| 6. |
A 2019-09-26 05:53:25 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Refs: |
GG5 (After the noun glosses): 新参の new; 〔新任の〕 newly appointed; 〔未熟な〕 green
中辞典 (preceding the noun glosses): 新参の new; green (未熟の); newly-appointed (新任の). |
| |
Comments: |
We distinguish between nouns where XXの is commonly adjectival and where it usually just
possessive. I think this is clearly a case where it's adjectival.
The removal of "adj-no" tags I have supported have been in situations where the pattern is
mainly possessive. |
| 5. |
A* 2019-09-26 03:33:34 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
well, it's still on 古参. and it makes more sense to have it. if 新参 only referred to a person, then i would agree that the adj-no is pointless here. but it doesn't. daijr: 新しく仲間に加わること。また、その人。
adj-no is fine for this one |
| 4. |
A* 2019-09-26 02:02:06 Marcus Richert <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
We've been moving away from tagging normal nouns as [n,adj-no] at all (not talking about [adj-no,n] here). You could
argue most nouns are adj-no, so it's really not necessary to point out in most cases. Case in point, I don't think the
adj-no adds anything here, which is why I removed it. |
| 3. |
A 2019-09-25 17:34:54 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Refs: |
gg5
新参の new; 〔新任の〕 newly appointed; 〔未熟な〕 green
eij
新参の
newly arrived
come-lately
new（地位や立場などが） |
| |
Comments: |
not sure why adj-no was removed |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -15,0 +16 @@
+<pos>&adj-no;</pos> |
| 2. |
A 2019-09-25 17:33:42 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Diff: |
@@ -15,0 +16 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1265410">古参</xref> |
|
(show/hide 1 older log entries)
|
| 1. |
A 2018-11-22 05:34:05 Marcus Richert <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Diff: |
@@ -16 +15,0 @@
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos> |