| 10. |
A 2022-09-24 14:59:28 Marcus Richert <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Refs: |
https://furigana.info/w/屁 |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -6 +6 @@
-<ke_pri>ichi1</ke_pri>
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf> |
| 9. |
A 2022-09-24 00:42:36 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Refs: |
おなら 277203
オナラ 127902 |
| |
Comments: |
OK, splitting. |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -13 +13,2 @@
-<reb>へ</reb>
+<reb>オナラ</reb>
+<re_nokanji/>
@@ -18 +18,0 @@
-<s_inf>usually 屁 is へ, and おなら is in kana</s_inf>
@@ -22,6 +21,0 @@
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<stagr>へ</stagr>
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<gloss>something worthless</gloss>
-<gloss>something not worth considering</gloss> |
| 8. |
A* 2022-09-22 17:57:27 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
This should be two entries. It doesn't make sense to tag this as "uk" when へ is almost always written with kanji. Also, with the exception of koj, my refs don't even have kanji for おなら. |
| 7. |
A 2012-05-05 03:45:35 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
|
| 6. |
A* 2012-05-04 23:22:36 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
One wit said that lexicographers are divided into "splitters and clumpers". I'm fairly much in the clumper camp, which is probably why JMdict is the way it is.
That said, I agree that へ/おなら is a real borderline case, and is a shining example of the messiness of Japanese orthography. If there was a clean usage split between へ and おなら, e.g. one was always polite/clinical and the other was always col/vulg, I'd put them in different senses with comments to indicate usage, but it seems both are used in both applications.
On balance I think they should stay in the one entry. |
|
(show/hide 5 older log entries)
|
| 5. |
A* 2012-04-30 09:22:08 Marcus
|
| |
Comments: |
OK, point taken on etymology, but I still think they should
be split. Although 屁 can be read as "onara" according to
one or two dictionaries, it isn't, really, ever read as おな
ら over へ. They are two different words, one more vulgar
than the other (へ could perhaps be tagged [col] or
[vulgar], おなら probably not), and they only share half of
the glosses. Usage is different too: you say へをこく but not
really おならをこく. Also おなら is [uk], while へ is't. |
| 4. |
A 2012-04-30 07:59:13 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Comments: |
no. why would we split if they have the same headword and meaning? etymology doesn't play into it |
| 3. |
A* 2012-04-30 07:49:18 Marcus
|
| |
Refs: |
jawiki also only lists へ as a reading of 屁
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/屁
difference in nuance too, 屁 is more vulgar (though maybe
not necessarily [vulg])
"「おなら」は「お鳴らし」が略されてできた女房言葉で、「屁」よりも上品（あるい
は婉曲）な言い方であるとされている。" (wiki)
"「屁」なんて言うと下品に下品がおんぶして、いても立ってもいられなかったはずだ"
http://gakuen.gifu-
net.ed.jp/~cont1/tyu_kokugo/tyukokugo/column/column_11/onara
.html |
| |
Comments: |
If おなら comes from お鳴らし, isn't that one more argument for
splitting? |
| 2. |
A 2012-04-30 06:58:33 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
|
| |
Refs: |
koj:
お‐なら【屁】
（「鳴らす」より）屁[へ]。 |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -27,0 +27,1 @@
+<gloss>something not worth considering</gloss> |
| 1. |
A* 2012-04-28 16:34:47 Marcus
|
| |
Refs: |
daijr list these separately and does not indicate that 屁 can
be read as おなら. daijr only lists "something worthless" as a
sense for へ. I suggest these are split |
| |
Diff: |
@@ -23,0 +23,5 @@
+<sense>
+<stagr>へ</stagr>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>something worthless</gloss>
+</sense> |