk) 17:20, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Edit: it looks to be this (https://en.glyphwiki.org/wiki/sawd-00121), which sources it to 《古壮字字典》. Theknightwho (talk) 17:31, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Also depicted as 𬼷 (了丶). —Fish bowl (talk) 23:31, 27 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Fish bowl: Would ⿰3· be considered unifiable to 𬼷? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 04:13, 14 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
Not sure; probably? —Fish bowl (talk) 04:57, 14 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
 
Can we resolve the RFV for this? I have a screenshot of the 古壮字字典 page for aemq, with ⿰3· as the top entry. Gold295857 (talk) 04:39, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

歌志内

edit

Japanese. Rfv-sense: {{place|ja|train station|city/Utashinai|subpref/Sorachi|pref/Hokkaido|c/Japan|sort=うたしない|t=Utashinai}}. See Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion#Place names. – wpi (talk) 12:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

  • 河原: {{place|ja|train station|town/Yazu|prefecture/Tottori|c/Japan|sort=かわはら|t1=Kawahara}}
  • 河内: {{place|ja|train station|city/Higashihiroshima|pref/Hiroshima|sort=こうち}}
  • 三笠: {{place|ja|train station|city/Mikasa|subpref/Sorachi|pref/Hokkaido|c/Japan|sort=みかさ|t=Mikasa}} and {{place|ja|train station|town/Karuizawa|district/Kitasaku|pref/Nagano|c/Japan|sort=みかさ|t=Mikasa}}
  • 雨竜: {{place|ja|train station|town/Uryū|district/Uryū|subpref/Sorachi|pref/Hokkaido|c/Japan|sort=うりゅう|t=Uryū}}
  • 神代: {{place|ja|train station|city/Senboku|pref/Akita|c/Japan|sort=し'んだい|t=Jindai}}
  • 小俣: {{place|ja|train station|city/Ise|pref/Mie|c/Japan|sort=おばた|t=Obata}}
  • 市田: {{place|ja|train station|town/Takamori|pref/Nagano|sort=いちだ}}
Ditto. Note that in all these cases the train station is named after some place name, e.g. 小俣(おばた) (Obata) is indirectly referring to 小俣町 (三重県), and ideally should be replaced with definition of such place name should the train station sense is deleted. – wpi (talk) 12:50, 27 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

August 2024

edit

術力口

edit

Chinese. – wpi (talk) 13:52, 18 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

WT:ATTEST: clearly widespread use? google:术力口Fish bowl (talk) 03:46, 28 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
google:"术力口" only has 81k hits, google:"術力口" has 3k hits. I don't think this could be called "widespread". – wpi (talk) 06:09, 30 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
So... is this referring specifically to lemmatization at the traditional form? (see also Talk:車万?) →Template:normalized? —Fish bowl (talk) 22:30, 17 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
I was referring to the use of WT:ATTEST's "widespread use" clause, which should only be applied on basic, common, and widespread words that are trivial to cite, and I doubt this word satisfies this clause at all.
Either way, with precendent of 車万, if 术力口 is attested then I suppose the lemma should be moved to that form. – wpi (talk) 04:47, 18 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

September 2024

edit

Japanese. Rfv-sense:

Checked Nihon Kokugo Daijiten and 故事俗信ことわざ大辞典 on JapanKnowledge, they do not say "making a bad situation worse". Pinging: @Eirikr

後事

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "successor". RcAlex36 (talk) 10:15, 14 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

前修为谁故。后事资纺绩。 内存溢出的猫 (talk) 12:36, 15 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

October 2024

edit

烏蘇

edit

Vietnamese. chữ Hán form of ô tô (“car”). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 15:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Attested as 烏蘇 ô tô in Phan Bội Châu tiểu sử 潘佩珠小史 (page 7),
群舅㛪辰扒𠫾附載車烏蘇 còn cậu em thì bắt đi phụ tải xe ô tô Lachy70 (talk) 23:14, 16 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

覆う

edit

Japanese. Rfv-sense: "to include everything". This sense is not real, or at least, I tried very hard to find it and would be shocked if someone can come up with one exemplar much less three. (I did not understand the process at first and thought it was similar to a {{cn}} tag on English Wikipedia so I just deleted it at first, sorry for that.) Psiĥedelisto (talk) 22:41, 3 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I think the meaning "to include everything" is from (「5. 全体をつつみ含む。」 "to cover and include the entirety"), this entry on デジタル大辞泉 (「 全体をつつみ含む。」 "to cover and include the entirety"; same dictionary entry also available on goo国語辞書), or from this entry on 精選版 日本国語大辞典 (「5. すべてをつつみ含む。また、説明し尽くす。」 "to cover and include everything; also, to explain something entirely").
The former has this usage example: これを、ひと(こと)(おお)えば...kore o, hitokoto de ōe baIf I were to include this in one word, ...
The latter cites the following sentence from ja:木下尚江 (KINOSHITA, Naoe)'s book 「火の柱」(see below) as the first attestation: 社会主義(しゃくゎいしゅぎ)とは(なん)ですか、一言(ひとこと)(おほ)へば( かみ)御心(みこころ)です、基督(きりすと)道破(だうは)(たま)へる(かみ)御心(みこころ)です。shakwaishugi toha nan desu ka, hitokoto ni ohohe ba kami no mikokoro desu, kirisuto ga dauhashi tamahe ru kami no mikokoro desu.What is socialism? To include (its sense) in a few words it is the will of God, (it is) the will of God which Christ has wholly explained.
In this attestation it's spelled with the Kanji "掩" instead of "覆", though.
<Quotation>
1904, 木下尚江 [Kinoshita Naoe], 火の柱 [hi no hashira]‎[26], 青空文庫:
Ryomnalybn (talk) 16:57, 20 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit

