User talk:Tohru/2009-01

I've done some tweaking on the templates. It takes some time to work out all the inconsistancies. The good thing about templates is that it is easy to change things ... otherwise categories are very painful to fix, as you probably know. Robert Ullmann 11:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hoi, I have given you edit rights at http://wiktionaryz.org . Please read about the DefinedMeaning and, have fun !! GerardM 18:54, 8 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

HAH I'm dumb. I looked at the kanji and thought hohoe. It was supposed to be びしょう. Oops. :D Ric | opiaterein 01:50, 15 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Normally, I find myself strongly advocating all sorts of experiments. But I don't see any value at all, in what User:Akanemoto has done, and is doing. I am really that far off base? To me, it looks like he/she deliberately mangled entries that previously complied very well with Wiktionary:About Japanese. --Connel MacKenzie 16:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I've added your nomination at Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2006-10/User:Tohru. Please indicate your timezone, babel info, and acceptance, if you'd like to accept. (I probably should have asked if you were interested, first.) --Connel MacKenzie 17:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

I am very interested in seeking a way to contribute more, with the combination of my rather limited English ability and native Japanese fluency. Thank you again for the nomination, and I will enjoy all of this! --Tohru 18:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Very good idea; in general we do this when we have the information to put in the etymologies. There are a lot of English words that should do this but have not yet because we need the information added. Even short notes help. Robert Ullmann 10:42, 28 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

I appreciate your comment; I've carelessly thought that a multiple etymology heading without the explanation is sufficient... By the way, as you know, the etymological study of Japanese language is not so developed in comparison with the western languages so far, and it may be difficult for us to go on telling homographs apart based on their etymologies especially at homographic 和語. Some meaning-and-usage based dividing might be desirable. Anyway I'll go right ahead with this experiment a little more. --Tohru 01:22, 29 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

They are all identified (collectively) by Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Han stroke, I was planning on either fixing them up by hand (one has to check to see whether one of the images is available from commons) or automate part of it. Even when they are images, the "thumb" and such have to be taken out, just keeping NNNpx. They all need some work. And, sadly, there aren't that many, even though commons has well over a thousand. They really ought to be all images. In general, it should be (char)-bw.png|NNNpx for NNN = (sn+1)*40 but some of them have the animated version. Robert Ullmann 15:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

It still takes all those params, it calls both ja-kanji and ja-readings. So anyone using it needs that doc. When it gets subst'd by the bot, they each get their own params. Each of them has the right documentation. Robert Ullmann 01:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

OK, I see. Sorry for the trouble. --Tohru 01:15, 5 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Would you tell me what you think of the changes I'm making for the other languages, see 森 for example? Robert Ullmann 23:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Besically, it looks excellent to me, and the followings are just my two cents:

• The idea of the defn template is splendid. And, how about getting it accompanied by a comment like <!-- please replace the template on the left with an actual definition --> so that a Wiktionary beginner with enough knowledge of languages can contribute adequately and confidently?
• In the same way, I think the parameter keys need to be a little bit longer so that a wiki beginner can tell what it is at a glance. How about "revised" instead of "rv", "yale" instead of "y", and so on? It is possible to have templates support both ways, the abbreviated parameter keys and the spelled out ones.

Cheers! --Tohru 23:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

I didn't think either was too hard ;-) The problem with the comment is that people don't replace the comment! (Most beginners have never seen an HTML comment ...) They learn to replace the template 'cause it is generating the "defintion needed" text. And I'd kind of like people to figure out just a little (like what y= might mean) before doing too much. They've just looked at the rendered text, and now they see the wikitext, I don't think it's too hard. The problems are when something really non-obvious is going on, that they also need to know about. (There are things they don't need to know about, like each repeat of the character on the page is displayed with the correct language font!) Robert Ullmann 00:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Oh and thanks for fixing ja-verb. If I'd just looked at it once more ... Robert Ullmann 00:10, 6 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Indeed. Then let's go ahead with the way you took on 森. Meantime, "rr" might be a more appropriate abbreviation of the Revised Romanization than "rv", though I'm not familiar with the circumstances. See User_talk:KYPark#Transcription. I suppose you can rely on him on Korean-related topics. --Tohru 03:02, 6 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi, thank you for correcting the pronunciation of number. In my previous edit, I just tried to get the SAMPA consistent to the IPA. Then, mapping the SAMPA back to the IPA, does it need to be altered to /ˈnʌmbɝ/? TIA. --Tohru 23:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

