<entry id="1114977" stat="D" corpus="jmdict" type="jmdict">
<ent_corp type="jmdict">jmdict</ent_corp>
<ent_seq>2438920</ent_seq>
<k_ele>
<keb>ゆうちょ銀行を除く</keb>
</k_ele>
<k_ele>
<keb>郵貯銀行を除く</keb>
</k_ele>
<r_ele>
<reb>ゆうちょぎんこうをのぞく</reb>
</r_ele>
<sense>
<pos>&exp;</pos>
<pos>&v5k;</pos>
<gloss>excluding the Post Office bank</gloss>
<gloss>excluding Japan Post Bank</gloss>
</sense>
<info>
<audit time="2009-04-10 00:00:00" stat="A">
<upd_detl>Entry created</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-07-30 08:42:56" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Jean-Luc Léger</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>Need help here. This is not a noun but a verbal expression. Yet I understand the nominal english gloss ..
So (exp,v5k) ?</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-07-30 10:02:24" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>paul</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Paul Blay</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>Used generally as a parenthetical qualification.  I don't think the noun glosses were appropriate.</upd_detl>
<upd_diff>@@ -14,3 +14,4 @@
-&lt;pos&gt;&amp;n;&lt;/pos&gt;
-&lt;gloss&gt;non-Post Office bank&lt;/gloss&gt;
-&lt;gloss&gt;bank&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;pos&gt;&amp;exp;&lt;/pos&gt;
+&lt;pos&gt;&amp;v5k;&lt;/pos&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;excluding the Post Office bank&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;excluding Japan Post Bank&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-07-30 12:16:34" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Scott</upd_name>
<upd_detl>Is this needed? Just a standard use of 除く</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-07-31 00:12:36" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>paul</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Paul Blay</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>@Scott: That's what I first thought, but it does seem to be a very common standard phrasing, so I don't think it hurts (as long as it's got correct gloss and PoS!).</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-07-31 01:46:23" stat="D" unap="true">
<upd_uid>rene</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Rene Malenfant</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>only 443 (real) google hits and 45 google hits.  this is a pretty bizarre thing to have in a dictionary, a standard construction, and personally i think it can go.  (i really don't understand how google can say there are 470,000 hits when there are only 443)</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-07-31 23:54:31" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>Can you hold off possible deletion - I want to check something.</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-08-01 02:01:59" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>Yahoo reports ~8k hits, and I can see the first 1000 of them.
Strangely, it doesn't show up in the Google n-gram collection when I grep for the trigram "銀行 を 除く". Perhaps it's an expression that came into use since that collection was done (July 2007). I think it should be kept as amended.</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2012-10-19 16:14:55" stat="D" unap="true">
<upd_uid>Marcus</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Marcus Richert</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>3560 hits on bing. but I don't quite see how it's necessary? 
it's just A+B</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2012-10-20 00:25:33" stat="D" unap="true">
<upd_name>Scott</upd_name>
<upd_detl>Absolutely. I'm sure that "excluding Justin Bieber" gets plenty of hits too. (7.7k)</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2012-10-20 01:46:53" stat="D">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>I guess it can go. I have expanded the 除く entry</upd_detl>
</audit>
</info>
</entry>