Japanese. Supposedly a kanji meaning yttrium, but I can't find a single Japanese-language source using it in this context. The only results I've found are snippets of Chinese text, Wiktionary mirror sites, OCR errors, and usernames of Japanese Twitter users. According to the first revision of the page, the source for this info came from Unicode's Unihan database, which lists the character with an unusual reading of "ITORYUUMU" (not イットリウム (ittoriumu)), though this was changed by an anonymous editor six months later. Since then, this info has remained on the page, forever unchanging and completely unsourced. If this does exist, I'm guessing it's in an old and/or obscure book somewhere. Binarystep (talk) 11:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Binarystep: In the early days of Wiktionary NanshuBot was used to set up our Han-character coverage based at least partly on the Unihan database. That database has a lot of user-generated content, but at the time it was better than nothing. We've been weeding out odd cruft like this and lots of straight-up errors ever since. For most of us who have followed CJKV rfvs and rfds for more than a few years, no explanation is necessary. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:20, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Binarystep: I agree with you, this reading is not real. All I can find you did not mention is that NEV sells an EV in Japan called 釔為3, but this is a borrowing from Chinese. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 21:23, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit

Japanese. Binarystep (talk) 08:32, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Probably unlikely to be in Japanese... Cchww1384 (talk) 19:35, 25 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

edit

Japanese. Rfv-sense: "(obsolete) Identical in meaning to the particle , but used only after pronunciations of , 𛀁, and ."

Tagged by @The Young Prussian (the entry creator) but not listed. Binarystep (talk) 00:24, 13 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

le

edit

Chinese. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 19:29, 13 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

https://archive.md/MeinW
https://archive.md/Dp1Xj
https://archive.md/wla5n 内存溢出的猫 (talk) 12:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
I think it means "level" in Hong Kong Cantonese. Mahogany115 (talk) 04:19, 29 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit

Japanese. Alleged kanji spelling of コロンビウム. Binarystep (talk) 04:41, 15 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

⿰亻児

edit
Discussion moved from WT:RFDCJK#⿰亻児.

Japanese, supposedly an extended shinjitai of based on original research as it is not encoded in Unicode. Eyesnore (talk) 16:20, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Eyesnore A few problems with this request:
  1. This is a matter for WT:Requests for verification/CJK.
  2. It's not really relevant whether it's been encoded in Unicode: plenty of legitimate (but rare) characters still haven't been encoded, and on the fipside, some encoded characters don't exist.
  3. We're a secondary source, so original research is actively encouraged.
Theknightwho (talk) 21:54, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Okay, you may move it to RFV to check for any attested uses of this supposed extended shinjitai based on analogy. Eyesnore (talk) 22:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

 

although strictly speaking, this is ⿰亻𫤗, not ⿰亻児; and being from the year 1916, this is 俗字, not extended shinjitai —Fish bowl (talk) 23:28, 2 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

サルートン

edit

Japanese. hello

Seems to just be a transliteration of Esperanto saluton (hello). Theknightwho (talk) 22:48, 26 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

スラマッパギ

edit

Japanese. good morning

Transliteration of Indonesian selamat pagi (good morning). Theknightwho (talk) 22:49, 26 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

ヘーボ

edit

Japanese.

Noun: (2channel slang) "grass", in reference to the expression w (LOL); LOLs

Phrase: (2channel slang) it's hilarious

Apparently a borrowing from Esperanto herbo (grass).

Several problems here:

  1. The noun definition is not clear at all: how is this a reference to w? Whatever the case, this needs to be moved to the etymology, as it obviously doesn't mean "grass".
  2. Obviously copied directly from the entry at (kusa), suggesting the IP who added it has no idea what they're doing (how is this a phrase?).
  3. Is this really derived from Esperanto? If it is, it's certainly not borrowed, in any event.

Pinging @Fish bowl, who knows about 2channel slang. Theknightwho (talk) 22:55, 26 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

This is definitely out of the range of my knowledge (passive learning of 2ch terms, outside of 2ch). Google finds threads about a board in which Esperanto translations of Internet slang have become popularized(?) and a copypasta listing Esperanto translations, but that runs into the "mention–usage" problem. —Fish bowl (talk) 08:43, 27 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

香檳

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: (obsolete) champion. Tagged by @Maraschino Cherry but not listed. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 22:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung @Maraschino Cherry
 