It already has that. --EncycloPetey 23:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

It doesn't. Please review my next edit. --Tohru 23:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Ah, I see. Yes, it's now OK. --EncycloPetey 01:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

I have reference materials but don't know real pronunciations very well. Please keep an eye on my edits :) --Tohru 01:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

I understand. Sometimes, I'll look in a published or on-line reference only to be baffled by the inaccurate IPA pronunciation given there. I've seen at least one major reference that always mixes-up "long" and "short" i (ɪ and i), and one that reverses the symbols for primary and secondary stress. --EncycloPetey 01:30, 7 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

The vote ends today, or was it tomorrow? You seem to have ample support, and I was doing bureaucrat sorts of things tonight, anyway, so I went ahead and issued you some buttons. Please have a look at Help:Sysop tools to find out more about them, or feel free to ask me or any of the other veteran sysops what's going on here. Please add your timezone information and anything else that's missing to the table at WT:A. Welcome aboard. Dvortygirl 06:37, 7 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations! Robert Ullmann 14:48, 7 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! --Tohru 22:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

The previous edit by 66.68.174.245 was by you Mattrogers, wasn't it? If so I'm sorry for my reversion.)

It's no problem, I see you've restored it. By the way I'm a little

new, so feel free to let me know if I do something inappropriate or

incorrect. Matt 00:06, 27 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Would you please look at the changes to to this. I don't know enough to explain it or the way we do things to the user. Robert Ullmann 11:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

The problem is that it is now including multiple forms without identifying them (he is hacking them into one parameter to ja-decl witht the < br > tag). What are these other forms? Are they adjective forms? If they are, they need to be identified in English. (He says, sighing, not having my Japanese grammar with him. ;-) To put it simply, having more that one form in a "box" isn't helpful. Robert Ullmann 16:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it is exactly what I referred to in my edit summary as "tidying up." Or possibly we need to just revert the not wrong but adhock, imperfect edit. Sorry but I'll cope with it tomorrow or later when I am not drunk as I am now ... --Tohru 16:20, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Okay, Cheers! Robert Ullmann 16:24, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

You might add footnotes, as used in {{ja-suru}}; looks good, without adding a lot of additional boxes. Just a thought. Robert Ullmann 14:56, 16 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sounds good. I've been (relatively unhurriedly) thinking about how to modify {{ja-na}} and {{ja-i}} in consistent manner, and your advice will be much help here. You should already know my subpage User:Tohru/sandbox, and the problem was that those "polite stem forms" don't exist in the i-adjective conjugation table, but based on your hint, I can use one table layout for both adjectives, getting the polite stem forms footnoted rather than putting them into separated rows. Anyway I will consult the community before I start deploying this new rather complicated table layout. Now, it is about time for us to activate the discussion page of WT:AJ again, isn't it? --Tohru 16:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Why thank you for the welcome! I'm sure the info you left will be helpful.
--BlackJar72 03:22, 16 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Did you add the warning there before logging it? I deleted it because an IP-anon user giving another one a warning is pretty odd ... if it was you, undelete the last version? (or better, do it again logged in ;-) Robert Ullmann 00:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Nope, I didn't, but anyway thank you for the notice. I even didn't know my user page had been vandalized and restored... --Tohru 04:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the welcome and the information! Liso 18:17, 10 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Tohru. I found you corrected the counter for 小説. (from 冊 to 篇). but I thought it didn't match my language experience... so I more deeply researched thsoe popularities at Japanese google.

• Arabic numeric + counter + noun:

  "１冊の小説" の検索結果 約 3,070 件 (*)

  "１篇の小説" の検索結果 約 139 件

  "２冊の小説" の検索結果 約 1,980 件 (*)

  "２篇の小説" の検索結果 約 89 件

  "３冊の小説" の検索結果 約 1,370 件 (*)

  "３篇の小説" の検索結果 約 41 件

• Kanji numeric + counter + noun:

  "一冊の小説" の検索結果 約 977 件

  "一篇の小説" の検索結果 約 4,920 件 (+)

  "二冊の小説" の検索結果 約 1,250 件 (*)

  "二篇の小説" の検索結果 約 129 件

  "三冊の小説" の検索結果 約 532 件 (*)

