We've used sK in this way on a handful of entries. I'm OK with it because the form is still visible, albeit in a note instead of the kanji field. It's a way of avoiding restr tags. It's also more in line with how a kokugo dictionary would present the information.
But I hadn't noticed that the 縦目 entry only had one sense. We could move タテ目 to a note as well but that wouldn't be our usual style for single-sense entries. I'm not sure what the best approach is. I wouldn't actually mind leaving 縦目/タテ目 as it is while having ヨコ目 in a note on this entry. I prefer how it looks (despite the inconsistent style). I don't think we need to give ヨコ目 the same prominence as 横目 given how rare it is outside of paper contexts.
I think "oft. written as" is better than "freq. shortened to" for the note.
According to the n-grams, 縦目 is more common than タテ目.

@@ -28 +28 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2845476">タテ目</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2845476">縦目</xref>

But now the format/note is different from the related タテ目 entry, which is a little unfortunate. We've not tagged kanji as [rK] even when its use is very rare if it there's any sense for which it's less uncommon, I think the same kind of logic applied here would mean that ヨコ目 stays visible?

I think this is better.

@@ -10,0 +11 @@
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
@@ -22 +22,0 @@
-<stagk>横目</stagk>
@@ -29 +29 @@
-<s_inf>freq. shortened to Ｙ目</s_inf>
+<s_inf>oft. written as ヨコ目 or Ｙ目</s_inf>

Not vs.

横目	543864	99.7%
ヨコ目	1623	0.3%

sense 1 is not vs in kokugos.
ヨコ目 is not uncommon for sense 2 so should probably be visible? (see the タテ目 entry)

@@ -7,0 +8,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>ヨコ目</keb>
@@ -18,0 +22 @@
+<stagk>横目</stagk>
@@ -20 +23,0 @@
-<pos>&vs;</pos>
@@ -24,0 +28,2 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2845476">タテ目</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2845476">タテ目</xref>

https://www.well-corp.jp/solution/yokome/

Apparently same reading

@@ -7,0 +8,4 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>Ｙ目</keb>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
@@ -20,0 +25 @@
+<s_inf>freq. shortened to Ｙ目</s_inf>

nikk daijs

plenty of more senses in nikk and daij

@@ -15,0 +16 @@
+<pos>&vs;</pos>
@@ -17,0 +19,4 @@
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>short grain (paper)</gloss>
+</sense>

仕様がない	44469
しようが無い	36641
仕様が無い	17319
しょうが無い	12745
しょうがない	3834602

@@ -32,0 +33 @@
+<misc>&uk;</misc>
@@ -37,0 +39 @@
+<misc>&uk;</misc>
@@ -46,0 +49 @@
+<misc>&uk;</misc>
@@ -57,0 +61 @@
+<misc>&uk;</misc>
@@ -65,0 +70 @@
+<misc>&uk;</misc>

gg5, meikyo

Aligning with 1305420.

@@ -33,7 +33,38 @@
-<misc>&uk;</misc>
-<gloss>it is what it is</gloss>
-<gloss>it can't be helped</gloss>
-<gloss>it is inevitable</gloss>
-<gloss>nothing can be done</gloss>
-<gloss>there's no point (in doing something)</gloss>
-<gloss>there's no reason (to do something)</gloss>
+<gloss>there's no (other) way</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&exp;</pos>
+<pos>&adj-i;</pos>
+<gloss>cannot be helped</gloss>
+<gloss>unavoidable</gloss>
+<gloss>inevitable</gloss>
+<gloss>(there's) nothing one can do</gloss>
+<gloss>having no choice</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&exp;</pos>
+<pos>&adj-i;</pos>
+<s_inf>oft. as 〜てもしょうがない</s_inf>
+<gloss>it's no use (doing)</gloss>
+<gloss>pointless</gloss>
+<gloss>useless</gloss>
+<gloss>no good</gloss>
+<gloss>insufficient</gloss>
+<gloss>not enough</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&exp;</pos>
+<pos>&adj-i;</pos>
+<gloss>hopeless (person)</gloss>
+<gloss>annoying</gloss>
+<gloss>troublesome</gloss>
+<gloss>awful</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&exp;</pos>
+<pos>&adj-i;</pos>
+<s_inf>as 〜てしょうがない or 〜でしょうがない</s_inf>
+<gloss>cannot stand it</gloss>
+<gloss>unbearable</gloss>
+<gloss>cannot help (doing, feeling)</gloss>
+<gloss>dying (to do)</gloss>

We had one and it was deleted two years ago. Search for 2601160 with "Deleted" ticked.

