It's a messy one. I think it's best just to leave it as it is for now.

＊ Oxford dictionary of linguistics:
"‘theta roles’ Term in *Government and Binding Theory for semantic
roles such as *agent or *patient: cf. case roles. Also written ‘θ-roles’: the
theta stands for earlier ‘thematic’, itself derived from *theme (3) for no
principled reason."

So they are just semantic roles?
Theta-roles are new to me, that's why I ask.


＊ Oxford dictionary of linguistics:
"transitive (Construction) in which a verb is related to at least two
nouns or their equivalent, whose semantic roles are characteristically
those of an *agent and a *patient: e.g. that of She (agent) carried him
(patient). A transitive verb is one which takes or can take such a
construction: thus carry, or carry in its basic sense."


.

Before I give my take, note that I have not come into contact with government and binding theory or actual syntactical theory beyond the basics, prior to this. So I'm learning as I type.
This means I don't really mean to harp on this too much, I'm more so trying to gain a better unterstanding here.

＞ The English translation reflects this lack of object relation: "I apologize for the rudeness," not "I apologize the rudeness."
This cannot be regarded as an argument. 
If I were to take German, there "to apologize" is in fact transitively used, and the translation from Japanese would possess that feature. 
Yet that is not evidence for the Japanese construction involving a transitive verb.


＞ (a) Burzio's generalization "All and only the verbs that can assign a theta-role to the subject can assign Accusative Case to an object." (Burzio, 1986).
＞ A transitive verb assigns a theta-role to its object, which typically undergoes or is affected by the action (a).
I'm sorry, but I'm not sure I get what this intends to prove here.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but there are various theta roles, right? Agent, theme, goal, etc. , and they specify the relation established by the predicate to its arguments.

So let me grab one of the examples and attempt to visualize my understanding.
1 [彼女(agent)]は[先生(experiencer)]に[遅刻したこと(theme)]を謝った.
Here 謝る assigns the theta role "agent" to the logical subject of the clause, 先生 is assigned "experiencer" and  is a dative (indirect) object, whilst 遅刻したこと is assigned "theme" and is an accusative (direct) object.
So in this sentence 謝る acts as a ditransitive verb to me, and should fulfill the generalization you've brought forth.

Yet a sentence like this is also perfectly fine (taken from massif):
2 [僕(agent)]は[君(goal)]に謝らなければならない。
In this sentence 謝る acts as an unergative (intransitive verb assigning an agent that acts with intention) verb.


Or am I missing something?


＞ - 謝る is syntactically intransitive because the subject's action does not affect or act upon another entity.
Would that not refer to semantics? Also in sentences like 1 the "excusing" definitely affects another entity, namely the "先生".
Another important criterion to transitivity in semantics is volition, which is present with 謝る (unlike with 驚く), which convinces me that there is an agent-patient dynamic with the former, but not with the latter, where it would be stimulus-experiencer.


Furthermore, transitivity is not really black-and-white, as thompson and hopper have pointed out in their 1980 paper on transitivity:
https://romanistik.uni-freiburg.de/raible/Lehre/2006/Materialien/Hopper_Thompson.pdf



I would again propose that having both tags is probably the best, or shall I say "least complicated" course of action.
Transitivity tags should be given out in reference to the usage in the target language, so a Japanese verb and its transitivity must be analyzed in a Japanese framework.
Hence the tags should mirror the status quo of 国語学, which it most likely wouldn't if we just tagged it as a 自動詞.

(a) Burzio's generalization "All and only the verbs that can assign a theta-role to the subject can assign Accusative Case to an object." (Burzio, 1986).

Finding formal papers that discuss the abstract or thematic use of を, where it introduces non-affected, conceptual objects can be difficult. Most of the linguistic resources I've found aren't public and don't really touch on the topic heavily, so I'll provide my own reasoning.