  "三篇の小説" の検索結果 約 484 件

In this research, "遍" gathers its popularity just only when it is used with the meaning of Kanji numeric 一('one'), although it got a peak of the popularity. On the other hand, "冊" gathers its popularity every time when it is used with Arabic numeric and also when it is used with Kanji numerics except of '一'('one'). hmmm... Which is the better counter for this word... That's a difficult problem... and I think 篇 is preferable to use for a Non-large gatherings of sentences in a common sense. such as for tanka, haiku, poem, letter, occaisionaly song. What do you think? I would like to share your recognition with this term. Thanks--Carl Daniels 09:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi there! Thank you for the feedback. Basically, my understanding on this is that 冊 is the counter for 小説 as a physical entity, i.e. a binded book, and that kyūtaiji 篇 or shintaiji 編 is the counter for 小説 as an abstract entity, i.e. a piece of work. Though I've thought 篇 is the best based on the comparison between only 一冊 and 一篇, as you pointed out generally 冊 seems to be the most commonly used one. Then a possible solution would be: putting back 冊 to the position of the official counter in the POS header, referring to the double meaning of 小説 between a book and a piece of work in the definition, and taking up 篇/編 and the difference among the counters as a usage note. How do you think of it?

Plus, I agree with you on that 篇 is preferable for a short piece of work, for which the physical media is usually unusable to count. I also can't figure out the difference between Kanji numeric and Arabic numeric appearing here... We will be able to discuss it quantitatively and precisely after the first large-scale, written Japanese corpus , which is comparable to BNC and ANC, is released around 2010 :) --Tohru 12:43, 7 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Looks like the 編 form is also of comparable popularity. My kanji dictionary does not classify 編 and 篇 as the same character (as it does with 新字体/旧字体). Instead it says that 編 is used as a substitute character for 篇 (no doubt because 篇 is 表外漢字). So it's similar to e.g. 奇/綺.

My understanding about 冊/篇 is the same as yours; e.g. you'd say 一篇の小説 if you are talking about one in a collection of them (say, in a magazine), but if you have one novel in one physical book, you could use either. Not that I want to exclude e-books - a "physical" book here might as well be an e-book - what matters is whether one thinks of the "physical book" as a collection of novels (or other works) or as just a single novel. -- Coffee2theorems 09:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

The WT:ELE format for synonyms is a single-line list. this is different from the formatting for translations and related terms. --EncycloPetey 01:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Now I confirmed the corresponding description, "synonyms should be given in a separate list for each meaning", on the WT:ELE. --Tohru 01:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes. See listen for an example with a list for each meaning. --EncycloPetey 01:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Could you look at 決まる and derived terms? These are the simple ones:

• 決まり (e.g. 決まりを守る (規則), これで決まりだ (決定)). Noun.
• 決まって (e.g. NHKが来る度に決まって居留守を使う (必ず, いつも)). Adverb. (駄目な例文ですが…)

I can't come up with a definition for 決まる that would work for the following cases, but they apparently aren't usually considered special (大辞林 and 広辞苑 at least don't have entries for these, only for 決まる):

• 決まっている (e.g. 決まっているだろう、右だ (当り前だ)) Verb, but does this need a separate entry? It seems somewhat idiomatic to me. I think that saying e.g. 決定しているだろう instead would be strange.
• に決まっている (e.g. 嘘に決まっている (に違いない)). Phrasal verb? Conjugated normally (○嘘に決まっていた etc) but ×嘘に決まる. The meaning is a bit different from the previous item, and I can't think of an example of this without the に, so a separate entry?
• 決まった (e.g. NHKは決まった日に来る (いつも同じ, 決まって同じ)) Adnominal like 小さな? 決まっている日 and 決まりの日 are similar, though. All seem to be about something that is habitual or repeats, rather than about a decision. Or can these somehow be explained by adding a meaning to 決まる?

I'm not a native Japanese so maybe I'm mistaken about these. -- Coffee2theorems 00:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

First of all, I think there is much room to discuss and experiment on this issue, whether those important collocations or typical usages of Japanese words should have their own articles or not. I don't want to be assertive here. But in my personal opinion, I feel we can keep those three points in one entry of the verb 決まる and should do so, preventing them from being scattered around among pages. In other others, for me, it seems that making use of example sentences and usage notes, rather than creating entries, would be enough and appropriate for them. Comparing the definitions of 広辞苑 and 大辞林, I feel the latter is more comprehensive and accurate, so I will discuss the details based on 大辞林.

