Entries

>> the lit gloss is clearly a literal translation, _from Chinese_.
That's precisely my point. lit glosses are supposed to be literal translations *of the Japanese*, sticking to the Japanese phrasing and structure as closely as possible. "the weak are meat the strong do eat" doesn’t even agree with 弱肉強食's part of speech. It's not consistent with how we use lit glosses on all non-yoji entries.
In some cases, translations from Chinese make good glosses but they shouldn’t be tagged as [lit]. The same goes for translations of the component characters. I don't think a gloss like "one time, one meeting" is useful.

>> A literal translation of a yojijukugo is simply a translation of its component characters (or words). Classical Chinese syntax does not carry over into Japanese.

...except that, that isn't true, as you can see, from most yojijukugo, that have lit glosses.
Certainly, none of it applies to 猿猴捉月, 弱肉強食, 三日坊主, 七転八起, 夜郎自大, 六法全書...
And Classical Chinese syntax not carrying over into Japanese, is irrelevant, as these are _English_, not Japanese, glosses.
In the case of 夜郎自大, the lit gloss is clearly a literal translation, _from Chinese_.
自大 isn't even a word, in Japanese.
Translating it character-for-character, from Japanese to English, would be pointless. Translating it character-for-character, rather than as the two kanji (or rather hanzi) word, would also be quite wrong.
Not to mention translating the name of the kingdom 夜郎, character-for-character. (or spelling it as Yarou, the Japanese pronunciation, rather than Yelang, as it is known in Chinese ... Well, in Modern Standard Mandarin, actually, but...)

>> "the weak are meat the strong do eat" is one translator's attempt at rendering 弱肉強食 into idiomatic English. It's certainly not a literal translation of the Japanese

It IS a literal translation.
It may not conform to the standard you mentioned, but that standard isn't the definition of "literal translation". It is only ONE sub-type, of literal translation.

>> I would keep "three kneelings and nine prostrations" and drop "one time, one meeting".

Why?
All of the lit glosses, mentioned here, seem perfectly good and useful.
Most of them also make sense, at least once you read the lit gloss.

Yojijukugo like 猿猴捉月 skips some aspects, that one must learn, before it can be understood (even if you are a native speaker of Japanese or Classical Chinese [the latter, only applying to people in the past]), but lit glosses should, and typically do, include those in parentheses.

Others, like, 一期一会, 弱肉強食, and 七転八起, make perfect sense, even with only literal translations of the individual characters. (though the syntax may feel a bit weird)

>> There, however, no possible valid/reasonable argument, for how/why it being a yojijukugo would have any relevance, to the question of having a lit gloss or not.

A literal translation of a yojijukugo is simply a translation of its component characters (or words). Classical Chinese syntax does not carry over into Japanese.
"the weak are meat the strong do eat" is one translator's attempt at rendering 弱肉強食 into idiomatic English. It's certainly not a literal translation of the Japanese (which, if anything, would be "weak meat, strong eat"). 
It's perfectly fine to include, where appropriate, glosses that incorporate the literal meanings of the characters but they shouldn't be tagged as "lit". I would keep "three kneelings and nine prostrations" and drop "one time, one meeting".

Here are some with a [lit] tag on the last gloss:
三拝九拝 【さんぱいきゅうはい】 (n,vs) (yoji) kowtowing; bowing repeatedly; three kneelings and nine prostrations
一期一会 【いちごいちえ】 (n) (yoji) once-in-a-lifetime encounter; one time, one meeting
猿猴捉月 【えんこうそくげつ】 (n) (yoji) trying to reach above one's station and failing; trying to accomplish something beyond one's abilities and failing; monkey catching (a reflection of) the moon (in the water) 

It's a fair question as to whether they are useful as glosses and if so, should they be tagged. For 三拝九拝 GG5 leads with that gloss. I'm not sure the others serve much purpose.
This should be discussed in the issues forum.

Yeah, there are tons of yojijukugo, with lit glosses. There is no sign of any rule, of no lit glosses for yojijukugo.
One can oppose having a lit gloss, due to the regular glosses being so close to the literal meaning.
There, however, no possible valid/reasonable argument, for how/why it being a yojijukugo would have any relevance, to the question of having a lit gloss or not.

I see that clunky literal translation went in before the yoji tag.
At present you'd have to search the XML for g_type="lit"

"We don't have lit glosses for yojijukugo."

I'm pretty sure I've seen lit glosses, on some yojijukugo. Also, why not? What is lit glosses for, if not to use them for such cases?
Also, is there any way to search for entries, with lit glosses?

We don't have lit glosses for yojijukugo.

OK, I'll make it that.

"the strong prey on the weak" sounds okay to me.

GG5 translating it as "might makes right" doesn't matter, if it is clear that, that is wrong.
And I've made clear how, and why, it is.
Dictionary makers aren't infallible, after all, and there are plenty of examples, of where their definitions are wrong.

GG5 obviously tried to line up an English expression, which seemed to fit OK to me. These 四字熟語 can be rather imprecise.
I'm tempted to suggest "the strong prey on the weak" as a replacement for the proposed 2nd and 3rd glosses, but I'll back off and let others consider it.

"Might makes right" is, quite explicitly, a statement of what is claimed to be right. (with the speaker typically accusing someone else, of holding the view, whilst personally rejecting it) ...or, sometimes, a statement about how what is considered right, in a society, is determined by those in power. (much like "history is written by the victors")

弱肉強食, however, is a statement of what is. Not necessarily (indeed, most often not) of what should be, or is right.

As such, they are very two different, quite separate and distinct, statements.
"The law of the jungle" is a decent translations.
Of course, how things work in the jungle, doesn't actually really reflect the notion of 弱肉強食
...but that is nevertheless, pretty much, what the phrase "the law of the jungle" is most often used to mean, which is what matters here.

Besides "The law of the jungle", one can use a description (I added a couple, though I'm not entirely confident in their quality)
...but not "might makes right", or "survival of the fittest".
Those two phrases can be seen as related (depending on context) but are certainly not synonymous.

Yes, not the best fit.

Survival of the fittest, most certainly does NOT mean, that the stronger dominates. It means those best suited to their environment (i.e. fittest) survive. Sometimes being weaker, makes one more fit. Humans, e.g., are quite significantly weaker, than any other apes. (past or present)
適者生存 is survival of the fittest. 弱肉強食 is not. They are two very different concepts.

Adding yoji tagAdding yoji tag
-*- via bulkupd.py -*-

OK

-this is a noun.  i don't think a simple noun can be a proverb.  also, all 四字熟語 have some kind of idiomatic of proverbial meaning, so i don't think it needs to be stated.
-do we generally provide [lit] tags for 四字熟語?

"the weak are meat the strong do eat" appeared when I googled 
for something similar - apparently it's from the novel Cloud 
Atlas, the author got it from the Japanese saying