We probably need an entry for しようがありません too

@@ -33,0 +34 @@
+<gloss>it is what it is</gloss>

G n-grams
 しようが無い	36641

@@ -6,0 +7,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>しようが無い</keb>
@@ -15,0 +19,3 @@
+<re_restr>仕様がない</re_restr>
+<re_restr>仕様が無い</re_restr>
+<re_restr>しょうが無い</re_restr>
@@ -20,0 +27 @@
+<re_restr>しようが無い</re_restr>

G n-grams:
 仕様がない	  44469
 仕様が無い	  17319
 しょうが無い	  12745
 しようがない	 426951
 しょうがない	3834602

reordering
removing ik from しょうがない; is in koj
adding spec1

@@ -5 +5,2 @@
-<keb>仕様が無い</keb>
+<keb>仕様がない</keb>
+<ke_pri>spec1</ke_pri>
@@ -8 +9 @@
-<keb>仕様がない</keb>
+<keb>仕様が無い</keb>
@@ -14,3 +15,2 @@
-<reb>しようがない</reb>
-<re_restr>仕様が無い</re_restr>
-<re_restr>仕様がない</re_restr>
+<reb>しょうがない</reb>
+<re_pri>spec1</re_pri>
@@ -19,2 +19,3 @@
-<reb>しょうがない</reb>
-<re_inf>&ik;</re_inf>
+<reb>しようがない</reb>
+<re_restr>仕様がない</re_restr>
+<re_restr>仕様が無い</re_restr>

http://www.esampo.com/work/marsh/65/index.html  
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/ytakano/20100603/1275576962  
http://www.47news.jp/feature/47school/english/80.html

This is the sense as used in 試験の結果が出るまで未だ一週間もあるんだ。今からあれこれ考えたってしょうがないだろ -- The test results won't be published for a week, so there's no point in worrying about them now.  The existing meanings don't really capture this sense of the phrase.

@@ -29,0 +29,2 @@
+<gloss>there's no point (in doing something)</gloss>
+<gloss>there's no reason (to do something)</gloss>

@@ -24,0 +24,1 @@
+<pos>&adj-i;</pos>

>> the lit gloss is clearly a literal translation, _from Chinese_.
That's precisely my point. lit glosses are supposed to be literal translations *of the Japanese*, sticking to the Japanese phrasing and structure as closely as possible. "the weak are meat the strong do eat" doesn’t even agree with 弱肉強食's part of speech. It's not consistent with how we use lit glosses on all non-yoji entries.
In some cases, translations from Chinese make good glosses but they shouldn’t be tagged as [lit]. The same goes for translations of the component characters. I don't think a gloss like "one time, one meeting" is useful.

>> A literal translation of a yojijukugo is simply a translation of its component characters (or words). Classical Chinese syntax does not carry over into Japanese.

...except that, that isn't true, as you can see, from most yojijukugo, that have lit glosses.
Certainly, none of it applies to 猿猴捉月, 弱肉強食, 三日坊主, 七転八起, 夜郎自大, 六法全書...
And Classical Chinese syntax not carrying over into Japanese, is irrelevant, as these are _English_, not Japanese, glosses.
In the case of 夜郎自大, the lit gloss is clearly a literal translation, _from Chinese_.
自大 isn't even a word, in Japanese.
Translating it character-for-character, from Japanese to English, would be pointless. Translating it character-for-character, rather than as the two kanji (or rather hanzi) word, would also be quite wrong.
Not to mention translating the name of the kingdom 夜郎, character-for-character. (or spelling it as Yarou, the Japanese pronunciation, rather than Yelang, as it is known in Chinese ... Well, in Modern Standard Mandarin, actually, but...)

>> "the weak are meat the strong do eat" is one translator's attempt at rendering 弱肉強食 into idiomatic English. It's certainly not a literal translation of the Japanese

It IS a literal translation.
It may not conform to the standard you mentioned, but that standard isn't the definition of "literal translation". It is only ONE sub-type, of literal translation.

>> I would keep "three kneelings and nine prostrations" and drop "one time, one meeting".

Why?
All of the lit glosses, mentioned here, seem perfectly good and useful.
Most of them also make sense, at least once you read the lit gloss.

Yojijukugo like 猿猴捉月 skips some aspects, that one must learn, before it can be understood (even if you are a native speaker of Japanese or Classical Chinese [the latter, only applying to people in the past]), but lit glosses should, and typically do, include those in parentheses.

Others, like, 一期一会, 弱肉強食, and 七転八起, make perfect sense, even with only literal translations of the individual characters. (though the syntax may feel a bit weird)

>> There, however, no possible valid/reasonable argument, for how/why it being a yojijukugo would have any relevance, to the question of having a lit gloss or not.

