<entry id="1968217" stat="A" corpus="jmdict" type="jmdict">
<ent_corp type="jmdict">jmdict</ent_corp>
<ent_seq>2120320</ent_seq>
<k_ele>
<keb>腐っても鯛</keb>
</k_ele>
<r_ele>
<reb>くさってもたい</reb>
</r_ele>
<sense>
<pos>&exp;</pos>
<misc>&proverb;</misc>
<gloss>a diamond on a dunghill is still a diamond</gloss>
<gloss>quality is quality</gloss>
<gloss>an old eagle is better than a young crow</gloss>
<gloss g_type="lit">even if it's rotten, it's still sea bream</gloss>
</sense>
<info>
<audit time="2006-12-21 00:00:00" stat="A">
<upd_detl>Entry created</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-11-27 00:08:23" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Scott</upd_name>
<upd_diff>@@ -12,1 +12,3 @@
-&lt;gloss&gt;expression meaning something that is not what it once was but it is still high class&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;something that is not what it once was but it is still high class&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;quality is quality&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;even if it's rotten, it's still sea bream&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-11-29 08:18:15" stat="A">
<upd_uid>rene</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Rene Malenfant</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_diff>@@ -14,1 +14,1 @@
-&lt;gloss&gt;even if it's rotten, it's still sea bream&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss g_type="lit"&gt;even if it's rotten, it's still sea bream&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2014-02-06 11:05:01" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Francis</upd_name>
<upd_detl>I have not changed the above. My thoughts were triggered by the fact that in some text the above expression is followed by "です" or "だ"; plus also sometimes an exphasis, etc., e.g., "な".

What I was thinking is this: that the parts in the meanings above which turn the expression into a complete statement should be included in brackets, e.g., [lit] even if (it's) rotten, (it's still) sea bream. I am stating this because when the meaning is preceded by the concept of "the literal meaning", namely; upholding the exact or primary meaning of a word or words, the inclusion of "it's" and "it's still" seems to be incorrect. I don't wish to become the pedant, but I am thinking that the novice may be deviated from the true concept of such an expression when trying to balance literal meaning of the Japanes head-word with the meaning given following the prefix [lit].

I think that I would like to see such an entry for the meaning of such expressions set out something like this:

"[this expression is idiomatically usually used simply as 'くさってもたい' and conveys the meaning of] something that is not what it once was but it is still high class; quality is quality; [lit] even if (it's) rotten, (it's still) sea bream.</upd_detl>
<upd_refs>See below.</upd_refs>
</audit>
<audit time="2014-02-08 04:36:18" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>Bear in mind it's a proverb. I don't think a language learner should be worrying too much about the literal meaning of the Japanese, much less agonizing over any ellipsis. We have plenty of expressions where we also give a "lit" Japanese version, and I'd hate to see the English mangled just to make it more 直訳.</upd_detl>
<upd_refs>ルミナス, 中辞典 (extra gloss).</upd_refs>
<upd_diff>@@ -13,0 +14 @@
+&lt;gloss&gt;an old eagle is better than a young crow&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2018-01-09 06:53:04" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>Marcus</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Marcus Richert</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>removed first sense because this is a proverb, not a noun 
referring to the figurative bream.</upd_detl>
<upd_refs>daij</upd_refs>
<upd_diff>@@ -12 +12,2 @@
-&lt;gloss&gt;something that is not what it once was but it is still high class&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;misc&gt;&amp;proverb;&lt;/misc&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;a diamond on a dunghill is still a diamond&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2018-01-14 11:18:13" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
</audit>
</info>
</entry>