A transitive verb assigns a theta-role to its object, which typically undergoes or is affected by the action (a). In Japanese, however, transitivity doesn't work in exactly the same way. 他動詞 can be thought of as any verb that can take an object marked by を, but not all を are equal. For example, verbs like 焦る, 謝る, 心配する, and 驚く can take a を-marked phrase, but the "object" in these cases doesn't undergo or receive the action in the usual sense.

I think that's where the confusion happens.

- 謝る is syntactically intransitive because the subject's action does not affect or act upon another entity.
- The を phrase (e.g., 失礼を謝る) can mark the cause, reason, stimulus, or domain of the action, not an affected object.
- The English translation reflects this lack of object relation: "I apologize for the rudeness," not "I apologize the rudeness."
- Therefore, even though を appears, it marks the trigger of the action rather than an object, so the verb remains intransitive in both structure and meaning.

＞ 謝る is intransitive and never takes a true direct object.
＞ In this sentence, the を is not marking a direct object; instead, it indicates what the apology is about and can be understood roughly as "about" or "for" in English.

Do you have references for this? I was unable to retrieve this sense from dictionaries. It seems very english-derived.
To my knowledge only "移動や時間の経過を表す自動詞" (Meikyo) and intransitive verbs in a starting point construction (e.g. 家を出る) can take を (and still be intransitive). 
Also, the english translation being an intransitive construction is not a criterion.
While DOJG also has also a fourth usage for を, "A particle that marks the cause of some human emotion.", 謝る doesn't really fall into that category in my eyes.
The examples DOJG gives contain verbs of emotion that are frequently tagged as transitive or bitransitive by references (e.g. 喜ぶ, 恐れる, etc.).


＊ Data
Massif:
｛を謝る｝＝ 524
｛に謝る｝＝ 3899 (false hits possible)

BCCWJ:
｛を；謝る｝＝ 11
｛に〈格助詞〉；謝る｝＝ 36

References that have 自動詞 ＝ Nikkoku
References that have 他動詞 ＝ Sankoku, SankokuGendaiGairai, Oukoku, Smk, Meikyo, Shinsen
References that have 自他動詞 ＝ Kojien, Gakken Kokugodaijiten, Iwakoku

Smk: 〈だれニ（なにヲ）謝る〉

To me the following examples, taken from various references, look perfectly transitive:
「うそを言ったことを謝る」
「人に罪を謝る」
「弟の不始末を姉が謝る」
「彼女は先生に遅刻したことを謝った」(e.g. replacing を with に here seems weird/ungrammatical to me)



Interestingly my 古語 references have 謝る is intransitive.
It seems 謝る came from 誤る, which was originally the intransitive pair to 過つ, which appears to have fallen out of use.
(Wiktionary, Nikkoku, Koj)

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
Another problem is that the english concepts of transitive/intransitive may not perfectly map onto 他動詞 and 自動詞, as pointed out be the following usage note on wiktionary: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/他動詞

"The terms transitive and intransitive are somewhat misleading in reference to Japanese. The English terms are generally used to refer to the syntax or structure of a sentence, and whether the verb in the sentence is followed by an object. The Japanese terms refer to the semantics or meaning of the verb, and whether the action of that verb is happening to or upon something else. The Japanese term 自動詞 (jidōshi) literally means “self-acting word”, and 他動詞 (tadōshi) literally means “other-acting word”, in reference to this semantic consideration.

For instance, in English, the verb ate in the simple sentence “I ate” would be considered an intransitive verb, because it is not followed by an object.

However, in the corresponding Japanese, the verb 食べた (tabeta, “ate”) in the simple sentence 私は食べた。 (“Watashi wa tabeta.”) would not be considered a 自動詞 (jidōshi), but would instead be considered a 他動詞 (tadōshi, literally “other-acting word”), as the underlying semantics or meaning of the verb 食べる (taberu, “to eat”) conceptually require an object: when one eats, one eats something, even if left unstated.