A literal translation of a yojijukugo is simply a translation of its component characters (or words). Classical Chinese syntax does not carry over into Japanese.
"the weak are meat the strong do eat" is one translator's attempt at rendering 弱肉強食 into idiomatic English. It's certainly not a literal translation of the Japanese (which, if anything, would be "weak meat, strong eat"). 
It's perfectly fine to include, where appropriate, glosses that incorporate the literal meanings of the characters but they shouldn't be tagged as "lit". I would keep "three kneelings and nine prostrations" and drop "one time, one meeting".

Here are some with a [lit] tag on the last gloss:
三拝九拝 【さんぱいきゅうはい】 (n,vs) (yoji) kowtowing; bowing repeatedly; three kneelings and nine prostrations
一期一会 【いちごいちえ】 (n) (yoji) once-in-a-lifetime encounter; one time, one meeting
猿猴捉月 【えんこうそくげつ】 (n) (yoji) trying to reach above one's station and failing; trying to accomplish something beyond one's abilities and failing; monkey catching (a reflection of) the moon (in the water) 

It's a fair question as to whether they are useful as glosses and if so, should they be tagged. For 三拝九拝 GG5 leads with that gloss. I'm not sure the others serve much purpose.
This should be discussed in the issues forum.

Yeah, there are tons of yojijukugo, with lit glosses. There is no sign of any rule, of no lit glosses for yojijukugo.
One can oppose having a lit gloss, due to the regular glosses being so close to the literal meaning.
There, however, no possible valid/reasonable argument, for how/why it being a yojijukugo would have any relevance, to the question of having a lit gloss or not.

I see that clunky literal translation went in before the yoji tag.
At present you'd have to search the XML for g_type="lit"

"We don't have lit glosses for yojijukugo."

I'm pretty sure I've seen lit glosses, on some yojijukugo. Also, why not? What is lit glosses for, if not to use them for such cases?
Also, is there any way to search for entries, with lit glosses?

prog, chujiten

We don't have lit glosses for yojijukugo.

@@ -19 +19 @@
-<gloss g_type="lit">the weak are meat the strong do eat</gloss>
+<gloss>the weak become the victim of the strong</gloss>

OK, I'll make it that.

@@ -18,2 +18 @@
-<gloss>the strongest prospering, at the expense of the weak</gloss>
-<gloss>ruthless competition or self-interest</gloss>
+<gloss>the strong prey on the weak</gloss>

"the strong prey on the weak" sounds okay to me.

GG5 translating it as "might makes right" doesn't matter, if it is clear that, that is wrong.
And I've made clear how, and why, it is.
Dictionary makers aren't infallible, after all, and there are plenty of examples, of where their definitions are wrong.

GG5: the law of the jungle; the right of the strongest; The strong 「devour [prey upon] the weak. | Might makes right. 【諺】
中辞典: the law of the jungle ¶弱肉強食の世界 a world where the weak are victims of the strong; 《文》 a world where the law of the jungle prevails.

GG5 obviously tried to line up an English expression, which seemed to fit OK to me. These 四字熟語 can be rather imprecise.
I'm tempted to suggest "the strong prey on the weak" as a replacement for the proposed 2nd and 3rd glosses, but I'll back off and let others consider it.

"Might makes right" is, quite explicitly, a statement of what is claimed to be right. (with the speaker typically accusing someone else, of holding the view, whilst personally rejecting it) ...or, sometimes, a statement about how what is considered right, in a society, is determined by those in power. (much like "history is written by the victors")

弱肉強食, however, is a statement of what is. Not necessarily (indeed, most often not) of what should be, or is right.

As such, they are very two different, quite separate and distinct, statements.
"The law of the jungle" is a decent translations.
Of course, how things work in the jungle, doesn't actually really reflect the notion of 弱肉強食
...but that is nevertheless, pretty much, what the phrase "the law of the jungle" is most often used to mean, which is what matters here.

Besides "The law of the jungle", one can use a description (I added a couple, though I'm not entirely confident in their quality)
...but not "might makes right", or "survival of the fittest".
Those two phrases can be seen as related (depending on context) but are certainly not synonymous.

@@ -18 +18,2 @@
-<gloss>might makes right</gloss>
+<gloss>the strongest prospering, at the expense of the weak</gloss>
+<gloss>ruthless competition or self-interest</gloss>

GG5, etc.

Yes, not the best fit.

@@ -17,0 +18 @@
+<gloss>might makes right</gloss>

Survival of the fittest, most certainly does NOT mean, that the stronger dominates. It means those best suited to their environment (i.e. fittest) survive. Sometimes being weaker, makes one more fit. Humans, e.g., are quite significantly weaker, than any other apes. (past or present)
適者生存 is survival of the fittest. 弱肉強食 is not. They are two very different concepts.