Champagne应该是香槟酒,但“香槟”未必就是Champagne。在汉语词汇中,“香槟”也曾是流行的彩票名称,源自Champion(冠军,优胜者)的音译,1924年上海《紫罗兰》杂志刊登的《香槟票轶话》描述:“春秋二季,海上西侨必举行大赛马。在起赛以前之一月,由赛马总会中发售香槟票,每票需银蚨十。其幸而获首奖者,可得二十余万圆。”
  随着“香槟票”(Champion Stakes)的流行,甚至还派生出一个新名词“跑香槟”,被作为“拍马屁”的雅称。1934 年上海《影戏年鉴》对“跑香槟”如此解释:“为什么‘跑香槟’三字可以代替‘拍马屁’呢?原来他们的意思是:跑马者志在香槟也,跑香槟者欲求其速,快达目的,那么,势必要在马屁股上重重的拍几下了。”
  在民国时期的上海滩,源自Champion音译的“香槟”,还有创刊于1928年的小报《香槟》(The Champion News),以及中美钟表总公司经销的英国“香槟”马表、裕华化学工业有限公司制造的“香槟”须皂、亚光织造厂制造的“香槟”手帕……离酒最近的,有一种名叫Champion的葡萄品种,也被译为“香槟”,1929年商务印书馆出版发行的《种葡萄法》描述:“香槟(Champion):生育强盛,开园栽种以后,不满数年,即达结果年龄。惟幼梢及果实,易罹患炭疽病,如撒布‘波尔多液’,即可防止。”

 
内存溢出的猫 (talk) 06:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
@内存溢出的猫 This only shows some terms that seem to derive from the English word "champion", but this doesn't show anything substantial for the sense of "champion". — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:37, 30 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
At least the third paragraph explains that many proper nouns are translated this way. Could we perhaps limit the scope of this sense then? 内存溢出的猫 (talk) 06:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
In my opinion, it was literally but not really semantically related to champion so rfv-sense may be passed or not, depending whether a better material can be found as a quotation to illustrate the sense, or others may not understand either. Maraschino Cherry (talk) 18:07, 2 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Now I've altered the rfv to rfex which means it's just pending a quotation or any further textual illustration. Maraschino Cherry (talk) 05:09, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

November 2024

edit

edit

Japanese. Specifically, the ぐすく reading. Tagged by @PhanAnh123 but not listed. Binarystep (talk) 10:03, 2 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Nihon Hōgen Daijiten says it is was (quotes from 1880 or earlier) used in both Okinawa and Kagoshima, though I imagine it (that is, (ぐすく) as clearly distinct from (しろ)) will be hard to find written. It also says that ぐすく, ぐふく, and ぎすく are used for 石垣(いしがき) (ishigaki) in parts of Okinawa. Cnilep (talk) 01:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
NKD has this partial quotation, though it could arguably be transliteration or calque of Okinawan:
  • 1952 折口 信夫 [Orikuchi Shinobu]. 古代感愛集 [Kodai kan'aishū]. “運天の大港 大里の古城ふるグスク
Cnilep (talk) 02:23, 6 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

將軍

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense:(historical) shogun (supreme generalissimo of feudal Japan). Basically there's no this sense in Chinese dictionaries.--Kethyga (talk) 06:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

満州

edit

Okinawan. Manchuria.

Manchuria.

Goryeo and Korea.

No source for any of these. Theknightwho (talk) 13:15, 22 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

The first two should probably be removed, unless anyone else can find a source. The third one can be argued on the basis of コーレーグス (コーレーグシュ) "chili pepper" (cf. Japanese こうらいごしょう【高麗胡椒】), but I would mark 高麗 as either obsolete or historical since it's not used today and could be considered a cranberry morpheme if it has no other usages (compare how the entries for cobweb and cop are structured). Io Katai (talk) 01:50, 17 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

水門

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: Watergate (an American political scandal). --dringsim 15:15, 27 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

There are plenty of web hits, some even from reputable sources like NYT[28]. How does one decide which are to be treated as naturalized Chinese words rather than literal translations? The NYT use is explicitly a translation of a foreign term and I am inclined to disregard it. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 20:45, 10 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Vox Sciurorum: As for now, the problem has nothing to do with naturalization but the existence of this word. Unfortunately the forementioned NYT source doesn't have quotation for 水门 but rather for 水门事件. The idea that "There are plenty of web hits" seems to be a misunderstanding. Dokurrat (talk) 11:18, 25 December 2024 (UTC) (edited)Reply

庫鉑

edit

Vietnamese, reason: “This looks like an impromptu construction; kho was indeed most often written as 庫, and bạc (in this sense) was also written as 鉑 (along with ), but is this 庫鉑 combination attested?” MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

“Almost certainly has no attestation, construction of known elements.” MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Tagged almost four years ago. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

