JMdictDB - Entries

jmdict 2621800 Active (id: 2088881)
胴丸；筒丸
【どうまる】

[n] [hist]
▶ light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat
▶ dō-maru

History:

27.	A 2020-11-27 23:56:58 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	I was satisfied with Marcus's version, so I'm putting it back. I've left the commentary here rather than reject the proposed edit (which would relegate it into a separate thread), but I may not do that with future edits. Re the "don't break up URLs into multiple lines", I'm afraid that's an artifact of browsers on some mobile devices, which insert line-break characters at the ends of text boxes.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>
26.	A* 2020-11-27 17:36:57 Alan
	Refs:	already cited refs. the previous comments.
	Comments:	>The back-and-forth here reminds me of the quote "perfection is the enemy of good". How so? All you've done, is to insist that the good is unacceptable, because you insist on the bad. For no discernable reason, and without particularly bothering to give any. Certainly not clarity or brevity, and absolutely not accuracy. If you wish to claim that I am letting the perfect, be the enemy of the good, you must first explain how/why what you propose is good, and not bad, and how/why what I propose is inferior. Explain not just how maybe an entry has to be less than perfect in one aspect, for the sake of some other aspect (for example: a bit less explanation, or maybe even accuracy, for the sake of brevity …though I should note that JMdict has a policy of brevity, beyond the level of most other dictionaries), but also how that is relevant to what I propose, in contrast to what you propose. I.e. Don't just make claims about my positions. That is no more than baseless nonsense. Make a case against them! And/or for your own position! "Put up, or shut up", as the saying goes. (this is a general problem, that you people have. You seem to like to just say "no you're wrong. X is how it should be", and insist that everyone just blindly obey. Finding actual discussion and argumentation, to be rude and impudent disruption, rather than the cornerstone of any/all collaboration/cooperation, and the foundation of how one can reach the truth or the best decisions/conclusions …as essentially all other dictionaries and all academic/scientific/scholarly endeavours do) As for the references you have chosen, this time… First of all, don't break up URLs into multiple lines. The first source, in showing a doumaru, shows a full suit of armour. The second source is a kokugo …and I have thoroughly explained why they are not only clearly inferior sources, but that they are also undeniably wrong and full of errors, in their entry on doumaru. Hence, citing them is utterly invalid. As for the third, I do not understand it's inclusion, as it is much briefer than any of the previously cited ones (aside from kokugos) and apparently just some random website mostly just concerned with costumes, and therefore not that bothered with armour. Looking at the comments, I am pleased to see you finally deciding to actually make some kind of argument, to back up your positions (though certainly not in regards to "perfection is the enemy of good"). The one on "infantry" is quite decent. I firmly disagree that it doesn't imply low-status footsoldiers, but then you did also, accurately, point out that it was mainly the low class footsoldiers who wore them initially, making that point rather moot. I still see no reason to insist on "infantry", over "combat on foot". The latter is not particularly longer, nor is it any less clear. That said, given your arguments, there is also not much reason to insist on "combat on foot", over "infantry", so… The second bit, however… >"but if the kokugos don't make a point of mentioning it, I believe it's not a very important point" How is that supposed to be an argument? First of all, that is essentially assuming that the kokugos are infallible, or must be very sensible, on the subject. This is disproven, not only in how they (as can be shown in all other dictionaries [but probably a lot more in Japanese dictionaries, than in English ones. Certainly a LOT more in jp-en/en-jp ones]) have many examples of errors and obvious examples of a lacking understanding of what they are describing, but also in that the _kokugos entries on doumaru, specifically,_ clearly contain obvious, and undeniable, errors. An argument that is clearly and obviously based on a foundation, that has already been thoroughly and undeniably shown to be invalid, cannot be regarded as a serious/honest attempt at an argument. Secondly, you are not making any kind of argument or explanation/clarification of why it wouldn't be an important point (or why it being an important or unimportant point, should matter in the least), but simply making an Argument from (flimsy) Authority, by saying that "they probably have a reason" without bothering to show, come up with, or even think about, the reason. You have four options, when it comes to the torso vs full suit issue: 1. Have the entry merely call it an "armour". (what I went with, and prefer, given how brief the entries are) 2. Have a sense with "torso armour", and a separate one with the no less (far more?) common "full suit" sense. 3. Actually bother to make a case, a serious and honest attempt (valid or not …though it must be a genuine attempt at validity) at a case, for why you can call it a torso armour, without the additional full suit sense. 4. Throw any sense of collaboration, logic, civility, or rational discussion out the window, and simply use your authority to ignore and dismiss all dissent (without listening to or addressing any arguments, however sound) and power through your position, without bothering with any kind of justification. I wouldn't recommend option #4 …though it does seem to be popular here and, by all accounts, quite accepted.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss> +<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>
25.	A 2020-11-27 00:35:36 Marcus Richert <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	https://www.hyogo-c.ed.jp/~rekihaku- bo/historystation/rekihaku-meet/seminar/bugu- kacchuu/kc_intro2.html ...中・下級の徒歩（かち）武者の甲冑として発達したものです。 there's also this: なお、今日胴丸と呼んでいる甲冑は、中世には腹巻と呼ばれており、逆に今日の腹巻を中世には胴丸と呼んでいました。(but let's just not get into it) (daijr: 中世以前はこの形式の鎧を腹巻と呼んでいた。) https://costume.iz2.or.jp/costume/535.html 胴丸は大鎧に次ぐ一般戦士の使用する軽快な武装であった。
	Comments:	The back-and-forth here reminds me of the quote "perfection is the enemy of good". "used" seems better than "made/designed". I'm not seeing how "combat on foot" is an improvement over Robin's "infantry combat" - neither implies low-status footsoldiers, but even if they did, those seem to have been the original wearers anyway (see sources, plus kokugos) so I'm not seeing the issue here. It might be the case that 胴丸 is used to refer to a full suit of armor including the sense 1 torso armor, but if the kokugos don't make a point of mentioning it, I believe it's not a very important point and that we don't have to either.
	Diff:	@@ -16,7 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for combat on foot</gloss> -<gloss>dō-maru</gloss> -</sense> -<sense> -<pos>&n;</pos> -<misc>&hist;</misc> -<gloss>suit of armour, using such a torso armour</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>
24.	A* 2020-11-20 09:38:25 Alan