This semantic focus is the underlying mechanism by which verbs in sentences like 私は食べた。 (Watashi wa tabeta. - “I ate.”) are still considered 他動詞 (tadōshi, glossed as “transitive”) even when there is no stated object (because the fundamental meaning of the verb implies action by the subject upon something else), and verbs in sentences like 道を歩く。 (Michi o aruku. - “[I] walk the street.”) are still considered 自動詞 (jidōshi, glossed as “intransitive”) even when there is an explicit object marked with the object or accusative particle を (o) (because the fundamental meaning of the verb only implies action by the subject itself in a way that does not affect the noun marked by を)."
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー

＞ for example, tagging 焦る as transitive [...]
Here I see multiple references having a 自他動詞 tag, with meikyo splitting out a transitive sense.
But that's an issue for another time.




.

When I saw this submission I was away from home, but I wanted to look into this a bit.

Based purely on references there are insufficient grounds for tagging this as just intransitive.
Perhaps a linguist could perform tests for transitivity here, but I sadly can't.
Our best bet is most likely having this as [vt,vi].

@@ -18,0 +19 @@
+<pos>&vi;</pos>
@@ -23,0 +25 @@
+<pos>&vi;</pos>
@@ -34,0 +37 @@
+<gloss>to be stumped (by)</gloss>

Those terms at the ends of definitions in kokugos are not readings. They are forms of synonyms.

Nikkoku has the ほそふで reading, but limited to the first sense as I suspected.

https://de.youglish.com/pronounce/細筆/japanese
Surprisingly the first 5 examples all say ほそふで, doesn't seem to be rare.

Daijr, daijs, 学研国語大辞典
①こまかい字を書くための穂先の細いふで。
②こまかい字を書くこと。細書。
③こまごまと書き記すこと。

gakken for the third sense: 《他動詞。「する」と結合してサ変動詞としても用いる》
Nikkoku specifies [vs] for the second and third sense.



.

Kokugos sometimes add "extra readings" at the end of the definition for a given sense, in this case it also seems to be appropriate.
Perhaps they didn't use a とも note because the ほそふで only seems to apply to one of the senses? Not sure

Anyhow, I found a usage example in the CEJC where it's indeed "ほそふで", but that's the only one out of the ~30 total hits in all the NINJAL corpora.
I think this can stay.

But references should be provided by the submitter.

@@ -14,0 +15,6 @@
+<gloss>fine brush or pencil</gloss>
+<gloss>writing brush with a fine point</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<stagr>さいひつ</stagr>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
@@ -16,2 +22,12 @@
-<gloss>fine brush or pencil</gloss>
-<gloss>small or fine handwriting</gloss>
+<pos>&vt;</pos>
+<gloss>(artistically) detailed writing</gloss>
+<gloss>fine writing</gloss>
+<gloss>writing minutely</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<stagr>さいひつ</stagr>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<pos>&vs;</pos>
+<pos>&vt;</pos>
+<gloss>writing down in detail (of information)</gloss>
+<gloss>minutely recording</gloss>

???

Several references give ほそふで as a meaning for 細筆 but I can't find any for it as the reading.

@@ -9,0 +10,3 @@
+<r_ele>
+<reb>ほそふで</reb>
+</r_ele>

Thanks

@@ -14 +14 @@
-<gloss>diving into five parts</gloss>
+<gloss>dividing into five parts</gloss>

@@ -10,0 +11 @@
+<pos>&n;</pos>
@@ -12 +13,2 @@
-<gloss>to divide into five parts</gloss>
+<pos>&vt;</pos>
+<gloss>diving into five parts</gloss>

should prob be aligned w any changes made to 三分

Entry created

I don't think it's needed, but it's not a big deal.
In the past, we needed matched tags on both kanji forms and readings to trigger a "P" tag in the edict format. That no longer applies, so it's OK to drop them from the kanji forms in the cases of [uk] entries.

@@ -7 +6,0 @@
-<ke_pri>spec1</ke_pri>

DOJG
Smk: 立場が上の者に対しては用いられない。
Oukoku: ふつう、目下の人に対して用いる。
Sankoku: 同等以下の人に [...]

