| 11. |
A 2021-09-30 11:39:13 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Refs: |
催涙 62743
催涙を 29
催涙が 49 |
| |
Comments: |
We could probably drop n. |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -17 +17 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1292260">催涙ガス・さいるいガス</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1292260">催涙ガス</xref> |
| 10. |
A 2021-09-30 01:58:23 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Refs: |
催涙 62743
催涙スプレー 32865
催涙ガス 11988
催涙弾 9776
催涙の 45 |
| |
Comments: |
I have to agree. |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -15 +15 @@
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
+<pos>&adj-f;</pos> |
| 9. |
A* 2021-09-29 14:32:38 Opencooper
|
| |
Refs: |
ngrams |
| |
Comments: |
Looks like adj-f to me? My refs (gg5, smk) have compounds as examples. |
| 8. |
A 2021-09-29 11:34:17 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
|
| 7. |
A* 2021-09-29 08:44:46 Marcus Richert <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Refs: |
PoS gloss agreement
催涙のガス No matches
催涙ガス 11988 |
| |
Comments: |
Should we treat this as a noun instead? or adj-f? |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -18,3 +18 @@
-<gloss>lacrimator</gloss>
-<gloss>dacryagogue</gloss>
-<gloss>tear-inducing agent</gloss>
+<gloss>tear-inducing</gloss> |
|
(show/hide 6 older log entries)
|
| 6. |
A 2014-12-03 04:19:47 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
OK. I'll move the xref. |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -14,0 +15 @@
+<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
@@ -16 +17 @@
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="1292260">催涙ガス・さいるいガス</xref>
@@ -21,6 +21,0 @@
-<sense>
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<xref type="see" seq="1292260">催涙ガス・さいるいガス</xref>
-<misc>&abbr;</misc>
-<gloss>tear gas</gloss>
-</sense> |
| 5. |
A* 2014-11-29 03:54:03 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
also since it's really only ever used as a prefix/adj, i suggest we gloss it as an adj. (also, all of my sources list it as a "こと" not a "もの"). in other words, just:
===
[1][adj-no,n]
lachrymatory;lacrimatory;tear-inducing |
| 4. |
A* 2014-11-28 07:12:13 Marcus Richert <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
"催涙スプレーかけられて" 24 uniques
"催涙かけられて" 2 hits (duplicate of the same sentence)
"催涙スプレーをかけられたら" 19 hits
"催涙をかけられたら" 0
I think we need more evidence before we include 催涙 as an
abbrev for tear gas |
| 3. |
A* 2014-11-20 22:04:02 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Refs: |
RNN News glossary: "tear gas spray 催涙スプレー" |
| |
Comments: |
In another fork Rene wrote: "we need a verifiable reference. standalone use of 催涙 for 'tear gas' is in none of mine"
We already have:
催涙スプレー （さいるいスプレー） (n) tear gas defense spray (e.g. mace, pepper)
催涙銃 （さいるいじゅう） (n) tear-gas gun
I agree it's a fine line. |
| 2. |
A* 2014-11-20 21:57:19 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Refs: |
Gg5, Igaku, Eijiro, etc. |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -17 +17,8 @@
-<gloss>lachrymal</gloss>
+<gloss>lacrimator</gloss>
+<gloss>dacryagogue</gloss>
+<gloss>tear-inducing agent</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="1292260">催涙ガス・さいるいガス</xref>
+<misc>&abbr;</misc> |
| 1. |
A* 2014-11-18 12:12:30 Jeff Gedert
|
| |
Comments: |
I've just encountered a case in an academic report where 催涙ガス was abbreviated to 催涙, but was still used to mean a type of gas. |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -17,0 +18 @@
+<gloss>tear gas</gloss> |