@@ -17 +16,0 @@
-<gloss>survival of the fittest</gloss>

Kanji Haitani list

Adding yoji tagAdding yoji tag
-*- via bulkupd.py -*-

@@ -15,0 +16 @@
+<misc>&yoji;</misc>

OK

-this is a noun.  i don't think a simple noun can be a proverb.  also, all 四字熟語 have some kind of idiomatic of proverbial meaning, so i don't think it needs to be stated.
-do we generally provide [lit] tags for 四字熟語?

@@ -16 +15,0 @@
-<misc>&proverb;</misc>

daijs
《韓愈「送浮屠文暢師序」による語。弱い者の肉が強い者の食料となる意から》弱者が
強者の犠牲になること。強い者が弱い者を餌食(えじき)にして栄えること。

"the weak are meat the strong do eat" appeared when I googled 
for something similar - apparently it's from the novel Cloud 
Atlas, the author got it from the Japanese saying

@@ -16 +16,2 @@
-<gloss>The survival of the fittest</gloss>
+<misc>&proverb;</misc>
+<gloss>survival of the fittest</gloss>
@@ -17,0 +19 @@
+<gloss g_type="lit">the weak are meat the strong do eat</gloss>

Closing.

>> That's precisely my point. lit glosses are supposed to be literal translations *of the Japanese*

No.
"lit gloss"es are supposed to be literal translations.
There is no good reason to insist, that it must specifically be from Japanese. I do not, for the life of me, understand why you insist that it must be.

>> "the weak are meat the strong do eat" doesn’t even agree with 弱肉強食's part of speech.

Not entirely, no, but it's about as close as you can get, to a literal translation. (there is, pretty much, no such thing as a perfect translation. Regardless of translation type)

What you're defining as "literal translation", is not really literal translation.
It is...
I'd like to say glosses, but given how that word is used here...
I tried looking up a more specific term for it, and found this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlinear_gloss
("interlinear" would seems to make it needlessly narrow, but what is described in the article perfectly reflects what I'm referring to)
...which is very different, to the concept of literal translation.

Essentially, what you are talking about, are glosses, in the proper sense of the word.
The use of "gloss", in JMDict, is not, I'd argue, strictly accurate, though I suppose it could be argued to be a wider sense of the word.
Glosses (in the narrower sense) are not translations nor definitions.
Those three are very different, though clearly related (when describing things, between languages), concepts.

>> It's not consistent with how we use lit glosses on all non-yoji entries.

Yes it is.
Just _claiming_ that they are not consistent, not/less useful, or in any other way worse, isn't evidence that they are.
You need to present some argument/evidence.

>> The same goes for translations of the component characters.

It is completely unclear, what that is supposed to mean.

>> I don't think a gloss like "one time, one meeting" is useful.

I absolutely think it is, and think that it is as useful, as any other literal translation, in JMDict.
How/why do you think that it isn't?

>> the lit gloss is clearly a literal translation, _from Chinese_.
That's precisely my point. lit glosses are supposed to be literal translations *of the Japanese*, sticking to the Japanese phrasing and structure as closely as possible. "the weak are meat the strong do eat" doesn’t even agree with 弱肉強食's part of speech. It's not consistent with how we use lit glosses on all non-yoji entries.
In some cases, translations from Chinese make good glosses but they shouldn’t be tagged as [lit]. The same goes for translations of the component characters. I don't think a gloss like "one time, one meeting" is useful.

>> A literal translation of a yojijukugo is simply a translation of its component characters (or words). Classical Chinese syntax does not carry over into Japanese.

...except that, that isn't true, as you can see, from most yojijukugo, that have lit glosses.
Certainly, none of it applies to 猿猴捉月, 弱肉強食, 三日坊主, 七転八起, 夜郎自大, 六法全書...
And Classical Chinese syntax not carrying over into Japanese, is irrelevant, as these are _English_, not Japanese, glosses.
In the case of 夜郎自大, the lit gloss is clearly a literal translation, _from Chinese_.
自大 isn't even a word, in Japanese.
Translating it character-for-character, from Japanese to English, would be pointless. Translating it character-for-character, rather than as the two kanji (or rather hanzi) word, would also be quite wrong.
Not to mention translating the name of the kingdom 夜郎, character-for-character. (or spelling it as Yarou, the Japanese pronunciation, rather than Yelang, as it is known in Chinese ... Well, in Modern Standard Mandarin, actually, but...)

>> "the weak are meat the strong do eat" is one translator's attempt at rendering 弱肉強食 into idiomatic English. It's certainly not a literal translation of the Japanese

It IS a literal translation.
It may not conform to the standard you mentioned, but that standard isn't the definition of "literal translation". It is only ONE sub-type, of literal translation.

>> I would keep "three kneelings and nine prostrations" and drop "one time, one meeting".

Why?
All of the lit glosses, mentioned here, seem perfectly good and useful.
Most of them also make sense, at least once you read the lit gloss.