• On the entry of 決まる in 大辞林, there is a definition "話し手の確信・判断". I think this covers your first two items. The first item might be an example without the に. Certainly, "決定しているだろう" in this context is strange, but we can explain this by a fact that 決定 doesn't have the sense mentioned above. Though I completely agree with your point that the degree of freedom for the conjugation is being limited here, I think it doesn't necessarily means that the expression requires its own entry. Instead, we can just explain it in the main article. Plus, let me note that the example in the first item sounds like a shortened variant of "そうに決まっているだろう".
• I did a quick research about the third item. It seems that 決まった is not an adnominal but a verb form of "決まる in 連用形 + 助動詞 た". Yes, it's very confusing for me, too... I think that this usage belongs to the definition "いつも変わらないでいる、一定している" of 決まる in 大辞林, and that we can also treat it as such on our entry 決まる.

Cheers! --Tohru 03:33, 13 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

I agree experimentation/discussion is called for, and not just for 決まる. Looks like there are many who want to have separate entries for inflections, even if there's nothing else in them but "this is the plural of something" (see e.g. somethings). User:SemperBlottoBot will add such entries for Italian inflections. (e.g. accusavi)

In school grammar 決まった is indeed analyzed as 連用形 + 助動詞 た, but in second language teaching it's said to be the past tense of 決まる. Many don't even know that て and た are 助動詞 in school grammar. The treatment of 補助動詞 such as (て)いる and (て)しまう varies more, but simply splitting them as て/いる and て/しまう becomes a problem with the colloquial synonyms てる, ちゃう, ちまう (no place to split them). Same for e.g. 見ては -> 見ちゃ. I added ている, てる, てしまう, ちゃう much in the same way as 大辞林 handles them (大辞林 also has ては and ちゃ), but it's possible that in the future we will also have entries such as 見た (actually, this already exists), 見ちゃう, 見させられました and so on. I think there's been too little discussion about such things, and have recently talked with User:Cynewulf about it.

explains more about Japanese as a second language. E.g. it lists these as inflections: "マス形：話します　ナイ形：話さない　タラ形：話したら　受身形：話される". It goes on to say "ただし、この中で「マス形」と「ナイ形」は厳密には活用形とは言いにくいものです。活用形というのは、動詞が変化した一つの形で、それ自身は変化しない、決まった形でなければなりません。" and "日本語教育の活用形を具体的に見て行く前に、学校文法の活用表を参考にあげておきます。この表に対しては、いろいろな立場・観点から数多くの批判がなされていて、現代語の活用表として不適当なことははっきりしていると言っていいでしょう。ですから、とりあげる必要もないのですが、". I believe this is how Japanese is commonly taught as a second language. I think there's merit in doing things both ways. For one thing, Wiktionary is not limited to "現代語", and for another there are many English speakers who do know something about the school grammar. Adding to all this Wiktionary's unique way of doing things, it's not easy to see what the best way is :-) -- Coffee2theorems 21:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

(sorry, this got rather long)

Hi, I suggested adding graphical character decompositions for Chinese characters in Beer parlor earlier. Robert added a parameter for them to the Han character template and I've been adding decompositions since. See 易 for an example. Because these decompositions are purely graphical, some of them are of course etymologically speaking nonsense. Now when I went to User_talk:Abdull by accident, I found out that you and some others have had a problem with this in the past, so I came here to talk about it :-)

Such decompositions are not an original idea. Indeed, it is merely an extension of the traditional idea of indexing by radicals, which does not care about etymologies either. 卡 has 卜 as the radical for instance, even though it's really a combination of 上 and 下. Removing 卜 from 卡 results in 上, so you could say that 卡=⿱上卜 graphically (⿱ is Unicode Ideographic Description Sequence character for top-bottom split). Etymologically it's 卡=⿻上下 (⿻ means overlapping parts).

Ideographic Description Sequences (IDS) are Unicode's way of describing characters that have not yet been encoded in Unicode. It's a graphical description, and nothing prevents its use for characters that already exist in Unicode, although that is not its main purpose. There are some examples in the document.

