<entry id="2292544" stat="A" corpus="jmdict" type="jmdict">
<ent_corp type="jmdict">jmdict</ent_corp>
<ent_seq>2142100</ent_seq>
<k_ele>
<keb>新平民</keb>
</k_ele>
<r_ele>
<reb>しんへいみん</reb>
</r_ele>
<sense>
<pos>&n;</pos>
<misc>&hist;</misc>
<misc>&derog;</misc>
<gloss>new commoner</gloss>
<gloss g_type="expl">former members of the lowest rank of the Japanese caste system after its abolition in 1871</gloss>
</sense>
<info>
<audit time="2007-03-28 00:00:00" stat="A">
<upd_detl>Entry created</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2014-12-18 13:12:20" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Marcus Richert</upd_name>
<upd_refs>daij wiki (蔑称) 
early meiji period so obs rather than arch</upd_refs>
<upd_diff>@@ -12,3 +12,3 @@
-&lt;misc&gt;&amp;arch;&lt;/misc&gt;
-&lt;misc&gt;&amp;vulg;&lt;/misc&gt;
-&lt;gloss&gt;"new commoners" (name given to the lowest rank of the Japanese caste system after its abolition)&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;misc&gt;&amp;obs;&lt;/misc&gt;
+&lt;misc&gt;&amp;derog;&lt;/misc&gt;
+&lt;gloss g_type="expl"&gt;name given to the lowest rank of the Japanese caste system after its abolition&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2014-12-19 04:51:34" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
</audit>
<audit time="2024-02-21 19:12:52" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>stephen</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Stephen Kraus</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>This might be an irrational pet peeve, but I don't like it when entries only contain [expl] glosses.
We have "平民" glossed as "commoner." Maybe "new commoner" is fine here.

Perhaps [hist] is more appropriate than [obs].</upd_detl>
<upd_refs>https://apjjf.org/2011/9/29/David-Chapman/3565/article.html
&gt;&gt; However, the new registries labelled the former outcaste households with the term ‘new commoner’ or ‘original eta’ (shinheimin/motoeta) maintaining an identifiable differentiated status.</upd_refs>
<upd_diff>@@ -12 +12 @@
-&lt;misc&gt;&amp;obs;&lt;/misc&gt;
+&lt;misc&gt;&amp;hist;&lt;/misc&gt;
@@ -14 +14,2 @@
-&lt;gloss g_type="expl"&gt;name given to the lowest rank of the Japanese caste system after its abolition&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss&gt;new commoner&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss g_type="expl"&gt;name given to the lowest rank of the Japanese caste system after its abolition in 1871&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2024-02-21 20:20:32" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>Maybe this?
I don't like expl-only glosses.</upd_detl>
<upd_refs>https://ja.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%96%B0%E5%B9%B3%E6%B0%91</upd_refs>
<upd_diff>@@ -15 +15 @@
-&lt;gloss g_type="expl"&gt;name given to the lowest rank of the Japanese caste system after its abolition in 1871&lt;/gloss&gt;
+&lt;gloss g_type="expl"&gt;former members of the lowest rank of the Japanese caste system after its abolition in 1871&lt;/gloss&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2024-02-24 01:12:32" stat="A">
<upd_uid>robin1354</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Robin Scott</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>We decided a few years ago that [expl] should not be used if the entry only has one gloss. Sometimes an explanatory gloss is all that's needed but in that case it should not be tagged as [expl].</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2024-02-25 00:36:46" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>I did consider that general position but I felt having the euphemistic "new commoner" was worth it. I'd have flagged it as [euph] but that's sense-wide.</upd_detl>
</audit>
</info>
</entry>