Yojijukugo like 猿猴捉月 skips some aspects, that one must learn, before it can be understood (even if you are a native speaker of Japanese or Classical Chinese [the latter, only applying to people in the past]), but lit glosses should, and typically do, include those in parentheses.

Others, like, 一期一会, 弱肉強食, and 七転八起, make perfect sense, even with only literal translations of the individual characters. (though the syntax may feel a bit weird)

>> There, however, no possible valid/reasonable argument, for how/why it being a yojijukugo would have any relevance, to the question of having a lit gloss or not.

A literal translation of a yojijukugo is simply a translation of its component characters (or words). Classical Chinese syntax does not carry over into Japanese.
"the weak are meat the strong do eat" is one translator's attempt at rendering 弱肉強食 into idiomatic English. It's certainly not a literal translation of the Japanese (which, if anything, would be "weak meat, strong eat"). 
It's perfectly fine to include, where appropriate, glosses that incorporate the literal meanings of the characters but they shouldn't be tagged as "lit". I would keep "three kneelings and nine prostrations" and drop "one time, one meeting".

Here are some with a [lit] tag on the last gloss:
三拝九拝 【さんぱいきゅうはい】 (n,vs) (yoji) kowtowing; bowing repeatedly; three kneelings and nine prostrations
一期一会 【いちごいちえ】 (n) (yoji) once-in-a-lifetime encounter; one time, one meeting
猿猴捉月 【えんこうそくげつ】 (n) (yoji) trying to reach above one's station and failing; trying to accomplish something beyond one's abilities and failing; monkey catching (a reflection of) the moon (in the water) 

It's a fair question as to whether they are useful as glosses and if so, should they be tagged. For 三拝九拝 GG5 leads with that gloss. I'm not sure the others serve much purpose.
This should be discussed in the issues forum.

Yeah, there are tons of yojijukugo, with lit glosses. There is no sign of any rule, of no lit glosses for yojijukugo.
One can oppose having a lit gloss, due to the regular glosses being so close to the literal meaning.
There, however, no possible valid/reasonable argument, for how/why it being a yojijukugo would have any relevance, to the question of having a lit gloss or not.

I see that clunky literal translation went in before the yoji tag.
At present you'd have to search the XML for g_type="lit"

"We don't have lit glosses for yojijukugo."

I'm pretty sure I've seen lit glosses, on some yojijukugo. Also, why not? What is lit glosses for, if not to use them for such cases?
Also, is there any way to search for entries, with lit glosses?

prog, chujiten

We don't have lit glosses for yojijukugo.

@@ -19 +19 @@
-<gloss g_type="lit">the weak are meat the strong do eat</gloss>
+<gloss>the weak become the victim of the strong</gloss>

OK, I'll make it that.

@@ -18,2 +18 @@
-<gloss>the strongest prospering, at the expense of the weak</gloss>
-<gloss>ruthless competition or self-interest</gloss>
+<gloss>the strong prey on the weak</gloss>

"the strong prey on the weak" sounds okay to me.

GG5 translating it as "might makes right" doesn't matter, if it is clear that, that is wrong.
And I've made clear how, and why, it is.
Dictionary makers aren't infallible, after all, and there are plenty of examples, of where their definitions are wrong.

GG5: the law of the jungle; the right of the strongest; The strong 「devour [prey upon] the weak. | Might makes right. 【諺】
中辞典: the law of the jungle ¶弱肉強食の世界 a world where the weak are victims of the strong; 《文》 a world where the law of the jungle prevails.

GG5 obviously tried to line up an English expression, which seemed to fit OK to me. These 四字熟語 can be rather imprecise.
I'm tempted to suggest "the strong prey on the weak" as a replacement for the proposed 2nd and 3rd glosses, but I'll back off and let others consider it.

"Might makes right" is, quite explicitly, a statement of what is claimed to be right. (with the speaker typically accusing someone else, of holding the view, whilst personally rejecting it) ...or, sometimes, a statement about how what is considered right, in a society, is determined by those in power. (much like "history is written by the victors")

弱肉強食, however, is a statement of what is. Not necessarily (indeed, most often not) of what should be, or is right.

As such, they are very two different, quite separate and distinct, statements.
"The law of the jungle" is a decent translations.
Of course, how things work in the jungle, doesn't actually really reflect the notion of 弱肉強食
...but that is nevertheless, pretty much, what the phrase "the law of the jungle" is most often used to mean, which is what matters here.

Besides "The law of the jungle", one can use a description (I added a couple, though I'm not entirely confident in their quality)
...but not "might makes right", or "survival of the fittest".
Those two phrases can be seen as related (depending on context) but are certainly not synonymous.

@@ -18 +18,2 @@
-<gloss>might makes right</gloss>
+<gloss>the strongest prospering, at the expense of the weak</gloss>
+<gloss>ruthless competition or self-interest</gloss>

GG5, etc.