“Attestation(s) needed.” MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

“Attestations?” MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

𣛠𠖤 is attested in the writing, Tây thú trình lục 西戍程錄, a collection of letters from Vietnamese soldiers fighting in France during WW1.
"廠𣛠𠖤窖𨔍𨓡𡫡、南軍欺買補𠓨、𢯢𢲲渚別濕高渚曾、𪚤各𣛠𨔍懲坤𨔍、浪一生芾㐌𣦆戈、㗂浪仍事氣機、極戈𠬠𡮇機撻排、生𦓡別𠸗𠉞買几、學而知共几困知、陶滝戈𣷭𨔍夷、心堅𢖮罕事夷拯𢧚。
Xưởng máy bay khéo lạ lùng sao, nam quân khi mới bổ vào, Sửa sang chưa biết thấp cao chưa từng, trông các máy lạ chừng khôn lạ, Rằng nhất sinh nào đã trải qua, tiếng rằng những sự khí cơ, chẳng qua một chút tâm cơ đặt bày, sinh mà biết xưa nay mấy kẻ, Học nhi tri cũng kẻ khốn tri, đào sông qua bể lạ gì, Tâm kiên ắt hẳn sự gì chẳng nên." Lachy70 (talk) 05:32, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Good find! Would you have a link to somewhere we can see the manuscript? I only found a transcription in a copy of a journal article, which is good enough for me at least, but not very satisfying. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Sadly the manuscript is not digitalised, if you want to see it, you would have to go in person to the Archives nationales d'outre-mer (ANOM). Lachy70 (talk) 02:24, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
That’s a wee bit far for me. We’ll have to trust the transcription then. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:56, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

December 2024

edit

𥑮

edit

Chinese. It appears that no dictionary has this character, and where are the Cantonese readings from? RcAlex36 (talk) 11:43, 9 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Used in 硓𥑮石 in Taiwanese, and it seems to also be a variant of (e.g. 茶鈷) found in older Taiwanese dictionaries. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:06, 9 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
The Cantonese readings seem to come from the "Cantonese Pronunciation List of the Characters for Computers" (p. 263 here). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 20:47, 17 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

クハル

edit

Japanese. Ultimateria (talk) 17:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Also: Talk:クハル, Talk:クフル, whose evaluations I agree with: the majority of hits for クハル are unrelated, and the majority of hits for クフル refer to kaffir.

http://repo.kyoto-wu.ac.jp/dspace/handle/11173/2546 is one Google hit where クフル refers to kohl: 瞳を危険な状態から回復させるクフルを選択せよ / mīl は「クフルを塗布する棒」を意味する語でもあり. —Fish bowl (talk) 22:26, 20 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

穀子

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: (ACG, slang) goods (a phono-semantic matching of Japanese グッズ). Is this form attested (as opposed to 谷子). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Pinging @MNXANL who added this sense. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:53, 23 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Most traditional Hanzi users use 谷子, but some does use 穀子? It might be better to consider 穀子 as an alternative form. MNXANL (talk) 01:44, 24 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
I don't know which trad form is more common, but I found things like this: 粉絲們在美羅城特展門口兌換“穀子” -- “吃穀”就是買周邊,即動漫、遊戲等二次元相關產品,穀子是英文goods的諧音,包括海報、徽章、卡片、掛件、立牌、手辦、娃娃等。“ and it would be a bit odd, perhaps, to use the metaphor of eating millet (吃穀) but write it as 吃谷 in trad characters. I see there's a link labeled 周邊/穀子 at https://zh.moegirl.org.cn/zh-hant/%E7%BC%A9%E5%86%99%E6%A2%97 Richwarm88 (talk)

賢才

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "(literary) outstanding ability". RcAlex36 (talk) 14:34, 24 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Most Chinese dictionaries don't have. Maybe the sense belongs to Japanese. By the way, the 賢才 entry in 大漢和辭典 (Dai Kan-Wa Jiten) has "かしこい才智" sense。 Kethyga (talk) 13:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

幽精

edit

Japanese. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 15:21, 29 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Used in Quran translations: google:"ジン(幽精)"; whose translation is this, and is this an accepted convention? —Fish bowl (talk) 01:38, 12 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

January 2025

edit

東都

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "(Philippine Hokkien) Tondo (a district and historical polity in Manila, Philippines)", which @Delirium333 has tried to remove out of process with the claim that "there is no reliable source that the chinese ever referred to tondo as "tong-to". only one dubious website says that. we must therefore refrain from associating this term to tondo". @Mlgc1998 as the editor who added this sense. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 11:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Surjection Thank you for the Rfv. I have investigated where I last remembered reading about this term that led me to add this term in en.wikt first last 2019 many years ago. Unfortunately, I remember having read this first from en.Wikipedia in the Tondo (historical polity) page unfortunately previously having trusted years ago where wikipedia sources their info from. I have dug into how and who first put this term in that wiki page and it seems it goes way back more than a decade ago back to 2008 in wikipedia, when User:Alternativity made this edit first to the Tondo (historical polity) page.
I first thought before that if it came from Tagalog Tondo that 東都 / 东都 (Tong-to͘) phonologically made sense in Philippine Hokkien that I grew up hearing from my parents and grandparents, and historically centuries ago, Classical Chinese texts in the Philippines just as in Fujian and Taiwan were traditionally read in the literary readings of Hokkien, tho semantically in hindsight perhaps 東都 / 东都 (literally eastern capital) does not fully make sense despite Tondo district today being part of the city of Manila, the modern capital of the Philippines, since historically Tondo is not really geographically situated  / (literally east) from where Philippine Hokkien speakers historically usually lived at in the Philippines centuries ago and even today, such as among others, residents of Binondo Chinatown to San Nicolas, Manila (former Baybay, Maynila near the original Lusong 呂宋 / 吕宋 by the Pasig river delta) would have seen Tondo as northwest.
Anyways, the original wikipedia source points to either or both a Kobe University Library source that seems to be inaccessible now and perhaps the "Ming Annals"? If the original source was about late Ming era, I would think it might've been about Koxinga's rule in Taiwan and historical events relating to 呂宋 / 吕宋 or who knows where User:Alternativity originally got their info from. Mlgc1998 (talk) 14:31, 6 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

