<entry id="2326656" stat="R" corpus="jmdict" type="jmdict">
<ent_corp type="jmdict">jmdict</ent_corp>
<ent_seq>2829645</ent_seq>
<r_ele>
<reb>ず</reb>
</r_ele>
<sense>
<pos>&aux-v;</pos>
<pos>&suf;</pos>
<pos>&conj;</pos>
<xref type="see" seq="2441300">ぬ</xref>
<s_inf>connects to -nai stem of 五段, 一段 and カ変 verbs and to サ変 as せ～ず</s_inf>
<gloss>not</gloss>
<gloss g_type="expl">negates a verb and continues onto next sentence</gloss>
</sense>
<info>
<audit time="2016-06-13 15:32:31" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>rene</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Rene Malenfant</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_refs>koj, etc.</upd_refs>
</audit>
<audit time="2016-06-13 23:31:02" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
</audit>
<audit time="2024-04-20 07:59:10" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Non</upd_name>
<upd_detl>Entry was missing the information that ず can form a conjunction.
Added second sense as terminal ず can still be found in set phrases as well as certain media.
Opted for 連用形 and 終止形 over translations as the original Japanese can likely be researched with less potential of wrong results than something such as connective form or terminal form, they can also be looked up within the dictionary whereas translations cannot.</upd_detl>
<upd_refs>daijs, daijr</upd_refs>
<upd_diff>@@ -9,0 +10 @@
+&lt;pos&gt;&amp;conj;&lt;/pos&gt;
@@ -13,2 +14,11 @@
-&lt;s_inf&gt;after the -nai stem of a verb&lt;/s_inf&gt;
-&lt;gloss&gt;not doing&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;s_inf&gt;連用形 of ～ぬ acting as a conjunction&lt;/s_inf&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;not&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;/sense&gt;
+&lt;sense&gt;
+&lt;pos&gt;&amp;aux-v;&lt;/pos&gt;
+&lt;xref type="see" seq="2441300"&gt;ぬ・1&lt;/xref&gt;
+&lt;xref type="see" seq="2441300"&gt;ぬ&lt;/xref&gt;
+&lt;xref type="see" seq="2441300"&gt;ぬ&lt;/xref&gt;
+&lt;misc&gt;&amp;form;&lt;/misc&gt;
+&lt;s_inf&gt;used at sentence end; old 終止形 of ～ぬ&lt;/s_inf&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;not&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2024-04-20 10:51:20" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_detl>"連用形" etc. isn't helpful. 99% of users won't know what it's a reference to. If you really were as smart as you seem to think, you'd realize the goal here isn't to cater to the 1% elite grammer nerds</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2024-04-20 11:47:44" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Non</upd_name>
<upd_detl>The notes only do two things: tell you what it is and tell you what it does. Do you presuppose that a reader does not wish to know either or neither of these things?
Of course shoving 連用形 or "conjunction" in there will not automatically allow them to directly download information concerning those concepts unto their brain, I truly hope you did not think this to have been my intent. 
The terms are put there so that the reader may research them on their own, they can even be researched back with this dictionary if someone wishes to research through translation. Could you construct an argument against these points, so that we can have a productive discussion and make a better entry?
The information is not there to "cater to grammar nerds" as you so creatively put, it is there to teach the language: grammar plays an important part of second-language acquisition for many, especially adults, even more so when there is such a disparity between the structures of Japanese and several Indo-European languages. Did you learn Japanese without studying any form of grammar? I would doubt that unless you grew up using Japanese.</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2024-04-22 08:35:28" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Non</upd_name>
<upd_detl>After some consideration, the translation on [1] should be changed as conjunctive ず is not properly represented by it: this ず conflates coordination and negation into a single morpheme, english has no such morpheme and thus lacks a direct translation. I have considered something such as "does/will not... and..." but that seemed confusing without an example sentence so I opted for an explanatory definition that is, hopefully, clear enough.

I realise I have forgotten to say why I have removed the notes on connection: I did so as I assume the notes will compel a reader to click the cross-reference to ぬ, leading them to learn that from there.