Yes, not the best fit.

@@ -17,0 +18 @@
+<gloss>might makes right</gloss>

Survival of the fittest, most certainly does NOT mean, that the stronger dominates. It means those best suited to their environment (i.e. fittest) survive. Sometimes being weaker, makes one more fit. Humans, e.g., are quite significantly weaker, than any other apes. (past or present)
適者生存 is survival of the fittest. 弱肉強食 is not. They are two very different concepts.

@@ -17 +16,0 @@
-<gloss>survival of the fittest</gloss>

Kanji Haitani list

Adding yoji tagAdding yoji tag
-*- via bulkupd.py -*-

@@ -15,0 +16 @@
+<misc>&yoji;</misc>

OK

-this is a noun.  i don't think a simple noun can be a proverb.  also, all 四字熟語 have some kind of idiomatic of proverbial meaning, so i don't think it needs to be stated.
-do we generally provide [lit] tags for 四字熟語?

@@ -16 +15,0 @@
-<misc>&proverb;</misc>

daijs
《韓愈「送浮屠文暢師序」による語。弱い者の肉が強い者の食料となる意から》弱者が
強者の犠牲になること。強い者が弱い者を餌食(えじき)にして栄えること。

"the weak are meat the strong do eat" appeared when I googled 
for something similar - apparently it's from the novel Cloud 
Atlas, the author got it from the Japanese saying

@@ -16 +16,2 @@
-<gloss>The survival of the fittest</gloss>
+<misc>&proverb;</misc>
+<gloss>survival of the fittest</gloss>
@@ -17,0 +19 @@
+<gloss g_type="lit">the weak are meat the strong do eat</gloss>

GG5, 中辞典

More senses. Almost all the 77 sentences are sense 1.

@@ -19 +18,0 @@
-<gloss>looking after</gloss>
@@ -23,0 +23,16 @@
+<gloss>looking after</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<pos>&vs;</pos>
+<gloss>trouble (e.g. putting someone to ...)</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>good offices</gloss>
+<gloss>recommendation</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>everyday life</gloss>
+<gloss>everyday affairs</gloss>

wisdom, prog

First result for “care” in both is 世話

@@ -19,0 +20 @@
+<gloss>care</gloss>

GG5, 新和英中辞典

It doesn't mean miscarriage.

@@ -20,2 +20,1 @@
-<gloss>aborticide</gloss>
-<gloss>miscarriage</gloss>
+<gloss>feticide</gloss>

I'm content with that "iK".

daijs:
人間では妊娠第8週以後の人間としての形が明らかになったものをいう。

"fetus" is the better translation based on the above.

should 胎仔 be considered [iK]?  no ref for it in any major dictionary.  eijiro has it in some examples, and it's in some of the minor dictionaries on weblio

@@ -11,0 +11,1 @@
+<ke_inf>&iK;</ke_inf>
@@ -20,1 +21,0 @@
-<gloss>embryo</gloss>
@@ -23,0 +23,2 @@
+<gloss>embryo</gloss>
+<gloss>unborn child</gloss>

Sankoku confirms [form] on [2].

I think the glosses in [2] are idiomatically missing something like "emergence" (and or "development", "rise",...).  But "emergence" is literally quite incompatible with　胎動 so I am reluctant to put something like that here.

The xref provides the option, however. Maybe that is sufficient. Or maybe some additional glosses would help here.

Consider:
中国の胎動	46	16.1%
日本の胎動	105	36.7%
世界の胎動	135	47.2%

Just a random example:
https://www.books-sanseido.jp/booksearch/BookSearchDetail.action?shopCode=&areaCode=&shoshiKubun=1&isbn=9784569636320
【目次】
動の章―新生日本の胎動... (The birth/emergence/rise/development of a new Japan?)
幕末・明治の決定的瞬間（池田屋事件―新選組が世の中を震撼させた瞬間
龍馬暗殺―戊辰戦争の火種龍馬暗殺の瞬間　ほか）

I mean, a literally newborn Japan(新生日本) cannot literally still be in-the-womb(胎動)...

===
p.s.  I do know the term Quickening(and don't object to it here), but only as a curiosity (and from the movie Highlander).  I doubt I've ever used it myself.  But, while searching this term, I ran into a reddit post on this very subject, with an anime translating 胎動 to "quickening" in the name (for coincidental reasons having to do with the sound/letter きゅう). 
https://www.reddit.com/r/evangelion/comments/ckeuam/in_rebuild_what_is_a_quickening/

The whole (extensive) reddit discussion seems completely oblivious to sense [2].  A shame.

胎動するエヴァ8号機とそのパイロット

@@ -27,0 +28,2 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2858758">胎動する</xref>
+<misc>&form;</misc>

I've heard quickening all my life; maybe I'm archaic.