First of all, could you please remove the [spec1] tag from 為さい?
Second, I disagree with the extra information not being necessary. Having a note like this isn't an outlier, it's pointed out by several references, and in my opinion good-to-know.

@@ -17 +17 @@
-<s_inf>light imperative; after the -masu stem of a verb</s_inf>
+<s_inf>light imperative; used towards someone of equal or lower standing; after the -masu stem of a verb</s_inf>

I don't think that much detail is needed.

@@ -17 +17 @@
-<s_inf>indicates light imperative towards someone of equal or lower status; after the -masu stem of a verb</s_inf>
+<s_inf>light imperative; after the -masu stem of a verb</s_inf>

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーー─┬────────────┬───────╮
│ 為さい │      1,295 │  0.0% │Why does this have a spec tag?
│ なさい │ 11,689,067 │100.0% │
╰─ーーー─┴────────────┴───────╯
Meikyo: かな書きが一般的。

Meikyo, etc. : 自分と同等以下の人に対するやわらかな命令を表す。


BCCWJ:
｛なさい｝＝ 9575
｛為さい｝＝ 0

necessary information

You could even make an argument for straight up hiding the kanji form, given the usage data. 
Two out of three references do so

@@ -5,0 +6 @@
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>
@@ -13,2 +14,2 @@
-<pos>&exp;</pos>
-<xref type="see" seq="1157090">為さる</xref>
+<pos>&aux-v;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="1157090">なさる</xref>
@@ -16 +17 @@
-<s_inf>imperative form often used after the -masu stem of a verb</s_inf>
+<s_inf>indicates light imperative towards someone of equal or lower status; after the -masu stem of a verb</s_inf>

Daijisen: コスモスの別名。

I'm not seeing a really case for it being a reading of 秋桜. Better off in #1050230.

@@ -17,4 +16,0 @@
-</r_ele>
-<r_ele>
-<reb>コスモス</reb>
-<re_inf>&gikun;</re_inf>

kanjipedia, smk, sankoku

@@ -16,0 +17,4 @@
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>コスモス</reb>
+<re_inf>&gikun;</re_inf>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmos_bipinnatus
世界大百科: コスモス(和名アキザクラ，オオハルシャギク)
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/オオハルシャギク
コスモス、アキザクラ（秋桜）とも呼ぶ。

I think the katakana form should be kept.
No need to drop the species name here. This isn't an archaic or obscure term.

@@ -13,0 +14,4 @@
+<r_ele>
+<reb>アキザクラ</reb>
+<re_nokanji/>
+</r_ele>
@@ -17 +21,2 @@
-<gloss>common cosmos</gloss>
+<gloss>garden cosmos (Cosmos bipinnatus)</gloss>
+<gloss>Mexican aster</gloss>

秋桜	133226	97.4%
あきざくら	2137	1.6%
アキザクラ	397	0.3%
秋櫻	1045	0.8%

@@ -6,0 +7,4 @@
+<k_ele>
+<keb>秋櫻</keb>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
+</k_ele>
@@ -9,4 +12,0 @@
-</r_ele>
-<r_ele>
-<reb>アキザクラ</reb>
-<re_nokanji/>
@@ -17 +17 @@
-<gloss>common cosmos (Cosmos bipinnatus)</gloss>
+<gloss>common cosmos</gloss>

@@ -9,0 +10,4 @@
+<r_ele>
+<reb>アキザクラ</reb>
+<re_nokanji/>
+</r_ele>
@@ -12,2 +16,2 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1050230">コスモス・1</xref>
-<gloss>cosmos (flower)</gloss>
+<xref type="see" seq="1050230">コスモス・2</xref>
+<gloss>common cosmos (Cosmos bipinnatus)</gloss>

Adding reading to x-ref for disambiguation

@@ -18 +18 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2847663">西蔵</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2847663">西蔵・せいぞう</xref>

I thought it might have been worth keeping, but it's our only single-kanji ministerial abbreviation.

daijs

"Ministry of Finance" is a kanwa meaning. I don't think it's needed here. We have an entry for 蔵相.