An additional idea that came to mind: this entry could be merged with ぬ by adding ず as a reading and adding this glossary to its, it would only need a few "as ～ず" or "as ～ぬ" to be added to the notes, the same could be done with ん. This practice could be applied to merge other entries that are variations of the same thing and with that trim down the number of individual entries with the benefit of consolidating currently scattered items under their corresponding set.</upd_detl>
<upd_diff>@@ -15 +15 @@
-&lt;gloss&gt;not&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss g_type="expl"&gt;used to negate a verb and continue onto next sentence&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2024-04-26 23:40:39" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>I don't think the proposed revision is very useful to the typical user of this dictionary. There may be scope somewhere for detailed etymological and morphological information about these sorts of terms, but I don't think this is the place.
I'm reverting the entry to the 2016 original so that the comments remain visible. I'll reopen it for a while in case there is further discussion.</upd_detl>
<upd_diff>@@ -10 +9,0 @@
-&lt;pos&gt;&amp;conj;&lt;/pos&gt;
@@ -14,11 +13,2 @@
-&lt;s_inf&gt;連用形 of ～ぬ acting as a conjunction&lt;/s_inf&gt;
-&lt;gloss g_type="expl"&gt;used to negate a verb and continue onto next sentence&lt;/gloss&gt;
-&lt;/sense&gt;
-&lt;sense&gt;
-&lt;pos&gt;&amp;aux-v;&lt;/pos&gt;
-&lt;xref type="see" seq="2441300"&gt;ぬ・1&lt;/xref&gt;
-&lt;xref type="see" seq="2441300"&gt;ぬ&lt;/xref&gt;
-&lt;xref type="see" seq="2441300"&gt;ぬ&lt;/xref&gt;
-&lt;misc&gt;&amp;form;&lt;/misc&gt;
-&lt;s_inf&gt;used at sentence end; old 終止形 of ～ぬ&lt;/s_inf&gt;
-&lt;gloss&gt;not&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;s_inf&gt;after the -nai stem of a verb&lt;/s_inf&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;not doing&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2024-04-26 23:40:58" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
</audit>
<audit time="2024-04-27 08:15:40" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Non</upd_name>
<upd_detl>I would question what the typical user is like, what they look for when using a dictionary, and whether the first two questions can be reliably answered at all.

Anyhow, disregard the morphology for a moment, I feel the functional aspects of the explanatory gloss and the [conj] tag were overlooked. There is nothing in the entry to suggest that ず is a conjunction, and not treating it as one will yield the wrong understanding of a phrase. 

The translation "Not doing" is a progressive negation while ず is a negation, a conjunction, and only progressive if the structure it is negating is. "Not" is a closer translation, but is still missing the conjunction part.
Going off of this entry as is, one could very well take a 食べず as "not eating" instead of "does not/will not eat and..."
Furthermore, with only an [aux-v] tag, a reader will most likely think this is the 連体形・終止形 dictionary form that ends a sentence or pre-modifies a noun. This is only worsened by ず ending with a -u, which is usually a characteristic of those forms.
That is not good as treating it as the dictionary form will analyse something such as「驚きもせず私達をながく見つめていた」with 驚きもせず as a premodifier for 私達. 

I tried to to address this with the notes on the 連用形, the tag and the explanatory gloss, I can see why all at once may seem superfluous but hold that at least one is required to solve the matter.
I will insist on the addition of the tag and the explanatory note, with the latter either as a complement or substitute for the translation as "not doing" does not do a good job of relaying what this word does. 
If nothing else, at least the tag should be kept since it is what the word is - but the note instead of or along with the translation could be immediately useful to anyone who does not know what a conjunction is.

As for morphology: it already occupies a place in many entries, notes like the -nai stem note here are morphological in nature and I can only imagine these are accepted while others are not as they allow identification through the morphology of the surrounding items. 
With that standard in mind, since the current entry runs into the suru class -nai stem problem of leaving a reader unable to identify せず and instead implicating しず, I propose changes to it in line with what was done to せる・させる.</upd_detl>
<upd_diff>@@ -9,0 +10 @@
+&lt;pos&gt;&amp;conj;&lt;/pos&gt;
@@ -11,2 +12,3 @@
-&lt;s_inf&gt;after the -nai stem of a verb&lt;/s_inf&gt;
-&lt;gloss&gt;not doing&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;s_inf&gt;connects to -nai stem of 五段, 一段 and カ変 verbs and to サ変 as せ～ず&lt;/s_inf&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;not&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss g_type="expl"&gt;negates a verb and continues onto next sentence&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2024-12-09 05:32:16" stat="R">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>This edit obviously hasn't received support.</upd_detl>
</audit>
</info>
</entry>