	Comments:	"I don't think" isn't and argument or clarification. You say it isn't an improvement, but don't explain how or why it isn't. Also, "infantry" is pretty much the same as "foot soldier", including the same problems. As for "torso armour"… Yes, certainly, it is clearer, though I'd argue that if the term "armour" is used, without mention of what part your talking about, people will tend to assume that it is either torso armour, or a full suit of armour, which would be fine, here. But okay. "Torso armour" it is …but then it needs to explicitly state the second sense. (this makes this entry, inconsistent with the other armour entries, BTW)
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16,7 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally designed for infantry combat</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for combat on foot</gloss> +<gloss>dō-maru</gloss> +</sense> +<sense> +<pos>&n;</pos> +<misc>&hist;</misc> +<gloss>suit of armour, using such a torso armour</gloss>
23.	A 2020-11-20 02:24:01 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	I don't think those changes improve the gloss. I'm not yielding on the "torso" point. Dropping it makes the gloss less precise and harder to visualise.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally made for use on foot</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally designed for infantry combat</gloss>
(show/hide 22 older log entries)
22.	A* 2020-11-19 22:56:50 Alan
	Comments:	Changed "designed" to "made". Better to avoid giving people an idea that the design was changed, when later used on horseback, or that it has features of its design that are better for foot, specifically. It's lighter and more flexible/mobile. Those are benefits, regardless. The weight and inflexible nature of the ooyoroi was a (much) greater problem on foot, than on horseback, but that is a thing about the ooyoroi, not the doumaru. The doumaru works equally well, on horse and foot.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally designed for use on foot</gloss> +<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally made for use on foot</gloss>
21.	A* 2020-11-19 22:39:29 Alan
	Comments:	It is no less commonly used to refer to a full suit of armour. You cannot ignore that. To only state the "torso armour" sense, is to implicitly deny the existence of the "full suit" sense. That the kokugos fail to recognize this, is one of the ways in which their entry is clearly wrong. As I've noted, they also claim that it was only used on foot, which is clearly false. This is hardly the only example of kokugos getting things objectively and undeniably wrong. (just as there are some examples of clear and undeniable errors, in many a en-en dictionary, as well. Not to mention jp-en/en-jp dictionaries, which have a large, shocking, amount of errors that are beyond obvious and quite extremely wrong. My go-to example being that practically all en-jp dictionaries translate "hip" as "尻". IIRC there is one, just one, rather minor, en-jp dictionary that doesn't)
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally designed for foot soldiers</gloss> +<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally designed for use on foot</gloss>
20.	A 2020-11-19 17:56:36 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	The fact that 胴丸 came to be used by other types of soldiers does not change the fact that it was designed for footsoldiers. We can add "originally" to be more precise. "Torso armour" is a crucial detail. 胴 is in the name. I don't think it's necessary to mention that 胴丸 can also refer to the complete suit of armour. The kokugos don't either.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light armour opening at the right</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally designed for foot soldiers</gloss>
19.	A* 2020-11-19 08:05:36 Alan
	Comments:	I have extensively explained why having a single sense calling it a torso armour, is wrong …as well as why claiming that it is for footsoldiers, is wrong in multiple ways.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right (designed for foot soldiers)</gloss> +<gloss>light armour opening at the right</gloss>
18.	A 2020-11-19 05:29:11 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	I'll merge the competing versions and close it.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>armour that opens at the right</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right (designed for foot soldiers)</gloss>
17.	A* 2020-11-14 16:44:54 Alan
	Comments:	I.e. reverting to a version that gives a false definition. Okay, so it needs to be short… Seems my impression of how brief the definitions need to be, wasn't really all that off…
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour designed for foot soldiers</gloss> +<gloss>armour that opens at the right</gloss>
16.	A 2020-11-14 11:08:06 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	For a term like this a short explanation is best. People can go off to other sources if they want more. I'm reverting to Robin's previous version.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light armour initially used on foot, but later also from horseback. Opens on the right side</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour designed for foot soldiers</gloss>
15.	A* 2020-11-14 05:12:29 Alan
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light armour that opens on the right side. Initially used on foot, but later also from horseback</gloss> +<gloss>light armour initially used on foot, but later also from horseback. Opens on the right side</gloss>
14.	A* 2020-11-14 05:10:24 Alan
	Comments:	Nothing that contradicts the kokugos? How about: jwiki: "しかし、その後の戦法の変化に伴い、胴丸はしだいに騎乗の上級武士にも用いられるようになり、デザイン的にも上級武士に相応しい華美なものへと発展していく。南北朝時代頃からは、胴丸の武士も兜・大袖を着用することが一般的になった。" myarmoury: "During the Mongolian invasions (1274 and 1281) and especially in the next century, the role of the infantry on the battlefield increased dramatically. Many of the poorer and low-ranking samurai preferred to fight on foot. Although the heavy, box-like o-yoroi was modernized to some degree in the 13th century, it remained quite unsuitable for infantry combat. At the same time, the do-maru's comfort, ease in wear and use on the battlefield made it a favoured replacement for the o-yoroi and other types of armour in such combat." https://www.nihonto.com/a-brief-history-of-japanese-armor/ "The dômaru and haramaki were the first light body armor for infantry. During the Muromachi era, they came to be used with helmets and shoulder guards in the place of ô-yoroi by military commanders." I still question the notion of calling it light, but as some sources do refer to it as such, I'll let it slide. (BTW, anything said of the doumaru, is also true of the haramaki. The only difference being, that the doumaru opens at the right side, and the haramaki at the back. As the ooyoroi died out, it was not quite replaced by the doumaru, but rather by the doumaru and the haramaki) …and, again, suits of armour including a doumaru "cuirass", are also typically (always?) referred to as doumaru. Hence you cannot specify it as "chest armour", unless you also add an extra sense, of a suit of armour with such a chest armour.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour designed for foot soldiers</gloss> +<gloss>light armour that opens on the right side. Initially used on foot, but later also from horseback</gloss>
13.	A 2020-11-13 23:33:15 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	jwiki: "胴丸（どうまる）は、日本の鎧の形式の1つ。平安時代中期頃生じたもので、徒歩戦に適した鎧の形式である。 " http://myarmoury.com/feature_jpn_armour.html "At the beginning of this period retainers and servants usually wore simpler armour (do-maru) [...] The warriors who wore do-maru usually walked or ran near the horse of their lord."