@@ -18,7 +18 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1414430">大蔵省・1</xref>
-<misc>&abbr;</misc>
-<gloss>(former) Ministry of Finance</gloss>
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<pos>&pref;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="2847663">西蔵</xref>

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

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/付喪神

Relevant detail

@@ -20 +20 @@
-<gloss g_type="expl">in folk belief, long-lived objects (household objects, living beings, nature, etc.) become inhabited by a spirit</gloss>
+<gloss g_type="expl">in folk belief, long-lived objects (household objects, living beings, nature, etc.) become inhabited by a spirit upon their 100th birthday</gloss>

付喪神	8392
九十九神	2201
つくも神	2601

@@ -9 +9 @@
-<keb>九十九神</keb>
+<keb>つくも神</keb>
@@ -12 +12 @@
-<keb>つくも神</keb>
+<keb>九十九神</keb>

game website, on jp wiki too

@@ -9,0 +10,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>つくも神</keb>

as 付喪神 is the only headword used in any ref including the wiki links above, i think it should remain first

@@ -5,1 +5,2 @@
-<keb>九十九神</keb>
+<keb>付喪神</keb>
+<ke_inf>&ateji;</ke_inf>
@@ -8,2 +9,1 @@
-<keb>付喪神</keb>
-<ke_inf>&ateji;</ke_inf>
+<keb>九十九神</keb>

I'm happy to make 悪い [sK] here.

@@ -7,3 +6,0 @@
-<ke_pri>ichi1</ke_pri>
-<ke_pri>news2</ke_pri>
-<ke_pri>nf28</ke_pri>
@@ -13 +10 @@
-<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>

https://pastebin.com/Mjzkw8Z3


.

Given the corpus data I think both kanji forms should be [rK]. The priority tags would need to be removed from 難い.
Multiple references don't even list 悪い for suffix usage, with shinsen also using just a kana headword with 難い as a secondary form.

@@ -5,0 +6 @@
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>
@@ -11,0 +13 @@
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>

Splitting. I'll approve and reopen for a while.

@@ -19,4 +18,0 @@
-<r_ele>
-<reb>がたい</reb>
-<re_restr>難い</re_restr>
-</r_ele>
@@ -30,9 +25,0 @@
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<stagr>がたい</stagr>
-<pos>&suf;</pos>
-<pos>&adj-i;</pos>
-<misc>&uk;</misc>
-<s_inf>after the -masu stem of a verb</s_inf>
-<gloss>very difficult to ...</gloss>
-<gloss>nearly impossible to ...</gloss>

@@ -37,2 +37,2 @@
-<gloss>very difficult to...</gloss>
-<gloss>nearly impossible to</gloss>
+<gloss>very difficult to ...</gloss>
+<gloss>nearly impossible to ...</gloss>

Remove uk tags
-*- via bulkupd.py -*-

@@ -14 +13,0 @@
-<misc>&uk;</misc>
@@ -24 +22,0 @@
-<misc>&uk;</misc>
@@ -29 +26,0 @@
-<misc>&uk;</misc>

良いね	392756	11.3%
いいね	3040209	87.5%
よいね	41123	1.2%

@@ -13,0 +14 @@
+<misc>&uk;</misc>
@@ -22,0 +24 @@
+<misc>&uk;</misc>
@@ -26,0 +29 @@
+<misc>&uk;</misc>

@@ -3,0 +4,4 @@
+<k_ele>
+<keb>良いね</keb>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
+</k_ele>

Sankoku 8e also has both [vt] and [vi]

Plenty of hits for both 〜をいいねえする and 〜にいいねする.

@@ -15,0 +16,3 @@
+<pos>&vt;</pos>
+<pos>&vi;</pos>
+<field>&internet;</field>

盾に取る	1384	73.4%
盾にとる	501	26.6%

N-gram

Encountered this spelling in the CCs for SPY×FAMILY.

