<entry id="2192487" stat="A" corpus="jmdict" type="jmdict">
<ent_corp type="jmdict">jmdict</ent_corp>
<ent_seq>2595780</ent_seq>
<k_ele>
<keb>意味するもの</keb>
</k_ele>
<r_ele>
<reb>いみするもの</reb>
</r_ele>
<sense>
<pos>&n;</pos>
<pos>&exp;</pos>
<xref type="see" seq="1156800">意味</xref>
<gloss>meaning</gloss>
<gloss>connotation</gloss>
<gloss>denotation</gloss>
</sense>
<info>
<audit time="2010-11-21 20:01:22" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Paul Krause</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>If there is going to be an entry for 意味するもの, (as opposed to just 意味) the general meaning should precede the technical meaning, otherwise, Translate Words produces bizarre results.</upd_detl>
<upd_refs>http://eow.alc.co.jp/%B0%D5%CC%A3%A4%B9%A4%EB%A4%E2%A4%CE/EUC-JP/</upd_refs>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-11-21 23:37:52" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>rene</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Rene Malenfant</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>~should~ there be an entry for 意味するもの?

there actually ~isn't~ an entry for this 'expression' in EDICT at the moment.  it 
only shows up because the Translate Words function is also checking the 
separate linguistics dictionary file

Jim, is there any way we can get 意味するもの removed from lingdic too?  it's a 
pointless entry there</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-11-22 18:46:36" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>As a temporary move I have added "meaning/connotation" to the LINGDIC entry so that Translate Words makes more sense. I'll check with Francis re the LINGDIC entry. 

意味するもの gets 1.5M Googits. Perhaps it's worth an entry, especially if that linguistics meaning is valid....</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-11-22 19:43:18" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>rene</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Rene Malenfant</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>if this is kept, are two senses needed?  after all, all this is is the equivalent of 
"what is meant"</upd_detl>
<upd_diff>@@ -13,1 +13,2 @@
-&lt;gloss&gt;connotation, meaning&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;meaning&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;connotation&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-11-22 19:43:34" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>rene</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Rene Malenfant</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_diff>@@ -17,1 +17,1 @@
-&lt;pos&gt;&amp;n;&lt;/pos&gt;
+&lt;pos&gt;&amp;exp;&lt;/pos&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-11-23 09:47:55" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>I guess not.</upd_detl>
<upd_diff>@@ -15,4 +15,0 @@
-&lt;/sense&gt;
-&lt;sense&gt;
-&lt;pos&gt;&amp;exp;&lt;/pos&gt;
-&lt;field&gt;&amp;ling;&lt;/field&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-11-23 17:08:41" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Scott</upd_name>
<upd_detl>Can take a です, so noun I think. Not sure the gloss really captures the meaning that well.</upd_detl>
<upd_diff>@@ -11,0 +11,1 @@
+&lt;pos&gt;&amp;n;&lt;/pos&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-11-24 10:05:14" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>As in 静かです and 綺麗です?  8-)}
No, the test for noun is whether you can have 意味するものが....
If "yes", it's a noun.
(Having said that, I'm a bit uncomfortable with "exp,n".)</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-11-24 18:54:47" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>rene</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Rene Malenfant</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>i've suggested that [exp,n] is no less acceptable than [exp,v1], since the first 
tells you what it is and the second tells you how it's used.  but i agree it's 
somewhat questionable.

if [exp,n] is something we want to disallow, there are probably &lt;10 other 
entries that will need to have the [n] removed</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2010-11-25 09:37:20" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>Having slept on it, I think "exp,n" is OK.</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2022-06-23 00:01:33" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>robin1354</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Robin Scott</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>I don't see a need for this entry. Overly compositional. We wouldn't add it today.</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2022-06-23 01:47:18" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_refs>意味するもの	156060	98.6%
意味する物	2217	1.4%
Eijiro, GG5 &amp; Tanaka sentences.
May as well keep it - common.</upd_refs>
</audit>
</info>
</entry>