On 22 October 2012 17:44, René Malenfant <
rene_malenfant@***********> wrote:
> On 2012-10-22, at 12:38 AM, Jean-Luc Léger <
reiga@****************> wrote:
> Le 2012-10-22 04:33, Jim Breen a écrit :
> > > Isn't the point of these mahjong terms that they are usually
> > > written in kanji, but in mahjong books and articles they chose
> > > to explain the readings in katakana, as though they were coming
> > > from Chinese, which is not the case with 三色同順, etc.?
> > I always thought that specific usage of katakana was just to stand out
> > a word just like we westeners use of upcases, bold or italic styles.
> > So, is it really worth recording them ? I wonder ..
Well, that happens too, and where it is common enough to occur in
text in a significant quantity, we usually record it in the dictionary
with a "nokanji".
> I've thought this myself. It really seems like it's more trouble than
> it's worth, and katakana->hiragana mappings should be taken
> care of by the dictionary software.
If it was just dictionary software which always did hira<>kata
mapping it wouldn't be a problem. However if you look up
サンショクドウジュン and さんしょくどうじゅん in Google
you get different sets of pages.. I feel some obligation at the
dictionary level to record that it can be used both ways.
(サンショクドージュン is something else again.)
For 三色同順/ さんしょくどうじゅん/サンショクドウジュン/
サンショクドージュン I think:
- we should put in さんしょくどうじゅん as it's the reading
of a regular jukugo;
- we need to record サンショクドウジュン and サンショクドージュン
because it's often written that way (thanks to the funny little ways of
the Mahjong Brigade in Japan);
- the issues are:
-- do the katakana forms get "nokanji" indicating they are not
associated with/readings of the kanji (not really the case)
-- do they get "ik" indicating they are irregular kana formations.
-- do they get both.
I'm inclined to flag them both ik/nokanji.
Cheers
Jim
--
Jim Breen
Adjunct Snr Research Fellow, Japanese Studies Centre, Monash University