JEs

This sense of "quicken" is archaic English. The JEs do have it for whatever reason. "Foment" also has a negative nuance that the refs don't indicate.

@@ -19,0 +20,2 @@
+<gloss>fetal movement</gloss>
+<gloss>movements of the fetus</gloss>
@@ -21 +22,0 @@
-<gloss>fetal movement</gloss>
@@ -27 +28,3 @@
-<gloss>fomenting (trouble)</gloss>
+<gloss>signs (of)</gloss>
+<gloss>indications</gloss>
+<gloss>stirrings</gloss>

mk

that "fomenting (trouble)" and "foetal movement" were in the same sense is mind-boggling

@@ -18,0 +19 @@
+<pos>&vi;</pos>
@@ -20 +21,6 @@
-<gloss>foetal (fetal) movement</gloss>
+<gloss>fetal movement</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<pos>&vs;</pos>
+<pos>&vi;</pos>

daijr

@@ -16 +16 @@
-<gloss>communications (e.g. post, tele.)</gloss>
+<gloss>communications (e.g. post, telegraph)</gloss>

gg5, prog
daijr: "乳児と幼児。小学校入学前の子供の総称"

Not just babies.

@@ -16,2 +16 @@
-<gloss>infants</gloss>
-<gloss>babies</gloss>
+<gloss>babies and very young children</gloss>

EDP https://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=付せん

@@ -8,0 +9,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>付せん</keb>

Daijr

Merging.

@@ -6,0 +6,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>附箋</keb>

daij

@@ -10,0 +10,3 @@
+<keb>繰越し</keb>
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
@@ -11,0 +14,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>繰り越</keb>

@@ -53,0 +54 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1871690">銀将・ぎんしょう</xref>
@@ -54,0 +56 @@
+<misc>&abbr;</misc>

@@ -48 +48,2 @@
-<gloss>silver colour (color)</gloss>
+<gloss>silver colour</gloss>
+<gloss>silver color</gloss>
@@ -53 +54,2 @@
-<gloss>silver general (shogi)</gloss>
+<field>&shogi;</field>
+<gloss>silver general</gloss>

thanks.  obvious error

Silver's chemical symbol is Ag, not Au (gold)

@@ -34 +34 @@
-<gloss>silver (Au)</gloss>
+<gloss>silver (Ag)</gloss>

daijs

@@ -34,1 +34,4 @@
-<gloss>silver</gloss>
+<gloss>silver (Au)</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
@@ -36,1 +39,10 @@
-<gloss>silver paint</gloss>
+<gloss>money</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>silver medal</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
+<gloss>silver colour (color)</gloss>

daijs

@@ -27,0 +27,4 @@
+<r_ele>
+<reb>しろかね</reb>
+<re_inf>&ok;</re_inf>
+</r_ele>

It may well be that 眼 means "lens" in this context, but I don't think "4眼カメラ" is a case of it being used as a counter.

https://k-tai.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1325761.html
https://carsmeet.jp/2020/12/24/178757/

Is it just me or is this also being used as a counter for cameras/lenses?

Probably best to clarify usage.

@@ -115,0 +116 @@
+<s_inf>after adj. stem</s_inf>

I'll approve this and reindex a sentence.
I really wonder about sense 17 being so low down - I know we tend to clump suffixes at the end, but thi is very common.

daijisen:
13 《12から転じて》よい結果になる可能性。「優勝の―はもう消えた」

@@ -66,0 +67,6 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1535080">目がない・3</xref>
+<gloss>chance to succeed</gloss>
+<gloss>possibility</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>

Thanks - reindexed now. #16 seems a long way down for that very common usage.

I'm assuming the sentences still need to be retagged.

shinmeikai:

縦と横の線が織り成す四角い形（をしたすきま）。また、その交差した箇所。

－のつんだ布（編物）
－の粗いふるい
網の－からもれる
畳の－
碁盤の－〔=a) 縦線と横線の交点。点 。⇒駄目もく（目） b) 俗に、模様として考えた時、縦線と横線によって出来る最小の正方形〕
編み－

Minor correction.

@@ -84 +84,2 @@
-<gloss>square (on a chess board, go board, etc.)</gloss>
+<gloss>intersection (on a go board)</gloss>
+<gloss>square (on a chess board)</gloss>

daij, gg5, prog

Added senses. I believe this only affects sentences linked with old sense 7 (new sense 16).