	Comments:	That gloss is far too long. I'm not seeing anything in the sources provided that contradicts the kokugo definitions. I think we should drop the mention of samurai altogether to avoid confusion.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>torso armour that opens at the right side. Initially made for those on foot, but later came to (along with the haramaki) replace the heavier and less mobile ō-yoroi on horseback as well</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour designed for foot soldiers</gloss> @@ -18,5 +17,0 @@ -</sense> -<sense> -<pos>&n;</pos> -<misc>&hist;</misc> -<gloss>suit or armour, with such a torso armour</gloss>
12.	A* 2020-11-12 10:19:30 Alan
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>torso armour that opens at the right side. Initially made for those on foot, but later came to replace the heavier and less mobile ō-yoroi on horseback as well</gloss> +<gloss>torso armour that opens at the right side. Initially made for those on foot, but later came to (along with the haramaki) replace the heavier and less mobile ō-yoroi on horseback as well</gloss>
11.	A* 2020-11-12 09:58:10 Alan
	Comments:	Ah, so the policy is like that? That's more to my liking, actually. I made it so simple and brief, due to my (apparently a bit mistaken) impression of how JMdict is. Okay, a bit more explanatory, then. Not sure if it's best to says "torso armour", and then add a second sense, or if it's better to just say "armour", but… >All the kokugos describe it as light/comfortable/simple armour designed for foot soldiers. …and all the other sources I mention, make it clear that the kokugos are wrong. Certainly, this isn't an encyclopedia and it needs to be shorter. This does not excuse making it clearly wrong, however, nor does it mean that the kokugos are, or possibly could be, more reliable than the other sources I mentioned, in terms of what a doumaru is. BTW, I find it very weird, that English language sources like add a hyphen, in the name. (this is merely a comment on the practice)
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour designed for foot soldiers and later worn by samurai</gloss> +<gloss>torso armour that opens at the right side. Initially made for those on foot, but later came to replace the heavier and less mobile ō-yoroi on horseback as well</gloss> @@ -17,0 +18,5 @@ +</sense> +<sense> +<pos>&n;</pos> +<misc>&hist;</misc> +<gloss>suit or armour, with such a torso armour</gloss>
10.	A 2020-11-12 00:00:14 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	Editorial Policy extracts: (https://www.edrdg.org/wiki/index.php/Editorial_policy) - "provide useful explanations where appropriate. "type of card game" is not very useful - in such a case explain briefly what the card game entails",
9.	A* 2020-11-11 22:26:04 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	daijr/s, koj, nikk, shinmeikai
	Comments:	All the kokugos describe it as light/comfortable/simple armour designed for foot soldiers. This isn't an encyclopedia so we can't mention everything but we need to include the key details. "Dō-maru" is common in English-language sources so I've added it as a gloss. Please do not delete the exiting gloss unless you wish to improve upon it. "A type of armour" is not a helpful translation.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16,2 @@ -<gloss>type of armour</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour designed for foot soldiers and later worn by samurai</gloss> +<gloss>dō-maru</gloss>
8.	A* 2020-11-11 07:27:10 Alan
	Comments:	What's the basis for the description as "light"? It is lighter than the ooyoroi, certainly, but that says more about the ooyoroi. (which was, as I've explained, later replaced by the doumaru, with no one using the relatively heavy and inflexible oyoroi, anymore. Though, to be fair to the oyoroi, it was used for several centuries) As for "chest armour": As per the 丸, it wraps around the torso/胴 (with, as previously mentioned, an opening at the right side), thus covering the sides and back as well …and has bits that drape down all the way to the thighs. So it doesn't just cover the chest, but also the sides and back, as well as abdomen and upper thighs. The term "cuirass" does at least mean an armour that covers both the front and back of the chest-area (but not the things that drape down, to protect further down), and is hence decently okay as a description/translation, but "chest armour" is far too inaccurate and misleading. Also, "used primarily by foot soldiers and later by samurai" is quite wrong, on two counts. "primarily by" is wrong, unless ones adds a "at first" or "initially" before it …and, as I said, footsoldiers implies (outright means?) common soldiers, but some samurai also fought on foot. Though as the sentence later states "…and later by samurai", it's far more than an implication.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light chest armour used primarily by foot soldiers and later by samurai</gloss> +<gloss>type of armour</gloss>
7.	A 2020-11-10 23:01:47 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	Looks good to me.
6.	A* 2020-11-10 18:12:49 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	daijr
	Comments:	I'd go with this.
	Diff:	@@ -16,6 +16 @@ -<gloss>A type of Japanese cuirass.</gloss> -</sense> -<sense> -<pos>&n;</pos> -<misc>&hist;</misc> -<gloss>suit of armour, with such a cuirass</gloss> +<gloss>light chest armour used primarily by foot soldiers and later by samurai</gloss>
5.	A* 2020-11-10 13:59:21 Alan
	Refs:	http://myarmoury.com/feature_jpn_armour.html (though it doesn't explicitly state that it was used on horseback) https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/胴丸 https://www.nihonto.com/a-brief-history-of-japanese-armor/
	Comments:	Whilst doumaru were, initially, used by retainers/ashigaru, they were later used by samurai, as well. Initially poorer samurai and/or ones that fought on foot, but was later also used by rich and/or horse-riding samurai as well, replacing the ooyoroi (which they had used before) What is sometimes called a cuirass, does also include what one might call faulds, which drape down over the lower parts, all the way down to the thighs. Hence "cuirass" is not an entirely accurate description …but it's close enough, I suppose.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16,6 @@ -<gloss>simple cuirass worn by footsoldiers</gloss> +<gloss>A type of Japanese cuirass.</gloss> +</sense> +<sense> +<pos>&n;</pos> +<misc>&hist;</misc> +<gloss>suit of armour, with such a cuirass</gloss>
4.	A* 2020-11-10 11:54:17
	Refs:	Daijisen
	Diff:	@@ -15 +15,2 @@ -<gloss>A type of Japanese armour.</gloss> +<misc>&hist;</misc> +<gloss>simple cuirass worn by footsoldiers</gloss>
3.	A* 2020-11-10 10:14:45 Alan
	Comments:	"Medieval" refers to a European time period. It is sometimes used for a somewhat analogous period in Japanese history, but… such use either needs clarification, or clear context. (one might argue that the latter is true, here, but… I wouldn't fully agree) Also, "lacking a solid breastplate and sleeves" is not a distinguishing feature of the doumaru, as that is true of almost all Japanese armours. Either this needs a far more thorough description, that refers to it's actual distinguishing features (that it wraps around the person, with an opening at the right side, being the most notable) …or just note that it's a Japanese armour, and let people look it up in an encyclopedia and/or a more armour/militaria dedicated resource.
	Diff:	@@ -15 +15 @@ -<gloss>medieval armour lacking a solid breastplate and sleeves</gloss> +<gloss>A type of Japanese armour.</gloss>
2.	A 2011-03-31 07:15:35 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	wiki
	Diff:	@@ -15,1 +15,1 @@ -<gloss>medieval armor</gloss> +<gloss>medieval armour lacking a solid breastplate and sleeves</gloss>
1.	A* 2011-03-31 06:20:32 Scott
	Refs:	koj