IDS is used this way by at least the CHISE project, which is Japanese. This page contains the parts relevant to IDS; they also have a search page (「指定した部品を持つ漢字を検索」). Their way of decomposing is slightly different from mine as I didn't use their data (they have a free license that is unfortunately incompatible with Wiktionary's), but it is certainly graphical, not etymological. E.g. "京=⿱⿱亠口小", "亘=⿱一旦", "午=⿱𠂉十". Nevertheless, search by such parts is useful, and all electronic kanji dictionaries I've seen have some kind of 部品 search. Mine (漢字源) allows entering "部品読み", and if I enter 部品読み＝じゅう＆とお and 総画数＝４, I get e.g. 午, 支, 升, 井, even though none of them have any etymological relation to 十. It doesn't care about the difference between 肉月 and 月偏 either.

One kanji dictionary also uses what they call "SKIP codes" for indexing kanjis, because radicals are a bit difficult to many Westerners. It simply uses stroke counts of different parts, e.g. 指 would be a type 1 (left-right split) character with 3 strokes on the left and 6 on the right, so the SKIP code is 1-3-6. The creator of that system claims copyright on the codes, though. Like 部品 search, it's easier than search by radicals.

There's also one book for learning kanjis, which splits characters into elements without caring at all about etymology. It even goes so far as to assign new, bogus meanings to existing characters and elements to aid memory. E.g. 癶 is teepee and 豆 is table; then 登 could be memorized by making a silly story for it (the book is all about such silly stories) like "I went camping on the mountains (山を登る) and took with me a teepee (癶) and a table (豆)". The author explains in the preface of the book how his method is the best thing since sliced bread and that the traditional teachers and Japanese who are set in the old, bad ways just don't get it (and no, I don't agree with that). That book's from 1977, so it's not exactly a new idea, and there's even a web forum for people who share such silly stories with each other to learn kanjis. They even know it's all wrong etymologically, but they don't care, as long as they learn to read and write the characters.

All in all, I think there's ample evidence that many find such things useful. If I didn't know e.g. 頁, it'd still be nice to be able to go to 貝, click on "What links here" and get to 頁 quickly, even though there's only a graphical relation between them, no etymological relation. Or getting to 通 from 用, or to 鬱 from 缶. I would never even guess what the radical for 鬱 is (apparently 鬯.. I've never seen that one). For etymology, there's always the etymology section. Of course the silliest decompositions (see 日, 曰, 月) may not be too useful, but I was only trying to be comprehensive as there's no harm in it and I didn't want to draw the line of what is silly and what's not. -- Coffee2theorems 02:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Do you prefer English or Japanese?

I have a few comments about two of your recent edits: ] and .

I think a redirect is better for two reasons:

1. By creating an entry in romanized script, it may imply that there really is an English word with such a spelling. The word yukata is arguably English now. However, very, very few monolingual English speakers will know the words katabira and yukatabira.
2. It duplicates entries. Your comment said "soft redirect", but rather it is basically a copy of the original entry. Any future changes to one entry will need to synchronized with the other. However, I fear that will often not be done.

Thus, I think it is best to leave these as redirects. If and when these terms become common in English, the redirect should be changed appropriately. I created the redirects only to assist in accessibility and discoverability. May I change them back? Bendono 07:24, 9 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

いつもお世話に成っております。質問は二つあります：

1. 古語など、歴史的仮名遣いはどうすればいいでしょうか？例えば、Template talk:ja-nounにはそのような引数はありません。形容詞の場合はもう少し複雑に成りますし。
2. 『倭名類聚抄』や『伊呂波字類抄』や『下学集』や『日葡辞書』等、昔の辞書を、そして岩波の古典文学大系（旧・新）等古典の本も