@@ -35,0 +36 @@
+<gloss>gaze</gloss>
@@ -36,0 +38,7 @@
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>notice</gloss>
+<gloss>attention</gloss>
+<gloss>observation</gloss>
+<gloss>eyes (of the world, public, etc.)</gloss>
@@ -47,0 +56,11 @@
+<gloss>discrimination</gloss>
+<gloss>discernment</gloss>
+<gloss>judgement</gloss>
+<gloss>eye (e.g. for quality)</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>appearance</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
@@ -48,0 +68,2 @@
+<gloss>spacing (between crossed strands of a net, mesh, etc.)</gloss>
+<gloss>opening</gloss>
@@ -51,0 +73,27 @@
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>grain (of wood)</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>eye (of a storm, needle, etc.)</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>square (on a chess board, go board, etc.)</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>dot (on a dice)</gloss>
+<gloss>pip</gloss>
+<gloss>rolled number</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>graduation</gloss>
+<gloss>division (of a scale)</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>tooth (of a saw, comb, etc.)</gloss>
@@ -59,0 +108 @@
+<misc>&uk;</misc>
@@ -62,0 +112,6 @@
+<sense>
+<pos>&suf;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="1510780">変わり目・1</xref>
+<s_inf>following -masu stem</s_inf>
+<gloss>point (e.g. of change)</gloss>
+</sense>

oh.  i just got the distinction.  yes.  "an" is okay.

@@ -40,1 +40,1 @@
-<gloss>experience</gloss>
+<gloss>an experience</gloss>

i agree.  (but not with the addition of "an").  also, the news1,nf16 almost certainly belong on め.

@@ -16,5 +16,0 @@
-<re_pri>ichi1</re_pri>
-</r_ele>
-<r_ele>
-<reb>まなこ</reb>
-<re_restr>眼</re_restr>
@@ -45,1 +40,1 @@
-<gloss>(an) experience</gloss>
+<gloss>experience</gloss>

daijr daijs

I think either まなこ should be split from this entry, or some of the senses should be restricted to め. daijr/daijs list a lot of meanings for め that they don't list for まなこ. If the editors want to split it, my initial suggestion for an entry for まなこ would be:

[1][n]
  eye; eyeball
[2][n]
  insight; perceptivity; power of observation
[3][n]
  iris (and pupil) of the eye
[4][n]
  look; field of vision
[5][n]
  core; center; centre; essence

@@ -45,1 +45,1 @@
-<gloss>experience</gloss>
+<gloss>(an) experience</gloss>

Just an x-ref

@@ -64,0 +64,1 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2040000">大きめ</xref>

@@ -34,0 +34,2 @@
+<gloss>sight</gloss>
+<gloss>vision</gloss>
@@ -38,0 +40,2 @@
+<gloss>stare</gloss>
+<gloss>glance</gloss>

I did, but then I was able to renumber the index OK, so I moved that sense up.

@@ -49,0 +49,7 @@
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="1511940">編み目</xref>
+<gloss>stitch</gloss>
+<gloss>texture</gloss>
+<gloss>weave</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
@@ -57,7 +64,0 @@
-<sense>
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<xref type="see" seq="1511940">編み目</xref>
-<gloss>stitch</gloss>
-<gloss>texture</gloss>
-<gloss>weave</gloss>
-</sense>

i think you nicked an 'h' there.  should this (n) go before the (suf) entries (makes sense to me), or would that cause too much havoc for Paul's example indexing?

@@ -54,1 +54,1 @@
-<gloss>-is</gloss>
+<gloss>-ish</gloss>

GG5

@@ -54,1 +54,8 @@
-<gloss>-ish</gloss>
+<gloss>-is</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="1511940">編み目</xref>
+<gloss>stitch</gloss>
+<gloss>texture</gloss>
+<gloss>weave</gloss>

hatena
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/keyword/�ʵ���¸��
3,920,000 results
usually on magazines/guidebook "mooks" i.e. the actual meaning 
is that they don't come out regularly

(and it's printed on the cover of a DVD I have, actually)

hatena
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/keyword/�ʵ���¸��
3,920,000 results
usually on magazines/guidebook "mooks" i.e. the actual meaning 
is that they don't come out regularly

rare or dated

daijr/s, nikk

Interjection according to the kokugos.

@@ -14,2 +14,2 @@
-<pos>&exp;</pos>
-<xref type="see" seq="1305420">しかたがない・1</xref>
+<pos>&int;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="1305420">しかたがない・2</xref>
@@ -18 +18,2 @@
-<gloss>there's nothing to do about it</gloss>
+<gloss>it is what it is</gloss>
+<gloss>nothing can be done</gloss>

daijs, nikk, wiki
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/兵隊シ�
%8A%E8%AA%9E
méi fǎzi: 
http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/srch/jc/仕方/m0u/

https://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/なろう系

http://blog.livedoor.jp/a304085a/archives/1621577.html 
"日本で義務教育受けてて「四季を愛でる文化が西洋にはない」と思えるってどういうことなん？
授業中ずーーーっとなろう系小説とかで現実逃避してんの？"
9 hits past hr on twitter