View entry in alternate formats: jel | edict | jmdict xml | jmnedict xml | jmdictdb xml

jmdict 2621800 Rejected (id: 2088968)
胴丸；筒丸
【どうまる】

[n] [hist]
▶ light armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat
▶ dō-maru

History:

29.	R 2020-11-30 00:54:01 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	I was quite satisfied with the position stated by Robin and Marcus. Please don't keep submitting this edit.
28.	A* 2020-11-28 21:34:10 Alan
	Comments:	>I was satisfied with Marcus's version …despite the arguments and evidence against it, and the utter lack of arguments or evidence for it. What is the basis, for favouring his version? Neither you, nor Marcus, have presented any. As such, there is no basis for going with it …or are you saying that you are choosing to go with alternative 4, in the list of options I listed?
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss> +<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>
27.	A 2020-11-27 23:56:58 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	I was satisfied with Marcus's version, so I'm putting it back. I've left the commentary here rather than reject the proposed edit (which would relegate it into a separate thread), but I may not do that with future edits. Re the "don't break up URLs into multiple lines", I'm afraid that's an artifact of browsers on some mobile devices, which insert line-break characters at the ends of text boxes.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>
26.	A* 2020-11-27 17:36:57 Alan
	Refs:	already cited refs. the previous comments.
	Comments:	>The back-and-forth here reminds me of the quote "perfection is the enemy of good". How so? All you've done, is to insist that the good is unacceptable, because you insist on the bad. For no discernable reason, and without particularly bothering to give any. Certainly not clarity or brevity, and absolutely not accuracy. If you wish to claim that I am letting the perfect, be the enemy of the good, you must first explain how/why what you propose is good, and not bad, and how/why what I propose is inferior. Explain not just how maybe an entry has to be less than perfect in one aspect, for the sake of some other aspect (for example: a bit less explanation, or maybe even accuracy, for the sake of brevity …though I should note that JMdict has a policy of brevity, beyond the level of most other dictionaries), but also how that is relevant to what I propose, in contrast to what you propose. I.e. Don't just make claims about my positions. That is no more than baseless nonsense. Make a case against them! And/or for your own position! "Put up, or shut up", as the saying goes. (this is a general problem, that you people have. You seem to like to just say "no you're wrong. X is how it should be", and insist that everyone just blindly obey. Finding actual discussion and argumentation, to be rude and impudent disruption, rather than the cornerstone of any/all collaboration/cooperation, and the foundation of how one can reach the truth or the best decisions/conclusions …as essentially all other dictionaries and all academic/scientific/scholarly endeavours do) As for the references you have chosen, this time… First of all, don't break up URLs into multiple lines. The first source, in showing a doumaru, shows a full suit of armour. The second source is a kokugo …and I have thoroughly explained why they are not only clearly inferior sources, but that they are also undeniably wrong and full of errors, in their entry on doumaru. Hence, citing them is utterly invalid. As for the third, I do not understand it's inclusion, as it is much briefer than any of the previously cited ones (aside from kokugos) and apparently just some random website mostly just concerned with costumes, and therefore not that bothered with armour. Looking at the comments, I am pleased to see you finally deciding to actually make some kind of argument, to back up your positions (though certainly not in regards to "perfection is the enemy of good"). The one on "infantry" is quite decent. I firmly disagree that it doesn't imply low-status footsoldiers, but then you did also, accurately, point out that it was mainly the low class footsoldiers who wore them initially, making that point rather moot. I still see no reason to insist on "infantry", over "combat on foot". The latter is not particularly longer, nor is it any less clear. That said, given your arguments, there is also not much reason to insist on "combat on foot", over "infantry", so… The second bit, however… >"but if the kokugos don't make a point of mentioning it, I believe it's not a very important point" How is that supposed to be an argument? First of all, that is essentially assuming that the kokugos are infallible, or must be very sensible, on the subject. This is disproven, not only in how they (as can be shown in all other dictionaries [but probably a lot more in Japanese dictionaries, than in English ones. Certainly a LOT more in jp-en/en-jp ones]) have many examples of errors and obvious examples of a lacking understanding of what they are describing, but also in that the _kokugos entries on doumaru, specifically,_ clearly contain obvious, and undeniable, errors. An argument that is clearly and obviously based on a foundation, that has already been thoroughly and undeniably shown to be invalid, cannot be regarded as a serious/honest attempt at an argument. Secondly, you are not making any kind of argument or explanation/clarification of why it wouldn't be an important point (or why it being an important or unimportant point, should matter in the least), but simply making an Argument from (flimsy) Authority, by saying that "they probably have a reason" without bothering to show, come up with, or even think about, the reason. You have four options, when it comes to the torso vs full suit issue: 1. Have the entry merely call it an "armour". (what I went with, and prefer, given how brief the entries are) 2. Have a sense with "torso armour", and a separate one with the no less (far more?) common "full suit" sense. 3. Actually bother to make a case, a serious and honest attempt (valid or not …though it must be a genuine attempt at validity) at a case, for why you can call it a torso armour, without the additional full suit sense. 4. Throw any sense of collaboration, logic, civility, or rational discussion out the window, and simply use your authority to ignore and dismiss all dissent (without listening to or addressing any arguments, however sound) and power through your position, without bothering with any kind of justification. I wouldn't recommend option #4 …though it does seem to be popular here and, by all accounts, quite accepted.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss> +<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>
25.	A 2020-11-27 00:35:36 Marcus Richert <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	https://www.hyogo-c.ed.jp/~rekihaku- bo/historystation/rekihaku-meet/seminar/bugu- kacchuu/kc_intro2.html ...中・下級の徒歩（かち）武者の甲冑として発達したものです。 there's also this: なお、今日胴丸と呼んでいる甲冑は、中世には腹巻と呼ばれており、逆に今日の腹巻を中世には胴丸と呼んでいました。(but let's just not get into it) (daijr: 中世以前はこの形式の鎧を腹巻と呼んでいた。) https://costume.iz2.or.jp/costume/535.html 胴丸は大鎧に次ぐ一般戦士の使用する軽快な武装であった。
	Comments:	The back-and-forth here reminds me of the quote "perfection is the enemy of good". "used" seems better than "made/designed". I'm not seeing how "combat on foot" is an improvement over Robin's "infantry combat" - neither implies low-status footsoldiers, but even if they did, those seem to have been the original wearers anyway (see sources, plus kokugos) so I'm not seeing the issue here. It might be the case that 胴丸 is used to refer to a full suit of armor including the sense 1 torso armor, but if the kokugos don't make a point of mentioning it, I believe it's not a very important point and that we don't have to either.