@@ -5,0 +6,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>盾にとる</keb>

chujiten, prog
daijs: 防御物として、その陰に隠れる。「立木を―・る」

Also used with its literal meaning.
We don't use transitivity tags for expressions.

@@ -13 +12,0 @@
-<pos>&vt;</pos>
@@ -15 +14,10 @@
-<gloss>to take as grounds (for)</gloss>
+<gloss>to use as an excuse</gloss>
+<gloss>to use as grounds (for)</gloss>
+<gloss>to use to one's advantage</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&exp;</pos>
+<pos>&v5r;</pos>
+<gloss>to use as a shield</gloss>
+<gloss>to shelter behind</gloss>
+<gloss>to hide behind</gloss>

GG5: を盾に取って on the strength of…; on grounds of…; on the grounds 《that…》

@@ -14 +14,2 @@
-<gloss>to use (something) as an excuse or pretext</gloss>
+<gloss>to use as a pretext</gloss>
+<gloss>to take as grounds (for)</gloss>

Trimming

@@ -11 +11 @@
-<s_inf>indicates light imperative; after the -masu stem of a verb</s_inf>
+<s_inf>light imperative; after the -masu stem of a verb</s_inf>
@@ -18 +18 @@
-<s_inf>prohibitive; after the dictionary form of a verb</s_inf>
+<s_inf>prohibitive; after the plain form of a verb</s_inf>

Missing information, looks confusing without it.

Also usual style

With or without "..."? I see both, though I think having them is better

@@ -8,0 +9 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2029110">な・2</xref>
@@ -10 +11,2 @@
-<gloss>do</gloss>
+<s_inf>indicates light imperative; after the -masu stem of a verb</s_inf>
+<gloss>do ...</gloss>
@@ -13,0 +16 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2029110">な・1</xref>
@@ -15 +18,2 @@
-<gloss>don't</gloss>
+<s_inf>prohibitive; after the dictionary form of a verb</s_inf>
+<gloss>don't ...</gloss>

三省堂国語辞典　第八版

https://kotobank.jp/word/くつと-3210064#w-484364
https://kotobank.jp/jeword/くっと#w-3193729

daijs, prog

Adding second sense here

@@ -12,0 +13,6 @@
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&adv;</pos>
+<gloss>quickly</gloss>
+<gloss>all of a sudden</gloss>
+<gloss>all at once</gloss>

adv gloss

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>letting out (a laugh)</gloss>
+<gloss>inadvertently (letting out a laugh)</gloss>

OK

https://ameblo.jp/3-magatama/entry-12908219269.html

lots and lots of hits on X

https://precious.jp/articles/-/33040
いいね返しやメンションへの反応は必要？【NGマナー診断】仕事用アカウントでのインスタグラム作法をテスト

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーーーーーーー─┬───────┬───────╮
│ 建御名方神　　　　 │ 3,472 │ 94.0% │Daijs, Daijr, Nikk
│ タケミナカタノカミ │   221 │  6.0% │
╰─ーーーーーーーーー─┴───────┴───────╯
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/タケミナカタ
There are a trillion other forms for this god, but it would get super messy trying to include them.
This is the main form

.

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーー─┬───────┬───────╮
│ 業沸く　 │    80 │  3.3% │
│ ごうわく │ 2,373 │ 96.7% │
╰─ーーーー─┴───────┴───────╯
From 業が沸く (In nikkoku)

https://yassei.net/archives/5149
https://japanese-dialects.com/hogen-haragatatsu/  (do Ctrl+F for ごうわく, lengthy page)


.

Saw used as kansaiben, mie prefecture specifically

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーーー─┬─────┬───────╮
│ 業が沸く　 │  39 │ 19.0% │koj, nikk
│ 業がわく　 │  27 │ 13.2% │[sK]
│ ごうがわく │ 139 │ 67.8% │
╰─ーーーーー─┴─────┴───────╯

No ngrams but a lot of contemporary WWW hits.