犯行

edit

Chinese. It's seldom used in Chinese.--Kethyga (talk) 09:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Kethyga: I see quite a few hits on Google Books. Is there a concern about the particular sense in question? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 00:47, 17 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense:

# {{qual|rare}} small species of {{taxfmt|Macropodidae|family}}

Fish bowl (talk) 02:07, 11 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

This is confusing, since the previous sense is
Only used in 兔䶈屬 / 兔䶈属 (Lagorchestes)
and Lagorchestes is a genus made up of "small species of Macropodidae" (note that species is both singular and plural). Both were added by the same person, so I wonder whether this is a paraphrase of the previous sense, a guess as to this character's meaning within that term, or a paraphrase of the definition in the Translingual section:
small or medium-sized marsupials, especially the wallaby
since wallabies are also in the Macropodidae
Then there's the other definition (also added by the same person):
Only used in 䶈𪕹 (species of rat)
The confusion makes it hard to tell what to verify. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:02, 11 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
@MistiaLorrelayFish bowl (talk) 09:32, 17 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

アクセソワリスト

edit

Japanese. Other entries by this IP should also be checked. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 20:25, 12 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Surjection What's wrong? WT:LEMMING; found in JMDict and Daijisen at a quick glance, though finding actual usage may be more difficult. 🌙🐇 ⠀talk⠀ ⠀contribs⠀ 03:00, 4 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

아리

edit

Korean. — This unsigned comment was added by Lunabunn (talkcontribs) at 17:20, 15 January 2025 (UTC).Reply

Move to Middle Korean? cf #밝쥐 (Talk:밝쥐) —Fish bowl (talk) 09:06, 26 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Derived term; described as Obsolete native Korean word. Move to Middle Korean? —Fish bowl (talk) 09:06, 26 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

黑貓警長

edit

Chinese. every instance on google books refers to the cartoon character. Svenurban (talk) 17:12, 26 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Svenurban: This is from 上海话大词典 p. 151. Since Shanghainese is a WT:LDL, this alone should be enough for verification. But I will ping our Wu editors just to check to see what they think. @ND381, Musetta6729, クフィ — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:17, 31 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Keep as Shanghainese, slang as well as the sense in 黑貓&老貓 クフィ (talk) 10:27, 1 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Keep at least with the Shanghainese label. The figurative+humorous "police" readings are easy to infer and are definitely attestable given association with the cartoon character.
Though also for what it's worth, it might be worth putting this sense's connection to the character in the usage notes since the notion of a "cat" in Shanghainese has likely already had associations with the police for a considerable time before the release of the cartoon, also seen through the examples of 黑貓黑猫 raised above, though most likely the cartoon would have further popularized the lexicalization of 黑貓警長黑猫警长 and its humorous sense of simply "cop". Putting all that info on there would be a separate piece of work of course but also for the factors above I think it'd be beneficial to keep the "police"-related senses for them to be added onto in the future. Musetta6729 (talk) 14:52, 4 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

February 2025

edit

祝𢜠𢆥㵋

edit

Vietnamese. "chữ Nôm form of chúc mừng năm mới.". Tagged by @PhanAnh123 but not listed. This, that and the other (talk) 22:44, 3 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "(Internet slang) the equivalent of the character "", and even (derivedly) other characters which have the same or similar pronunciation with """. RcAlex36 (talk) 02:42, 23 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

内存溢出的猫📝瞄?💬喵! 17:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

가곡

edit

Korean. Rfv-sense:

# [[song]]
# [[melody]], [[tune]]

The dictionaries at https://dict.naver.com/dict.search?query=가곡 describe specific forms of music, one from Korean tradition and related to sijo, one from European (German) tradition.

@AtitarevFish bowl (talk) 02:17, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Fish bowl: There are two definitions, if I open the link on my iPhone. (I will be away from editing for two weeks, going to South Korea today). Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:35, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
yes, and I have summarized them above. —Fish bowl (talk) 02:57, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
I mean, in Naver, there are two definitions. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:52, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
I don’t mind if you fix the defs to match. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:53, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
The second sense definitely exists; see the following definition from 고려대한국어대사전:
3. 노래의 곡조.
I'd (as a native speaker) wager that the first sense also exists, though perhaps only colloquial/proscribed? Compare 歌曲(かきょく) (kakyoku). 🌙🐇 ⠀talk⠀ ⠀contribs⠀ 04:15, 29 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