	Diff:	@@ -16,7 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for combat on foot</gloss> -<gloss>dō-maru</gloss> -</sense> -<sense> -<pos>&n;</pos> -<misc>&hist;</misc> -<gloss>suit of armour, using such a torso armour</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>
(show/hide 24 older log entries)
24.	A* 2020-11-20 09:38:25 Alan
	Comments:	"I don't think" isn't and argument or clarification. You say it isn't an improvement, but don't explain how or why it isn't. Also, "infantry" is pretty much the same as "foot soldier", including the same problems. As for "torso armour"… Yes, certainly, it is clearer, though I'd argue that if the term "armour" is used, without mention of what part your talking about, people will tend to assume that it is either torso armour, or a full suit of armour, which would be fine, here. But okay. "Torso armour" it is …but then it needs to explicitly state the second sense. (this makes this entry, inconsistent with the other armour entries, BTW)
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16,7 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally designed for infantry combat</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for combat on foot</gloss> +<gloss>dō-maru</gloss> +</sense> +<sense> +<pos>&n;</pos> +<misc>&hist;</misc> +<gloss>suit of armour, using such a torso armour</gloss>
23.	A 2020-11-20 02:24:01 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	I don't think those changes improve the gloss. I'm not yielding on the "torso" point. Dropping it makes the gloss less precise and harder to visualise.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally made for use on foot</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally designed for infantry combat</gloss>
22.	A* 2020-11-19 22:56:50 Alan
	Comments:	Changed "designed" to "made". Better to avoid giving people an idea that the design was changed, when later used on horseback, or that it has features of its design that are better for foot, specifically. It's lighter and more flexible/mobile. Those are benefits, regardless. The weight and inflexible nature of the ooyoroi was a (much) greater problem on foot, than on horseback, but that is a thing about the ooyoroi, not the doumaru. The doumaru works equally well, on horse and foot.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally designed for use on foot</gloss> +<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally made for use on foot</gloss>
21.	A* 2020-11-19 22:39:29 Alan
	Comments:	It is no less commonly used to refer to a full suit of armour. You cannot ignore that. To only state the "torso armour" sense, is to implicitly deny the existence of the "full suit" sense. That the kokugos fail to recognize this, is one of the ways in which their entry is clearly wrong. As I've noted, they also claim that it was only used on foot, which is clearly false. This is hardly the only example of kokugos getting things objectively and undeniably wrong. (just as there are some examples of clear and undeniable errors, in many a en-en dictionary, as well. Not to mention jp-en/en-jp dictionaries, which have a large, shocking, amount of errors that are beyond obvious and quite extremely wrong. My go-to example being that practically all en-jp dictionaries translate "hip" as "尻". IIRC there is one, just one, rather minor, en-jp dictionary that doesn't)
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally designed for foot soldiers</gloss> +<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally designed for use on foot</gloss>
20.	A 2020-11-19 17:56:36 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	The fact that 胴丸 came to be used by other types of soldiers does not change the fact that it was designed for footsoldiers. We can add "originally" to be more precise. "Torso armour" is a crucial detail. 胴 is in the name. I don't think it's necessary to mention that 胴丸 can also refer to the complete suit of armour. The kokugos don't either.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light armour opening at the right</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally designed for foot soldiers</gloss>
19.	A* 2020-11-19 08:05:36 Alan
	Comments:	I have extensively explained why having a single sense calling it a torso armour, is wrong …as well as why claiming that it is for footsoldiers, is wrong in multiple ways.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right (designed for foot soldiers)</gloss> +<gloss>light armour opening at the right</gloss>
18.	A 2020-11-19 05:29:11 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	I'll merge the competing versions and close it.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>armour that opens at the right</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right (designed for foot soldiers)</gloss>
17.	A* 2020-11-14 16:44:54 Alan
	Comments:	I.e. reverting to a version that gives a false definition. Okay, so it needs to be short… Seems my impression of how brief the definitions need to be, wasn't really all that off…
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour designed for foot soldiers</gloss> +<gloss>armour that opens at the right</gloss>
16.	A 2020-11-14 11:08:06 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	For a term like this a short explanation is best. People can go off to other sources if they want more. I'm reverting to Robin's previous version.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light armour initially used on foot, but later also from horseback. Opens on the right side</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour designed for foot soldiers</gloss>
15.	A* 2020-11-14 05:12:29 Alan
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light armour that opens on the right side. Initially used on foot, but later also from horseback</gloss> +<gloss>light armour initially used on foot, but later also from horseback. Opens on the right side</gloss>
14.	A* 2020-11-14 05:10:24 Alan
	Comments:	Nothing that contradicts the kokugos? How about: jwiki: "しかし、その後の戦法の変化に伴い、胴丸はしだいに騎乗の上級武士にも用いられるようになり、デザイン的にも上級武士に相応しい華美なものへと発展していく。南北朝時代頃からは、胴丸の武士も兜・大袖を着用することが一般的になった。" myarmoury: "During the Mongolian invasions (1274 and 1281) and especially in the next century, the role of the infantry on the battlefield increased dramatically. Many of the poorer and low-ranking samurai preferred to fight on foot. Although the heavy, box-like o-yoroi was modernized to some degree in the 13th century, it remained quite unsuitable for infantry combat. At the same time, the do-maru's comfort, ease in wear and use on the battlefield made it a favoured replacement for the o-yoroi and other types of armour in such combat." https://www.nihonto.com/a-brief-history-of-japanese-armor/ "The dômaru and haramaki were the first light body armor for infantry. During the Muromachi era, they came to be used with helmets and shoulder guards in the place of ô-yoroi by military commanders." I still question the notion of calling it light, but as some sources do refer to it as such, I'll let it slide. (BTW, anything said of the doumaru, is also true of the haramaki. The only difference being, that the doumaru opens at the right side, and the haramaki at the back. As the ooyoroi died out, it was not quite replaced by the doumaru, but rather by the doumaru and the haramaki) …and, again, suits of armour including a doumaru "cuirass", are also typically (always?) referred to as doumaru. Hence you cannot specify it as "chest armour", unless you also add an extra sense, of a suit of armour with such a chest armour.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour designed for foot soldiers</gloss> +<gloss>light armour that opens on the right side. Initially used on foot, but later also from horseback</gloss>
13.	A 2020-11-13 23:33:15 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	jwiki: "胴丸（どうまる）は、日本の鎧の形式の1つ。平安時代中期頃生じたもので、徒歩戦に適した鎧の形式である。 " http://myarmoury.com/feature_jpn_armour.html "At the beginning of this period retainers and servants usually wore simpler armour (do-maru) [...] The warriors who wore do-maru usually walked or ran near the horse of their lord."