@@ -5,0 +6,3 @@
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>カルチャー・ウォー</reb>

saw on social media

Clearer

@@ -14 +14 @@
-<gloss>usefulness for the useless</gloss>
+<gloss>usefulness for the (seemingly) useless</gloss>

無用の用	4335
Daijisen

@@ -10,0 +11 @@
+<pos>&exp;</pos>
@@ -11,0 +13 @@
+<field>&phil;</field>

https://www.asahi.com/sp/ajw/articles/16081940

In books by famed physicist Hideki Yukawa, Kitagawa was captivated by the Lao-Zhuang philosophical concept of “muyo-no-yo” (the usefulness of the useless), the idea that things that appear to have no purpose are, in fact, useful.

一線を越える	11311	83.5%
一線を超える	2231	16.5%

#2833819 has both kanji forms. We treat 越える and 超える as interchangeable.

@@ -5 +5 @@
-<keb>ライン超え</keb>
+<keb>ライン越え</keb>
@@ -8 +8 @@
-<keb>ライン越え</keb>
+<keb>ライン超え</keb>
@@ -15 +15 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2833819">一線を超える</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2833819">一線を越える</xref>

I didn't realize I used another kanji. 
When I searched for examples on X I wrote it by hand and the ごえ part got converted to 超え. 
I think the examples using 超え on X could be 変換ミス too. All of the websites I found explaining it have it as ライン越え.

ライン越え	1688	48.9%
ライン超え	1762	51.1% - X examples

Seems both forms are used.

@@ -3,0 +4,3 @@
+<k_ele>
+<keb>ライン超え</keb>
+</k_ele>

ライン越え 1,688 
ライン越えの 108 

https://dic.pixiv.net/a/ライン越え

https://e-kae-library.com/linegoe/

a lot of examples on X:
https://x.com/search?q="ライン超え"

@@ -20,0 +21 @@
+<misc>&abbr;</misc>
@@ -26,0 +28,2 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1637800">ニューハーフ・2</xref>
+<misc>&abbr;</misc>

https://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/女装の用語一覧
ニューハーフ／NH

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/NH
ニューハーフ (New Half) の略称。

https://lovema.jp/otona-deai/newhalf-meeting
NH：New Halfの略で、ニューハーフのこと

https://www.37d.co.jp/love-hacks/newhalf-deai/
NH(ニューハーフの略称)

https://e-venz.com/column/25466/
NH…ニューハーフの略

saw in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RmQNdBotQU

Odd, but seems valid.

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<gloss>participant in eating competitions</gloss>

大食い選手	1067

GG5, 中辞典, etc. all use kana in examples for this.

I can't see the quoted corpus data supporting the use of the 難い form for がたい.

@@ -16,0 +17 @@
+<misc>&uk;</misc>

Forget the "vice-versa" part, I misread the arrows. In that case I don't think [see=2772730・難い・にくい[1]] serves any practical purpose.

https://pastebin.com/Mjzkw8Z3

Not [uk], see corpus data. Is a reference to にくい and vice-versa really needed?

@@ -12,0 +13 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1582640">難い・かたい</xref>
@@ -15 +15,0 @@
-<misc>&uk;</misc>

Proposed split from 2772730. I'll approve and reopen for a while.

Thanks

There's a typo

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>Southern Hokkadō</gloss>
+<gloss>Southern Hokkaidō</gloss>

https://uu-hokkaido.jp/marukita/south.shtml
http://hokkaido-dounankai.com/
https://www.jrhokkaido.co.jp/travel/area/donan/index.html
https://www.visit-hokkaido.jp/asset/access/hokkaido_access_map02.pdf
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/道南

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<gloss>Southern Hokkadō</gloss>

道 Dou to Dō conversion
-*- via bulkupd.py -*-

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>Dounan</gloss>
+<gloss>Dōnan</gloss>