Re: Reference Dictionaries (Was: [edict-jmdict] About entries containing "with negative")

["Zarlan ." <zarlan@********>]

>That site, but you need to log to a (paid) subscription to see the individual dictionaries covered.

Fair enough.
So the list is more detailed, when you log in, then? Can't say I'm particularly surprised to hear that.

>https://kod.kenkyusha.co.jp/service/guide/usage.jsp has a list of the dictionaries covered towards the bottom.

None of them labelled as 第５版 ...but as you've said, they are labelled such, once you log in.
Still, I'd call it a revised edition of the 第５版, rather than the 第５版 (I don't get why Kenkyusha labels it as 第５版, rather than 第５版 revised or 5.x or something)
...but I certainly get why you'd just call it GG5, if Kenkyusha does so. That means it IS the GG5 ...except it isn't the same GG5 as the print version, so it isn't really the GG5 ...even though it is the GG5 ... Ehm...
Anyway: I don't fully agree with your position, but I understand and accept it.
Thanks for the clarification.

>The corrections I mentioned were made to the 第５版.

My point was that the 第５版 is essentially a big correction of 第4版 and the 第4版 is a correction of the 第3版 ...and so on.
But given the above stuff, I guess that's kinda beside the point.

Anyway, all of this answers the questions I had, but raises another:
When you said "Kenkyusha cites 新和英大辞典第５版 and ＫＯＤ追加語彙 as distinct sources. So should we.", what did you mean?
As you have apparently stated that the J-E dictionary on the KOD is GG5 (and I presume that the E-J dictionary is labelled as 新英和大辞典第6版?), then what would be labelled as KOD, rather than GG5 or Kenkyusha's New English-Japanese Dictionary 6th Edition?

/Alan

<-----Ursprungligt Meddelande----->

From: Jim Breen jimbreen@********* [edict-jmdict] [edict-jmdict@***************] Sent: 16/9/2019 4:43:24 AM To: edict-jmdict@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Reference Dictionaries (Was: [edict-jmdict] About entries containing "with negative")  ?   On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 at 05:05, 'Zarlan .' zarlan@spray.se [edict-jmdict] <edict-jmdict@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > >Well, the Kenkyusha site labels it as "???????5?". > > Really? Where? I can't find any mention of "?5?", anywhere at, https://kod.kenkyusha.co.jp/service/ > Is there some other site, that you're talking about? I can't seem to find any. That site, but you need to log to a (paid) subscription to see the individual dictionaries covered. That label (above) is on entries displayed from the ?????. The page at: https://kod.kenkyusha.co.jp/service/guide/usage.jsp has a list of the dictionaries covered towards the bottom. > >As I mentioned earlier, there are corrections made to the "?5?" in the online version. > > You could say that ?5? contains many corrections made to the ?4?... But I didn't. The corrections I mentioned were made to the ?5?. A comparison of the printed/CD ediction and the current online version confirms this. > >Kenkyusha cites ???????5? and KOD???? as distinct sources. So should we. > > Isn't that exactly what I said? Well what appeared in the email I received was: "As it is a separate entity, if you cite from the website version you should not refer to it as GG5 or ???????5?, but as KOD or Kenkyusha Online Dictionary ...or ????????�????????." I have no problem with using GG5 as shorthand for ???????5?. Cheers Jim -- Jim Breen Adjunct Snr Research Fellow, Japanese Studies Centre, Monash University http://www.jimbreen.org/ http://nihongo.monash.edu/