	Comments:	That gloss is far too long. I'm not seeing anything in the sources provided that contradicts the kokugo definitions. I think we should drop the mention of samurai altogether to avoid confusion.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>torso armour that opens at the right side. Initially made for those on foot, but later came to (along with the haramaki) replace the heavier and less mobile ō-yoroi on horseback as well</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour designed for foot soldiers</gloss> @@ -18,5 +17,0 @@ -</sense> -<sense> -<pos>&n;</pos> -<misc>&hist;</misc> -<gloss>suit or armour, with such a torso armour</gloss>
12.	A* 2020-11-12 10:19:30 Alan
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>torso armour that opens at the right side. Initially made for those on foot, but later came to replace the heavier and less mobile ō-yoroi on horseback as well</gloss> +<gloss>torso armour that opens at the right side. Initially made for those on foot, but later came to (along with the haramaki) replace the heavier and less mobile ō-yoroi on horseback as well</gloss>
11.	A* 2020-11-12 09:58:10 Alan
	Comments:	Ah, so the policy is like that? That's more to my liking, actually. I made it so simple and brief, due to my (apparently a bit mistaken) impression of how JMdict is. Okay, a bit more explanatory, then. Not sure if it's best to says "torso armour", and then add a second sense, or if it's better to just say "armour", but… >All the kokugos describe it as light/comfortable/simple armour designed for foot soldiers. …and all the other sources I mention, make it clear that the kokugos are wrong. Certainly, this isn't an encyclopedia and it needs to be shorter. This does not excuse making it clearly wrong, however, nor does it mean that the kokugos are, or possibly could be, more reliable than the other sources I mentioned, in terms of what a doumaru is. BTW, I find it very weird, that English language sources like add a hyphen, in the name. (this is merely a comment on the practice)
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light torso armour designed for foot soldiers and later worn by samurai</gloss> +<gloss>torso armour that opens at the right side. Initially made for those on foot, but later came to replace the heavier and less mobile ō-yoroi on horseback as well</gloss> @@ -17,0 +18,5 @@ +</sense> +<sense> +<pos>&n;</pos> +<misc>&hist;</misc> +<gloss>suit or armour, with such a torso armour</gloss>
10.	A 2020-11-12 00:00:14 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	Editorial Policy extracts: (https://www.edrdg.org/wiki/index.php/Editorial_policy) - "provide useful explanations where appropriate. "type of card game" is not very useful - in such a case explain briefly what the card game entails",
9.	A* 2020-11-11 22:26:04 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	daijr/s, koj, nikk, shinmeikai
	Comments:	All the kokugos describe it as light/comfortable/simple armour designed for foot soldiers. This isn't an encyclopedia so we can't mention everything but we need to include the key details. "Dō-maru" is common in English-language sources so I've added it as a gloss. Please do not delete the exiting gloss unless you wish to improve upon it. "A type of armour" is not a helpful translation.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16,2 @@ -<gloss>type of armour</gloss> +<gloss>light torso armour designed for foot soldiers and later worn by samurai</gloss> +<gloss>dō-maru</gloss>
8.	A* 2020-11-11 07:27:10 Alan
	Comments:	What's the basis for the description as "light"? It is lighter than the ooyoroi, certainly, but that says more about the ooyoroi. (which was, as I've explained, later replaced by the doumaru, with no one using the relatively heavy and inflexible oyoroi, anymore. Though, to be fair to the oyoroi, it was used for several centuries) As for "chest armour": As per the 丸, it wraps around the torso/胴 (with, as previously mentioned, an opening at the right side), thus covering the sides and back as well …and has bits that drape down all the way to the thighs. So it doesn't just cover the chest, but also the sides and back, as well as abdomen and upper thighs. The term "cuirass" does at least mean an armour that covers both the front and back of the chest-area (but not the things that drape down, to protect further down), and is hence decently okay as a description/translation, but "chest armour" is far too inaccurate and misleading. Also, "used primarily by foot soldiers and later by samurai" is quite wrong, on two counts. "primarily by" is wrong, unless ones adds a "at first" or "initially" before it …and, as I said, footsoldiers implies (outright means?) common soldiers, but some samurai also fought on foot. Though as the sentence later states "…and later by samurai", it's far more than an implication.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16 @@ -<gloss>light chest armour used primarily by foot soldiers and later by samurai</gloss> +<gloss>type of armour</gloss>
7.	A 2020-11-10 23:01:47 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	Looks good to me.
6.	A* 2020-11-10 18:12:49 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	daijr
	Comments:	I'd go with this.
	Diff:	@@ -16,6 +16 @@ -<gloss>A type of Japanese cuirass.</gloss> -</sense> -<sense> -<pos>&n;</pos> -<misc>&hist;</misc> -<gloss>suit of armour, with such a cuirass</gloss> +<gloss>light chest armour used primarily by foot soldiers and later by samurai</gloss>
5.	A* 2020-11-10 13:59:21 Alan
	Refs:	http://myarmoury.com/feature_jpn_armour.html (though it doesn't explicitly state that it was used on horseback) https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/胴丸 https://www.nihonto.com/a-brief-history-of-japanese-armor/
	Comments:	Whilst doumaru were, initially, used by retainers/ashigaru, they were later used by samurai, as well. Initially poorer samurai and/or ones that fought on foot, but was later also used by rich and/or horse-riding samurai as well, replacing the ooyoroi (which they had used before) What is sometimes called a cuirass, does also include what one might call faulds, which drape down over the lower parts, all the way down to the thighs. Hence "cuirass" is not an entirely accurate description …but it's close enough, I suppose.
	Diff:	@@ -16 +16,6 @@ -<gloss>simple cuirass worn by footsoldiers</gloss> +<gloss>A type of Japanese cuirass.</gloss> +</sense> +<sense> +<pos>&n;</pos> +<misc>&hist;</misc> +<gloss>suit of armour, with such a cuirass</gloss>
4.	A* 2020-11-10 11:54:17
	Refs:	Daijisen
	Diff:	@@ -15 +15,2 @@ -<gloss>A type of Japanese armour.</gloss> +<misc>&hist;</misc> +<gloss>simple cuirass worn by footsoldiers</gloss>
3.	A* 2020-11-10 10:14:45 Alan
	Comments:	"Medieval" refers to a European time period. It is sometimes used for a somewhat analogous period in Japanese history, but… such use either needs clarification, or clear context. (one might argue that the latter is true, here, but… I wouldn't fully agree) Also, "lacking a solid breastplate and sleeves" is not a distinguishing feature of the doumaru, as that is true of almost all Japanese armours. Either this needs a far more thorough description, that refers to it's actual distinguishing features (that it wraps around the person, with an opening at the right side, being the most notable) …or just note that it's a Japanese armour, and let people look it up in an encyclopedia and/or a more armour/militaria dedicated resource.
	Diff:	@@ -15 +15 @@ -<gloss>medieval armour lacking a solid breastplate and sleeves</gloss> +<gloss>A type of Japanese armour.</gloss>
2.	A 2011-03-31 07:15:35 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	wiki
	Diff:	@@ -15,1 +15,1 @@ -<gloss>medieval armor</gloss> +<gloss>medieval armour lacking a solid breastplate and sleeves</gloss>
1.	A* 2011-03-31 06:20:32 Scott
	Refs:	koj