地窿

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "(Hakka) tunnel (underground or underwater passage)". I would also like to rfv the Meixian Hakka pronunciation ti4 lung2. RcAlex36 (talk) 16:05, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Pinging @Mahogany115 who created the page. The Association for Conservation of Hong Kong Indigenous Languages (cited on the page) writes this word as 地龍. |h=gd= should only be used for Meixian Hakka. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 17:25, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
I copied the pronunciation from the Association's page, I know that this is not Meixian pronunciation but there is no such option in the template. Mahogany115 (talk) 23:12, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Mahogany115: We should not use that parameter if it’s not Meixian. It is misleading to use it. We can always leave an rfp for unsupported varieties. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 04:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Also I consider 地窿 as a better way to write because it describes the thing better. If we write as 地龍, some may think that this is a kind of creature instead of "tunnel". Mahogany115 (talk) 23:13, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Mahogany115: It’s possible to conceive of a tunnel as a metaphorical dragon, since tunnels are long. (Compare queues/line-ups, which are also metaphorically called 龍 in Cantonese, for example.) We should generally not make up orthography based on our own intuitions without any further back-up. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 04:21, 25 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Mahogany115, RcAlex36: Okay, I've checked another source 香港客家話研究 (劉鎮發), and it writes this word as 地窿 (tì lūng) on p. 159. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:13, 25 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

March 2025

edit

诗人握持

edit

Chinese. Apparently doesn't meet the Wiktionary attestation criteria which requires use in durably archived media, conveying meaning, in at least three independent instances spanning at least a year. Maraschino Cherry (talk) 07:26, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Pinging @Bmcc718 who created the entry. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 18:54, 4 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1P64y1K7zn/ (Jan 2024)
https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV14j421D7ed/ https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV12W421N7VE/ (Feb 2024)
https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1ZZ421t7n9/ (Mar 2024)
https://nga.178.com/read.php?tid=39804129 (Apr 2024)
Mentioning the word: https://www.douyin.com/video/7340295896560569663 (Feb 2024) 内存溢出的猫📝瞄?💬喵! 17:28, 10 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

哈密瓜

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "(slang, offensive, neologism) Uyghur people". Tagged by @Maraschino Cherry but not listed. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 20:23, 4 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Pinging @Hahahaha哈 who added this sense. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:06, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
This is an internet slang used around 2013. You could still find the old post on weibo with this usage. I am not a racist. I just recorded this racial slur. Hahahaha哈 (talk) 11:36, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Hahahaha哈: Could you provide a few links (weibo posts or otherwise) where this is used? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 15:03, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
https://freeweibo.com/weibo/3764219335512173
https://freeweibo.com/weibo/3728200158832423
https://freeweibo.com/weibo/3715412535518935
https://freeweibo.com/weibo/3707596671813374
https://freeweibo.com/weibo/3707289565536933 Hahahaha哈 (talk) 16:09, 11 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
According to WT:ATTEST, a word which is to be passed RFV should be in three or more independent instances durable archived spanning at least a year. Now that the word has been obsolescent (sunk into oblivion), if the cited weibos spanned no longer than one year, RFV is possibly to fail. Maraschino Cherry (talk) 17:41, 29 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

單馬令

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "Tembeling (an area in Malaysia)". Tagged by @Kethyga but not listed. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 20:24, 4 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

得來速

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "drive-in (theatre)". Tagged by an IP. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 20:25, 4 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

𦝠

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "Luó, a kind of dragon (either a Panlong or a Chi)". Tagged by @JoeyChen since entry creation. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 20:27, 4 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "(obsolete) the toad (especially in reference to the one supposed to live on the Moon); earthworm". Tagged by @PhanAnh123 but not listed. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 20:28, 4 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

西門

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "A transliteration of the German surname Siemens". Tagged by @Kethyga but not listed. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 20:29, 4 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

造物者

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "nature". Tagged by @Maraschino Cherry but not listed. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 20:30, 4 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

It seems to come from 重編國語辭典修訂本, which defines it as "創造萬物者。指大自然。". — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 20:32, 4 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

那由他

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "the number 1060". Tagged by @Maraschino Cherry but not listed. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 20:33, 4 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

切糕

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "(neologism, slang, offensive) Uyghur people". Tagged by @Maraschino Cherry but not listed. Also pinging @Hahahaha哈 who added this sense when creating the entry. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:50, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

This is an internet slang used around 2013. You could still find the old post on weibo with this usage. I am not a racist. I just recorded this racial slur. Hahahaha哈 (talk) 11:36, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Hahahaha哈: Could you provide a few links (weibo posts or otherwise) where this is used? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 15:03, 7 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
https://freeweibo.com/weibo/3691952111874229
https://freeweibo.com/weibo/3683817358989277
https://freeweibo.com/weibo/3690245763410905
https://freeweibo.com/weibo/3756427049262375
https://freeweibo.com/weibo/3683455927582590
https://freeweibo.com/weibo/3730719685928141
https://freeweibo.com/weibo/3733452819976255
https://freeweibo.com/weibo/3700849514001400 Hahahaha哈 (talk) 17:01, 11 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

動向

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "direction of movement". Tagged by @Tooironic but not listed. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 09:10, 8 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Justinrleung
Ping me User:内存溢出的猫 plz!📝瞄?💬喵! 18:07, 10 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

大不列滇

edit

Chinese. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:03, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

All Google Web hits are puns referring to Yunnan (当“歪果仁”来到云南“大不列滇” (云南宣传网) or Auntology). —Fish bowl (talk) 22:13, 20 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

RFV failed (for the sense given in the original entry: alternative form of 大不列顛). It can be recreated with the appropriate sense (preferably with quotes complying to WT:ATTEST). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:06, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

작은금조

edit

Korean. Cannot find any hits on Google other than Wiktionary. Courtesy ping; @User:Linguoboy. 🌙🐇 ⠀talk⠀ ⠀contribs⠀ 22:40, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

あの日

edit

Japanese. Sense "first day of the menstrual period"; the other sense is an &lit so the page should be deleted if nothing is found. Ultimateria (talk) 00:40, 15 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Delete. I think this is a contextual euphemism that's not idiomatic. Whym (talk) 08:54, 28 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
I can't find it in texts. I informally surveyed some female acquaintances – not anything systematic, but merely suggestive. Besides the literal meaning, some people suggested things along the lines of "昔" or "歴史的の一日". No one mentioned menstruation, though, for what it's worth. Cnilep (talk) 00:01, 3 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

鎖具足

edit

Japanese. See also Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/CJK#鎖具足#Japanese.