持っています。引用はどのように書けばいいでしょうか？参考に成るような見出しを指摘して頂ければ幸いです。 以上、宜しくお願いします。Bendono 02:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Would you mind not changing {{top}} to {{trans-top}} without also providing a gloss, as per your edit a few months ago to Einstein field equation? Thanks! DAVilla 05:53, 19 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oops, I must have known it was needed there though... Thank you for the tidying up! ―Tohru 06:25, 19 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hello Tohru, I have a question. The word waka gashira or shatei gashira consist both of 2 words including gashira. Rodasmith and I were wondering whether がしら (gashira) is only used in compounds such as those, and or the word in isolation is pronounced as かしら (kashira). And if you can, can you create the gashira article? Thanks Mallerd 12:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hello Mallerd, without dought, がしら (gashira) is only used in compounds. In those compounds, the first /k/ sound of かしら (kashira) was affected by the preceding word and euphonically changed into the voiced /g/ sound, so there is no case in which がしら exists as an independent word. This change also applies to many other words like 会社 (かいしゃ, kaisha), 本 (ほん, hon) or 橋 (はし, hashi). Cheers! --Tohru 16:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! So helpful :D Mallerd 16:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, 英湯 was a typo, but I am hesitant to take it away, as I was curious and did find a couple of uses of it on the internet. I don't know what the definition is, so I can't be sure as to whether or not it warrants being there. And also, I only saw it in a few places, so maybe it's lack of use means it doesn't warrant a place. I'm not to familiar with these matters, so I am not going to take any further action on the matter. If you're curious as well, I saw it most often used as part of longer phrases such as 英湯広場, which apparently translates to "British hot water open space"; according to Google and another translation program I used. — This unsigned comment was added by MichaelLau (talk • contribs) at 02:53, 24 September 2007.

英(ei) is an abbreviation for England and 湯(yu) is hot water so 英湯(eiyu?) is English(or British by extension) hot water so I suppose it might just be SoP.--50 Xylophone Players 19:56, 23 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

According to the Moji add-on for Firefox 広場(hiroba) translates to plaza.--50 Xylophone Players 15:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

I hadn’t notice that the vote finally concluded. Thanks! Rod (A. Smith) 06:22, 24 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Not you of course ;-) Someone keeps reverting the edits. Can you lock the correct entry for a while? Algrif 16:35, 14 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

I've added a "hhira" parameter to ja-noun and the other templates, thought you might like to know (per your conversation with Bendono in August). Cynewulf 19:49, 21 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks!! Yes, I should've done that ages ago... ―Tohru 00:36, 22 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks.. これを見ていましたｗ。 Cynewulf 16:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

面白いｗ。「農協牛乳」にしか聞こえないですね。。―Tohru 17:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

What was the clip about? When I click on the above link, a mesage announcing its deletion is displayed. What was the topic? Bogorm 18:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

ゆうしょうの修正をありがとうございます。

じゃなくて、無償だ。Cynewulf 16:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

まさに「お安い御用」ってやつです。―Tohru 00:48, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

先日はウェルカムメッセージありがとうございました。編集をしていてわからないことがございましたので、メッセージのお言葉に甘えて一つお訊きさせていただきます。英語形容詞のTranslations節においては、日本語の該当語はしばしば形容動詞や「名詞＋の」のような形になりますが、その際の書き方についてなにか方針はおありでしょうか。既存の項目をいくつか見て回ってみたのですが、例えばbeautifulでは「 綺麗 」と語幹のみになっており、honestでは「 正直な 」と、語尾まで含められており、urgentでは「 緊急の, 重大な 」と、語尾も記載してあるもののリンクは語幹だけと揺れがあり、一定した傾向が見えてきませんでした。このことに関してなにか既存の方針や慣習はございますか。よろしくお願いします。--Asahiko 05:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

I may not know much about Japanese, but I find that the conjugations are very lacking. For example on the page for 食べる, the form 食べたい is not there. Nor is 食べません. Why not? Is there some reason for why this isn't included? --BiT 20:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

返事が遅れてすみません。それについては、もうプロジェクトが立ち上がっているようです。それに参加なさってはいかがでしょうか。下の文は、私のところに来た案内状です。参考になさってください。--Izumi5 01:32, 23 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hello !

We are transferring the content of dico.fj.free.fr, a French/Japanese dictionary based on EDict. We are about to import 17 000 articles :) These are what we are working on :

• We have to improve the Japanese conjugation templates.
• We also are completing this pronunciation table.
• And of course, we are working on conversion rules for the importation :)

We have already :

• a function that generates romaji from kana
• a function that generates IPA pronunciation from kana

All contributors are welcome !

Good contributions on Wiktionary !!!

Ftiercel 15:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm awfully sorry. That was an invitation for a French/Japanese dictionary project. I should read things carefully...

Anyway, auxiliary words such as "たい", "ます" connects to specific forms of conjugating words. So, "食べません" or "食べたい" can be easily predicted by the current template. Maybe you have already learned that in this nearly-two-year interval, but that's all I can say for the problem. I again apologize to you for my rude attitude.--Izumi5 15:08, 17 October 2009 (UTC)Reply