View entry in alternate formats: jel | edict | jmdict xml | jmnedict xml | jmdictdb xml

13.	A 2021-01-03 20:41:10 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Diff:	@@ -17 +17 @@ -<xref type="see" seq="2595270">逆さ海月・さかさくらげ・1</xref> +<xref type="see" seq="2595270">逆さ海月・さかさくらげ・2</xref>
12.	A 2018-12-05 23:32:51 Marcus Richert <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	I'll self-approve just in case the ♨ would break the dictionary file about to be generated in half an hourb
11.	A* 2018-12-05 23:31:22 Marcus Richert <...address hidden...>
	Diff:	@@ -12 +12 @@ -<gloss>sign used to designate a hot springs (e.g. on a map)</gloss> +<gloss>sign used to designate a hot spring (e.g. on a map)</gloss>
10.	A* 2018-12-05 23:26:30 Marcus Richert <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	You probably meant to reject it?
	Diff:	@@ -12 +11,0 @@ -<s_inf>♨</s_inf>
9.	A 2018-12-05 17:06:42 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	Sadly no.
(show/hide 8 older log entries)
8.	A* 2018-12-05 14:30:19 Marcus Richert <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	Does this work?
	Diff:	@@ -11,0 +12 @@ +<s_inf>♨</s_inf>
7.	A 2011-04-01 04:20:17 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
6.	A* 2011-04-01 00:56:25 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
5.	A 2011-04-01 00:56:09 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	Scott added ♨ to the kanji part. It's causing problems down the line as I need things in the keb/reb to convert to JIS codes, and this one doesn't. I'm deleting it, then reopening for comment/information.
	Diff:	@@ -6,3 +6,0 @@ -</k_ele> -<k_ele> -<keb>♨</keb>
4.	A 2011-03-31 22:09:40 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	It won't get into WWWJDIC (not JIS212).
3.	A* 2011-03-31 15:57:55 Scott
	Diff:	@@ -6,0 +6,3 @@ +</k_ele> +<k_ele> +<keb>♨</keb>
2.	A 2010-11-19 08:14:38 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Diff:	@@ -17,1 +17,1 @@ -<xref type="see">逆さ海月</xref> +<xref type="see" seq="2595270">逆さ海月・さかさくらげ</xref>
1.	A* 2010-11-18 20:19:33 Scott
	Refs:	gg5 koj daij

9.	A 2021-01-03 20:40:24 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	WWW hits are mostly for the jellyfish.
	Diff:	@@ -14,4 +13,0 @@ -<reb>サカサクラゲ</reb> -<re_nokanji/> -</r_ele> -<r_ele> @@ -25,0 +22,10 @@ +<r_ele> +<reb>サカサクラゲ</reb> +<re_nokanji/> +</r_ele> +<sense> +<pos>&n;</pos> +<misc>&uk;</misc> +<gloss>upside-down jellyfish (Cassiopea ornata)</gloss> +<gloss>jellyfish of the genus Cassiopea</gloss> +</sense> @@ -34,5 +39,0 @@ -</sense> -<sense> -<pos>&n;</pos> -<gloss>upside-down jellyfish (Cassiopea ornata)</gloss> -<gloss>jellyfish of the genus Cassiopea</gloss>
8.	A* 2021-01-03 07:20:09 Alan Cheng <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	daijs, zokugo https://www.godac.jamstec.go.jp/bismal/j/view/9017139 https://onsenbasic.blog.fc2.com/blog-entry-32.html 逆さ海月 191 逆さくらげ 83 逆さクラゲ 455 サカサクラゲ 1598
	Diff:	@@ -3,0 +4,3 @@ +<k_ele> +<keb>逆さクラゲ</keb> +</k_ele> @@ -10,0 +14,8 @@ +<reb>サカサクラゲ</reb> +<re_nokanji/> +</r_ele> +<r_ele> +<reb>さかさクラゲ</reb> +<re_restr>逆さクラゲ</re_restr> +</r_ele> +<r_ele> @@ -11,0 +23,2 @@ +<re_restr>逆さ海月</re_restr> +<re_restr>逆さくらげ</re_restr> @@ -20,0 +34,5 @@ +</sense> +<sense> +<pos>&n;</pos> +<gloss>upside-down jellyfish (Cassiopea ornata)</gloss> +<gloss>jellyfish of the genus Cassiopea</gloss>
7.	A 2021-01-03 01:13:23 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
6.	A* 2021-01-03 00:35:05 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	gg5: 連れ込み旅館の俗称 daijs: 昭和二〇年代の流行語。逆さ海月 191 逆さくらげ 83
	Comments:	A colloquial term but not a contemporary one.
	Diff:	@@ -16,2 +16,3 @@ -<xref type="see" seq="2595260">温泉マーク・2</xref> -<s_inf>because the Japanese hot spring symbol looks like an upside-down jellyfish</s_inf> +<misc>&col;</misc> +<misc>&dated;</misc> +<s_inf>due to the resemblance between the hot spring symbol and an upside-down jellyfish</s_inf>
5.	A 2011-03-31 22:07:57 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
(show/hide 4 older log entries)
4.	A* 2011-03-31 17:07:30 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	that's not how an expl gloss should be used. it's not a translation
	Diff:	@@ -18,0 +18,1 @@ +<s_inf>because the Japanese hot spring symbol looks like an upside-down jellyfish</s_inf> @@ -20,1 +21,0 @@ -<gloss g_type="expl">the name comes from the fact that the onsen sign looks like a jellyfish viewed upside down</gloss>
3.	A 2011-03-31 17:05:23 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
	Diff:	@@ -16,2 +16,2 @@ -<xref type="see" seq="2595260">温泉マーク</xref> -<xref type="see" seq="2595260">温泉マーク</xref> +<xref type="see" seq="2595260">温泉マーク・2</xref> +<xref type="see" seq="2595260">温泉マーク・2</xref>
2.	A 2010-11-19 08:13:38 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
1.	A* 2010-11-18 20:20:16 Scott
	Refs:	daij nikk