# Japanese [[chainmail]] [[armour]], used by the samurai class and their retainers in feudal Japan.

Fish bowl (talk) 22:08, 20 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=%22鎖具足%22
  • 日本甲冑の基礎知識 https://books.google.com/books?id=BqsYAAAAYAAJ
    鎖具足、畳具足などと称するものがある。鎖具足は、例えば寛永十三年(一六三六)八月の細川家の記録である『御具足同諸御道具帳』に、「くさり具足」「くさり御具足」などと見えるもので、家地よろいかるたがねきつこうがねに鎖を綴じ付けた甲をいう。
    quote of an example from 1636
  • 絵てみる時代考証百科: 槍, 鎧, 具足編 https://books.google.com/books?id=e5MzAQAAIAAJ
    くさりぐそく第三十四節鎖具足鎖具足という名称は、分類上の便宜のために仮につけた名称であって、古来のものではない。
    "鎖具足 is a retronym" (so, what about the above example then?)
Fish bowl (talk) 01:58, 25 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

민서

edit
Discussion moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/CJK#민서.

Korean. Just an English transliteration. The English word "meatgrinder" is commonly called as "()세절기" in Korean. [29][30][31][32] Dubukimchi (talk) 03:19, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Dubukimchi: It seems attestable for this sense. Cognate with Japanese ミンサー (minsā). Also check 미트 민서 (miteu minseo, meat mincer) in Google searches. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:04, 14 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Atitarev: ᅟI found some results in Google, but it is used to only a limited extent as a compound of "미트 민서" or "민서-기(機)". Dubukimchi (talk) 08:28, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Dubukimchi: Hi. Thanks. I've made some changes to the entry based on the limited results. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 20:02, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Send to RFV? —Fish bowl (talk) 02:56, 28 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Fish bowl: Yes, it can be. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 20:02, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
I think the current definition revised by @Atitarev is fine. Can we call RFV-resolved? 🌙🐇 ⠀talk⠀ ⠀contribs⠀ 19:26, 29 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

(Moved to RFV —Fish bowl (talk) 22:11, 20 March 2025 (UTC))Reply

노례

edit

Korean. Claimed to be the North Korea spelling of 노예 (noye). However, KCNA Watch has attestations for 노예 only, but not 노례. OosakaNoOusama (talk) 23:58, 22 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

For context, the person who created that was banned for their prolific, yet clueless Japanese edits, and it took an abuse filter to keep them from continuing that as an IP. I wouldn't trust them to know anything about Korean. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:33, 23 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Note also that at least as of 조선어 철자법 (1954), 노예 (noye) was explicitly listed as correct over 노례 (norye) because there is no word in which () (rye), regardless of position, gets pronounced with an /l/ in the modern language. DPRK's undoing of 두음법칙 (dueumbeopchik) is less about preserving old rimes and more about consistency. 🌙🐇 ⠀talk⠀ ⠀contribs⠀ 06:17, 23 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Cited. The original chapter describes Île de Gorée and has really a number of 노예. I just randomly chose one to quote. Maraschino Cherry (talk) 12:35, 6 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

乙π

edit

Japanese. Alternative spelling of おっぱい.

Recently created by IP 67.209.129.91. Apparently this does exist as a hashtag, both on Pixiv and Instagram. It also seems to be used in some social media user names. But it doesn't seem to be widespread, and I can't find it attested in a way that conveys its meaning. (It's a rebus, by the way: (おつ) (otsu) + パイ (pai). Took me a second to get that.) Cnilep (talk) 05:01, 25 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Can we not delete entries that are clearly in use Just Because they don't strictly meet CFI? What form of "durably archived media" could a word like 乙π possibly be used in?
and I can't find it attested in a way that conveys its meaning.
Tried searching for the hashtag on Instagram; meaning seems pretty darn clear to me 😛 🌙🐇 ⠀talk⠀ ⠀contribs⠀ 04:09, 29 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
It clearly has been used by at least a handful of people. Does that make it part of the language as such? I don't know. I don't think the answer is obvious or uncontroversial.
I assume that “seems pretty darn clear to me” refers to the images returned when searching for the hashtag. If one knows what おっぱい means and thinks about the relevant characteristic of the images, then the meaning of the rebus is clear. But (1) visual search results are not quotable media, and (2) if one doesn't already know those things, then no, the meaning is not conveyed by the hashtag itself.
Cnilep (talk) 05:04, 31 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
These are very strange conditions to presume. Yes, the meaning of a word (or rebus or whatever else) is not obvious to someone who doesn't know of the word or any of its surrounding context. That is a general truth, not a noteworthy observation.
Regarding your initial point, I would like to ask: if multiple people using a word (/rebus/...) does not make it "part of the language," what does? WT:CFI governs addition to Wiktionary, and as a guideline at that; questioning whether something is part of a language solely on the grounds it is not used in durably archived media seems, without any implication that this is what you are doing, flatly silly.
In any case, it would seem the conversation we should be having is not whether this is part of the language, but instead whether we can afford to have this entry without folks yelling about it. On a personal note, I can only feel it unfortunate that some editors (of a dictionary!) choose to prioritize policy over usage—but such is the Wiktionary bureaucracy. 🌙🐇 ⠀talk⠀ ⠀contribs⠀ 08:18, 31 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

