jmdict 2865149 Active (id#2340497)
画像はイメージです
がぞうはイメージです
  1. [exp] [id]
    • image is for illustrative purposes only
    Cross references:
    • ⇒ see: 1021750 イメージ 3. depiction (e.g. of a product); rendition; impression
History:
    • A 2025-05-25 06:04:38 Jim Breen (id#2340497)
    • Comments
      Closing.
    • A* 2025-05-15 08:52:12 Syed Raza (id#2339296)
    • Comments
      Hmm, my approach would have been to instead index the Tatoeba example, but fair points.
    • A* 2025-05-15 08:07:47 Jim Breen (id#2339292)
    • Comments
      Maybe it's OK. It's certainly common, and it's using a lesser sense of イメージ.
    • Refs
      画像はイメージ	456179	  
      画像はイメージです	389671	 
      画像がイメージです	24
    • Diff
      @@ -6,3 +5,0 @@
      -</k_ele>
      -<k_ele>
      -<keb>※画像はイメージです</keb>
      @@ -15 +12,3 @@
      -<gloss>This image is for illustrative purposes only</gloss>
      +<xref type="see" seq="1021750">イメージ・3</xref>
      +<misc>&id;</misc>
      +<gloss>image is for illustrative purposes only</gloss>
    • A* 2025-05-12 22:14:03 Jai (id#2339083)
    • Comments
      Thanks for your consideration and explanation, and sorry if I'm being difficult, but I just want to make the case as clear as I can because I do think it would be a valuable entry. If this doesn't change anything then fair enough, I'll accept that of course. (Also, I guess I should mark this as undeleted if I want my comment to be reviewed? Sorry if that wasn't necessary!)
      
      Firstly, I'm still not quite convinced that the meaning is very clear on first exposure to the phrase, even knowing which sense of イメージ is being used - even less so without that prior knowledge, let alone without having the entry visible as a reference (even being aware of that sense, I think many people wouldn't naturally think of it).
      Also, tatoeba is a low-quality project - there are thousands of unnatural sentences submitted by non-native speakers, so I still think it would make sense to add it (as a common expression) to JMdict, being a high-quality dictionary (especially given the breadth already present).
      Finally, as long as my other points make sense, there are plenty of full sentences already present in JMdict where their meanings are not obvious from the component parts and/or they are much more common as collocations than chance would suggest, so I'm not sure how this one is any different in that regard.
      
      Sorry if you don't think my points are valid or if I've overlooked anything, again, I don't want to be antagonistic or take up editing time, I just want to make sure the case is as clear as I can make it before giving up on it!
    • D 2025-05-03 06:47:01 Jim Breen (id#2338322)
    • Comments
      Yes, not really suitable as a dictionary entry.
  1. (show/hide 2 older history records)
View entry in alternate formats: jel | edict | jmdict xml | jmdictdb xml

Notes

  • Click on the entry seq# to see all versions of the entry.       
  • ⇒,⇔,⇐ Denote cross references (xrefs). ⇒ shows an xref from this entry sense to some other entry. ⇐ shows an xref on some other entry that points to this one; to change, edit the other entry. ⇔ indicates two xrefs, one in each direction.
  • Cross references marked with an asterisk (*) after the seq# denote a reference to an unapproved entry. These will disappear when the unapproved entry is approved.