Search \| Advanced Search \| New Entry \| Submissions \| Help	wsgi/DB=jmdict

If you have questions about, problems using, or suggestions for improving this page, please send email to jimbreen@gmail.com.
JMdictDB is an open-source Postgresql database and Python API for managing Japanese dictionary data developed by Stuart McGraw. More information at http://edrdg.org/~smg/. Please report software problems at https://gitlab.com/yamagoya/jmdictdb/issues or email to jmdictdb@mtneva.com.

2.	A 2011-03-31 14:58:10 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
1.	A* 2011-03-31 11:51:56 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	Daijirin
	Diff:	@@ -6,0 +6,3 @@ +</k_ele> +<k_ele> +<keb>金盃</keb> @@ -12,1 +15,3 @@ -<gloss>gold cup (goblet)</gloss> +<gloss>gold cup</gloss> +<gloss>gilded cup</gloss> +<gloss>goblet</gloss>

2.	A 2011-03-31 22:06:07 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
1.	A* 2011-03-31 21:02:13
	Diff:	@@ -14,0 +14,5 @@ +<gloss>follower</gloss> +<gloss>adherent</gloss> +<gloss>convert</gloss> +<gloss>disciple</gloss> +<gloss>admirer</gloss>

4.	A 2019-03-27 23:32:57 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
3.	A* 2019-03-27 18:27:43 Robin Scott <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	daijs, koj
	Comments:	Despite what GG5 says, I don't think this can be translated as "true character". The second sense in daijs and koj is "芝居で、馬のあしを演じる役者". This is the origin of the expression "馬脚を露わす".
	Diff:	@@ -18 +18 @@ -<gloss>one's true character</gloss> +<gloss>stage actor who plays the role of a horse's legs</gloss>
2.	A 2011-03-31 01:12:17 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
1.	A* 2011-03-31 01:05:51 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	daij, gg5, etc.
	Diff:	@@ -11,1 +11,0 @@ -<pos>&exp;</pos> @@ -13,3 +12,6 @@ -<gloss>give oneself away</gloss> -<gloss>reveal one's true colors</gloss> -<gloss>reveal one's true colours</gloss> +<gloss>horse's legs</gloss> +</sense> +<sense> +<pos>&n;</pos> +<xref type="see" seq="1928870">馬脚を露わす</xref> +<gloss>one's true character</gloss>

3.	A 2011-03-31 14:59:03 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
	Diff:	@@ -11,0 +11,1 @@ +<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
2.	A* 2011-03-31 10:56:51 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	Honyaku discussion (tsunami-related).
	Diff:	@@ -14,0 +14,2 @@ +<gloss>not foreseen</gloss> +<gloss>exceeding assumptions</gloss>
1.	A 2008-09-23 00:00:00
	Comments:	Entry created

3.	A 2011-03-31 08:22:36 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
2.	A* 2011-03-31 07:07:07 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	yahoo enc, and eij has 海運貨物取扱業者
	Diff:	@@ -12,2 +12,4 @@ -<gloss>A service agency that is responsible for arranging customs clearance as well as shipping arrangements for trade goods</gloss> -<gloss>a (freight) forwarding agent</gloss> +<misc>&abbr;</misc> +<s_inf>abbr. of 乙種海運仲立業</s_inf> +<gloss>chartering broker (arranges customs clearance and shipping details for trade goods)</gloss> +<gloss>freight forwarding agent</gloss>
1.	A* 2011-03-31 06:43:38 Alan Costa <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	http://www.buturyu.net/a/otunaka.html http://www.weblio.jp/content/乙仲
	Comments:	I use this word at work every day. I work for a company that imports and exports seafood products. I hope the links are acceptable.

2.	A 2011-03-31 08:22:52 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
1.	A* 2011-03-31 07:00:51 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	koj, daij, gg5

2.	A 2011-03-31 08:23:10 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
1.	A* 2011-03-31 07:01:54 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	nikk

2.	A 2011-04-01 03:39:32 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Comments:	Thanks for the quote, as it looked a bit 直訳.
1.	A* 2011-03-31 18:25:31 Scott
	Refs:	nikk shinmeikai (罪のみなもと｡｢キリスト教の七つの―｣)

4.	A 2012-11-16 03:06:26 Rene Malenfant <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	gg5 has in its entry for だいざい
	Comments:	i'm sure both are fine
	Diff:	@@ -10,0 +10,3 @@ +<r_ele> +<reb>ななつのだいざい</reb> +</r_ele> @@ -12,0 +15,1 @@ +<pos>&n;</pos>
3.	A* 2012-11-14 11:02:34 huixing
	Refs:	http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/七つの大罪
	Comments:	correct pronunciation
	Diff:	@@ -8,1 +8,1 @@ -<reb>ななつのだいざい</reb> +<reb>ななつのたいざい</reb>
2.	A 2011-03-31 22:11:20 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
	Refs:	Eijiro too.
1.	A* 2011-03-31 18:26:33 Scott
	Refs:	wiki

2.	A 2011-03-31 22:10:43 Jim Breen <...address hidden...>
1.	A* 2011-03-31 19:38:26 Scott
	Refs:	gg5

JMdictDB - Japanese Dictionary Database

Entries