贏學

edit

Chinese. Google has some results but does not seem to be durable. – wpi (talk) 15:49, 25 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

日耳曼贏學

edit

Chinese. Similar to #贏學 above, does not seem to have durably archived results on Google. – wpi (talk) 15:50, 25 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

奠基

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "groundbreaking". RcAlex36 (talk) 03:57, 30 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

芒果

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "pussy; cunt". Added by @Bmcc718. Previously deleted per RFV (Talk:芒果). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:51, 31 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

April 2025

edit

豬圈

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: (Shanghainese) pork leg.--Kethyga (talk) 23:26, 3 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Added by @ND381 in this diff. This definition doesn't seem to be found in 上海话大词典 (the entry for it on page 40 doesn't list such a sense). — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:56, 13 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

赫爾辛福

edit

Chinese. Most results are 赫爾辛福斯. The IP user may have omitted the last 斯/s of Helsingfors.--Kethyga (talk) 11:23, 4 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Cited. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 03:36, 9 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "I, me". Added by @Zt1h. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 23:05, 6 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Whole bunch of Hán tự forms for non-existing Vietnamese words

edit

By @Taiwanese (Tâi-gí).

quốc an

Quốc an bộ

quốc gia an toàn

Quốc phòng bộ

MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:32, 8 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

持續

edit

Vietnamese. By @Vietstork. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:36, 8 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

朔月

edit

Vietnamese, sóc nguyệt, by @TongcyDai. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:38, 8 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Included in Từ điển Nguyễn Quốc Hùng. TongcyDai (talk) 05:12, 8 April 2025 (UTC)Reply
What does that have to do with it? That is not a dictionary of the Vietnamese language, but of Chinese (as used in Vietnam). MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 06:25, 8 April 2025 (UTC)Reply
While Từ điển Nguyễn Quốc Hùng indeed contains many Sino-Vietnamese terms, I believe it is still fundamentally a Vietnamese language dictionary, and the words included in it likely appear in Vietnamese literary or specialized contexts. TongcyDai (talk) 10:20, 15 April 2025 (UTC)Reply
“Likely” is not enough. We need actual cites. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 00:38, 16 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

餅包

edit

Vietnamese, bánh bao, created by @沈澄心. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:43, 8 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Vietnamese, bánh rán. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:43, 8 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Vietnamese, bánh mì: “The quotation and citation state the Nôm form as 𥹘𫗗 instead of 餅麵” MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:43, 8 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

edit

Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: reading ngô. Not really a sense, though. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:49, 8 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

勞働

edit

Chinese. variant form of 勞動劳动 (láodòng), although (dòng) is a variant of (dòng). --Kethyga (talk) 05:05, 8 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Cited. See Citations:勞働. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 18:58, 10 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

周密

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: (literary, of dealings) intimate; close. --Kethyga (talk) 11:59, 8 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

電驢

edit

Chinese. WT:BRAND. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 05:51, 13 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

手民之誤

edit

Chinese. Tagged by an IP (45.87.52.61), with the comment "SoP". If it is SoP, this should be sent to RFD instead of here. Pinging @RcAlex36, who created this entry. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 18:36, 13 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

攪屎棍

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: "(historical) shit stick (small piece of wood or bamboo used to clean the anus after defecation)". Tagged by @Maraschino Cherry, with the comment "Added rfd[sic]-sense for I don't find this sense in any dictionary" in the edit summary. Sense added by @Tooironic in this diff. — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 18:39, 13 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

薩拉克

edit

Chinese.

# [[salak]]; [[snake fruit]] {{taxlink|Salacca zalacca|species}}

Created by Special:Contributions/2001:4455:68B:B600:A993:EAB:ED4A:F260

All Google results seem to be listicles about AMAZING FRUITS YOU DON'T KNOW or (certainly machine-translated) stock image websites.

Fish bowl (talk) 00:43, 14 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

抓包

edit

Chinese. Rfv-sense: to snatch a bag. It should be 抓包's literal meaning. Should this sense be categorized as a distinct meaning??--Kethyga (talk) 07:55, 19 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

けろけろ

edit

Japanese. Rfv-sense: robotic autotune. Added by @Fish bowl, can't find — This unsigned comment was added by Chuterix (talkcontribs).

Widely used: google:"ケロ声", google:"ケロケロ声", google:"ケロケロボイス". —Fish bowl (talk) 03:39, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

麥理浩

edit

Chinese. Is this ever used for the surname other than for Murray MacLehose? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 07:32, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply